Tax Controversies/Litigation
The Law Offices of Stephen Moskowitz is a law firm that provides nationwide federal tax litigation representation. Our attorneys have extensive experience in all facets of tax controversy.
We have represented U.S. and foreign taxpayers at all controversy levels, including IRS audits and appeals, trial and appellate litigation. We have regularly appeared before the United States Tax Court, United States Bankruptcy Court, United States Federal Claims Court, various United States District Courts, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Our tax litigators have numerous published decisions. Our objective in every tax controversy is to resolve the issues as early as possible without litigation; however, if it is in the best interest of the client, we will litigate the tax controversy on behalf of our clients. If the matter is to proceed to trial, our tax attorneys are not only well knowledgeable on tax law, but our attorneys are also well versed in court. We are particularly proud of their ability to navigate through court procedures and trial strategies.
Many of our federal tax litigation cases are handled on a flat fee basis. This way, our clients know at the outset of the case what the costs will be. Because we have litigated so many tax controversies, we are able to draw upon our previous case history and keep litigation costs down.Below are some of the representative cases our firm has handled
Tax Court Docket Number 24760-05, Our firm represented a Son-of-Boss investor in challenging the tax consequence of international currency option transactions. A favorable settlement was achieved and documented in a unique closing agreement.
Tax Court Docket Number 6736-07, The IRS claimed the taxpayer did not properly roll securities into an Individual Retirement Accounts. Since the taxpayer keep meticulous detailed documentation of his roll-over transactions, our Firm was able to reach a favorable settlement with the IRS. The IRS originally increased the taxpayers’ taxable income by almost $180,000. Our attorneys convinced the IRS that their position was erroneous and the IRS settled the case for only $1,165.
Tax Court Docket Number 10296-07, The IRS originally disallowed a substantial number of the taxpayer’s expenses related to his dental practice. Since the taxpayer was able to substantiate his expenses through his bank statements, our Firm was able to reach a favorable settlement with the IRS. The settlement saved the taxpayer over $300,000 in federal income taxes.
Tax Court Docket Number 13121-07, The IRS originally disallowed a substantial number of the taxpayer’s expenses related to his moving business. Since the taxpayer was able to substantiate his expenses through documentation, our Firm was able to reach a favorable settlement with the IRS. The settlement saved the taxpayer approximately $12,000 in income taxes and penalties.
Tax Court Docket Number 6407-06, In this case, a taxpayer constructed a new home and sold it for a profit. The IRS disallowed all of his expenses in the construction of the property. The IRS also claimed the taxpayer was in the trade or business of selling homes the agency attempted to treat the taxpayer’s gains as ordinary income. Since the taxpayer had meticulous records of his expenses, our firm was able to reach a settlement for a fraction of the amount the IRS claimed was owed. In addition, our firm was able to convince the IRS to tax the gain of the sale as favorable capital gains versus ordinary income. The settlement saved the client over $250,000 in federal income tax liability.
Tax Court Docket Number20074-05, In this case, the taxpayer received negligent advice from his tax advisers. As a result, the IRS proposed to assess over a $300,000 federal tax liability against him. Because the taxpayer had documentation to substantiate most of the expenses reported on his tax returns, our firm was able to negotiate a favorable settlement on behalf of the taxpayer. We were also able to convince the IRS to remove an accuracy related penalty that exceeded $50,000.
Tax Court Docket Number 3247-05, In this case, the IRS disallowed all of the losses claimed from two partnerships he was a partner. The IRS also claimed that the partnerships should have been disallowed because the partnerships had no economic substance. Our Firm was able to utilize the documentation provided by the taxpayer to negotiate a difficult settlement. The IRS agreed to allow over $450,000 losses from the client’s partnership allocations that were originally disallowed. The IRS even agreed to all over $36,000 in losses not originally claimed on the taxpayer’s individual income tax returns. We estimate that our settlement with the IRS saved the client over $200,000 in federal tax liability.
NHUSS TRUST, et al.v Commissioner, trial in U.S. Tax Court decided on October 11, 2005. One of the issues in this case was the basis of the taxpayers’ home. The Tax Court agreed to increase the taxpayers’ basis in their home.
Luiz v.Commissioner trial in U.S. Tax Court decided on January 29, 2004. One of the issues in this case was whether the taxpayers were liable for additions to tax for a late filing penalty. Our Firm convinced the IRS during trial to concede the late filing penalty. We estimate this victory saved the taxpayer nearly $20,000 in federal tax liability.
Thompson v. Commissioner, trial in U.S. Tax Court decided July 3, 2007. One of the issues in this case was whether the taxpayer was liable for an accuracy-related penalty. The Tax Court agreed not to assess an accuracy-related penalty against the taxpayer.
Fuller v. Commissioner, trial in U.S. Tax Court decided March 19, 2007. Although the Court ruled against the taxpayers, our Firm was able to negotiate numerous concessions with the IRS prior to trial which resulted in significant savings of federal tax liability.
Potter v. Commissioner, motion in U.S. Tax Court requested that the IRS reconsider a denial of an Installment payment Agreement. The Court agreed to remand the case to the IRS to reconsider their denial of the taxpayer’s request for an Installment Payment Agreement.
G. Kierstead Family Holding Trust, Et Al.,v. Commissioner argued before the United States Tax Court. Case is currently being argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Civil Action No. 07-cv-00903-EWN-BNB v. United States, case currently being litigated before the United States District Court for District of Colorado. Case involves whether a taxpayer is entitled to deduct the alimony payments he made to his ex-wife in 1993.
1:08-cv00326-TCW v. United States, case currently is being litigated before the United States Federal Claims Court. Case involves whether the IRS wrongfully included the proceeds of a home refinance in taxpayers gross income. * The results portrayed in the cases mentioned above were dependent on the facts of that particular case, and the results will differ if based on different facts.
