Sixth Circuit Court rules Law Firm is not Exempt from Taxes
Recently, in the case of a Michigan law office, the Sixth Circuit Court upheld a decision to penalize the law firm for not filing a Form 5330, Return of Excise Taxes Related to Employee Benefit Plans. According to a Bloomberg BNA report, the court ruled that the firm was penalized for reasonably acknowledging that it had not paid its taxes.
The background of the initial case
The law office established an employee stock ownership plan in 1998, a Law 360 report explained. This ESOP is a retirement plan that owns securities of the employer that sponsors the program. Then, after the principal established the ESOP, he transferred his ownership to the plan. At the time, ESOPs at S corps like the firm in question were exempt from taxes on income attributable to stocks held in the ESOP until it was distributed. As the principal and his firm were exempt from taxes, there were no returns filed.
However, in 2001, Congress amended the provisions, giving taxpayers a six-month grace period to make back payments and ensure compliance. This provision was amended to combat tax abuses by S corporations that established ESOP programs that were designed to benefit a few key personnel rather than large groups of employees. Congress imposed a 50 percent excise tax on S corp. ESOP programs that did not have employee ownership. Ultimately though, the law firm did not comply within the grace period.
Further complicating the case was the fact that the IRS waited until 2011 to collect the excise tax – which was over $200,000 – that resulted from the firm’s decision not to come into compliance. In the initial case, the court found that Section 4979A, which enforces the excise tax, governed the statute of limitations, and that the time had expired for the IRS to impose the tax.
The court’s initial ruling
The court initially found the IRS was required to adhere to a three-year statute of limitations imposed under Section 4979A. However, when the court reconsidered the case, it ruled that the IRS should have applied a different tax code section.
Therefore, the court found that the statute of limitations never expired because the law firm never properly filed the necessary tax form for the ESOP, which meant that the statute of limitations never started.
The significance of the Sixth Circuit Court’s decision
The lesson for taxpayers, particularly S corps, is that in order to benefit from the three-year statute of limitations, it is crucial that they file the necessary tax form – even if they did not need to when they established the ESOP. Taking this one step further, the guidance for taxpayers in general is that they should file tax returns, even if they believe in good faith that they are tax exempt. It is best that the IRS is provided with the information so that they can calculate any potential taxes.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
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.
Sixth Circuit Court Rules Law Firm is not Exempt from Taxes
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Sixth Circuit Court rules Law Firm is not Exempt from Taxes
Recently, in the case of a Michigan law office, the Sixth Circuit Court upheld a decision to penalize the law firm for not filing a Form 5330, Return of Excise Taxes Related to Employee Benefit Plans. According to a Bloomberg BNA report, the court ruled that the firm was penalized for reasonably acknowledging that it had not paid its taxes.
The background of the initial case
The law office established an employee stock ownership plan in 1998, a Law 360 report explained. This ESOP is a retirement plan that owns securities of the employer that sponsors the program. Then, after the principal established the ESOP, he transferred his ownership to the plan. At the time, ESOPs at S corps like the firm in question were exempt from taxes on income attributable to stocks held in the ESOP until it was distributed. As the principal and his firm were exempt from taxes, there were no returns filed.
However, in 2001, Congress amended the provisions, giving taxpayers a six-month grace period to make back payments and ensure compliance. This provision was amended to combat tax abuses by S corporations that established ESOP programs that were designed to benefit a few key personnel rather than large groups of employees. Congress imposed a 50 percent excise tax on S corp. ESOP programs that did not have employee ownership. Ultimately though, the law firm did not comply within the grace period.
Further complicating the case was the fact that the IRS waited until 2011 to collect the excise tax – which was over $200,000 – that resulted from the firm’s decision not to come into compliance. In the initial case, the court found that Section 4979A, which enforces the excise tax, governed the statute of limitations, and that the time had expired for the IRS to impose the tax.
The court’s initial ruling
The court initially found the IRS was required to adhere to a three-year statute of limitations imposed under Section 4979A. However, when the court reconsidered the case, it ruled that the IRS should have applied a different tax code section.
Therefore, the court found that the statute of limitations never expired because the law firm never properly filed the necessary tax form for the ESOP, which meant that the statute of limitations never started.
The significance of the Sixth Circuit Court’s decision
The lesson for taxpayers, particularly S corps, is that in order to benefit from the three-year statute of limitations, it is crucial that they file the necessary tax form – even if they did not need to when they established the ESOP. Taking this one step further, the guidance for taxpayers in general is that they should file tax returns, even if they believe in good faith that they are tax exempt. It is best that the IRS is provided with the information so that they can calculate any potential taxes.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
