Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
IRS Embattled with Technology Firms Over 2004 Corporate Tax Holiday
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 19, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
The Internal Revenue Service is taking a closer examination of corporations’ tax strategies during the 2004 tax holiday, and two technology firms in particular have drawn scrutiny from the federal agency.
In two separate tax law cases, the IRS is battling BMC Software Inc. and Analog Devices, both of which are citing a 2004 corporate tax holiday to dispute new tax bills the agency imposed, Reuters reports. Current tax laws enable U.S. companies that operate internationally to avoid paying taxes on the profits on the funds so long as they remain overseas.
In an effort to boost investment in the U.S. and act as an incentive to large scale and profitable multinationals, the controversial 2004 law paved the way for global corporations to enjoy a reduced tax rate for profits that were earned overseas but brought back to the United States.
Regarding both the BMC and Analog issues, the two technology companies settled pricing transfer disputes with the IRS in 2005, around the same period when BMC repatriated $717.2 million and Analog brought $1 billion back to the U.S, according to Reuters. However, the IRS later levied a tax bill for $12.9 million against BMC and $26 million against Analog, arguing that the settlements increased both companies’ domestic profits, which are taxable, the news source added.
Reuters notes that the cases are thought to be the first legal tests of the tax holiday, and many corporations are watching the outcomes closely. As the IRS plans to scrutinize the tax practices of large corporations more closely in an effort to close the multibillion-dollar tax gap, the case may be of particular interest to those large companies that are currently or have recently faced disputes with the agency over corporate profits.
The IRS refused to comment on either case, noting that it is not at liberty to discuss ongoing cases.
- Practices: Tax and Trusts & Estates
- Locations: Red Bank, NJ, New York City, Little Falls, NJ
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Rule 26 Expert Discovery: When an Expert Witness Uses AI, Is It Discoverable?
Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger
How Expert Witness AI Use Ends Up in Discovery
“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger
The Screenshot Problem: Why Nothing Is Really Private Anymore
Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
BESS Project Agreements: Allocating Risk Among Developers, EPC Contractors, and Equipment Suppliers
Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall
IP Infringement: What Steps Can You Take If You're Affected?
IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki
Public Allegations, Unfinished Investigation: What New Jersey Businesses Should Do Next
When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.