Legislation pending before the Connecticut General Assembly would establish a tax amnesty to run from September 16, 2013, through November 15, 2013. The "carrot" being offered under the amnesty program is a 75 percent reduction in the interest due -- from 12 percent per year to 3 percent -- which could represent substantial savings. In addition, all civil penalties will be waived and no criminal prosecution will be sought. (Filing for amnesty constitutes a waiver of all rights of appeal or to claim a refund, however.)
If you have a matter pending before the Department of Revenue Services (the "Department") that is likely to conclude soon, you may want to wait to see if the amnesty is enacted. (The regular legislative session ends on June 5, 2013, but it is not clear if the budget issues, of which amnesty is a part, will be resolved by then.)
In a change from prior Connecticut amnesties, taxpayers will be eligible even if they currently are under audit or have been notified of a pending audit. The amnesty will apply to all Connecticut taxes other than the Motor Carrier Road Tax.
Amnesty will not be available to any person who (i) is a party to any criminal investigation or to any civil or criminal litigation that is pending on July 1, 2013; (ii) is a party to a closing agreement with the Department; (iii) has made an offer of compromise that has been accepted by the Department; or (iv) is a party to a managed Sales and Use Tax audit agreement.
The proposed amnesty also contains a "stick." Any person owing a tax for a period ending on or before November 30, 2013, that has not filed an otherwise required return and that does not file for amnesty with respect to that period shall be subject to an additional non-waivable penalty of 25 percent of the tax owed for such period.
Dina Kapur Sanna and Carl A. Merino co-authored an article, "Long Arm of the Law: The Risk to U.S. Practitioners of Prosecution for Facilitating Foreign Tax Offenses," (subscription required) in the June 2017 issue of Trusts & Estates Magazine.
Angela Titus McEwan and Stacey Valentine Fielding authored an article for Bloomberg BNA's Daily Tax Report entitled "A Death Sentence for the Federal Estate Tax? States Watching Closely," in which they considered the repeal to the Federal Estate Tax and how it may impact, if at all, individual states.
On May 25, Dina Sanna and Carl Merino were panelists at an event hosted by Citco.
Day Pitney Alert
Aaron Kriss was a featured panelist in a webinar, "Form 3520 Foreign Trust Reporting for Tax Counsel: Navigating Filing Requirements and Penalty Abatements for Delinquencies," for Strafford Publications.
Von Sanborn was featured in an article, "Five Questions: Von Sanborn on Art Law, Insurance and the IRS," published in the Connecticut Law Tribune.
Stephen Ziobrowski was quoted in an article, "How Bermudians can be exposed to US taxes," in The Royal Gazette. The article is a recap of an International Tax and Planning Seminar at an AFL Investment sponsored event held in May 2016, in which Ziobrowski participated.
Stephen Ziobrowski was quoted in an article, "10 states millionaires might be fleeing," in LifeHealthPro. In the article, Ziobrowski discusses how several states—including Massachusetts—are considering raising their taxes on their wealthiest residents. He says that the concern with taxing the wealthy is that it causes them to leave.
Stephen Ziobrowski was quoted in an article, "7 Tips For Simplifying Tax Writing," in Law360. The article outlines best practices for tax lawyers to draft contracts and court documents. "Tax law is a foreign language, so you have to do some translation if you’re putting it into written documents," said Ziobrowski in the article. "If you’re aiming for a particular tax result in a transaction, it won’t do any good to have all the right magic words on the document and then people don’t understand what they’re supposed to do."
Chris Stracco was quoted in an article,"Will Veto Spark Litigation Over Nonprofit Hospitals' Tax Status?" in New Jersey Law Journal. In the article, Stracco discusses Governor Chris Christie's veto of S3299 in connection to the controversial New Jersey Tax Court decision of AHS Hospital v. Morristown. Stracco says the decision in the case, in which Morristown Memorial Hospital lost its tax-exempt status because it had for-profit business attributes, is unique. Given that case's uniqueness, he expects that the ruling and Christie's veto of S3299 will not likely result in a flood of nonprofit hospitals being hit with tax bills and suits to challenge them.