5 ms·
>Actions that are deemed to have been taken solely for their tax effects are clearly and explicitly deemed tax evasion by the IRS This is just not true.
by ryanl0l 10y ago
>Actions that are deemed to have been taken solely for their tax effects are clearly and explicitly deemed tax evasion by the IRS
This is just not true.
- notacoward 10y agoHere are some citations. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-14-58.pdf https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-14-58.pdf https://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Guidance-for-Examiners-and-Managers-on-the-Codified-Economic-Substance-Doctrine-and-Related-Penalties https://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Guidance-for-Examiners-and-Ma... Just look up "sham transaction" for plenty more. It's a very well established concept and doctrine. Nobody should be splitting hairs about avoiding vs. evading taxes, or generally pontificating about fiduciary duty, without understanding it.
- ryanl0l 10y agoThat's not what you said though. >Actions that are deemed to have been taken solely for their tax effects are clearly and explicitly deemed tax evasion by the IRS What you said would make almost all tax avoidance into tax evasion. Hell, even claiming deductions would by your logic be tax evasion.
- notacoward 10y agoYou didn't read the citations before saying that, did you?
- ryanl0l 10y agoThe citations do not support your original claim.