In Uncategorized on 05/25/2022 at 16:56

The late A. G. Linkletter would find The Glasshouse That Vic Built an endless source of josh, banter, and the jocose. Today Judge Albert G (“Scholar Al”) Lauber encounters yet another specimen of what makes blogging Tax Court “a medley of extemporanea.”

Ifeoma Ezekwo, Docket No. 15454-21P, filed 5/25/22, wants “…the IRS to “release[e] her full monthly disability payment to her and rush[] a check of $107,076.60 within the next 7 days.” Order, at p. 1.

Ya gotta admire Ifeoma. Not even the Jersey Boys would go for the cup off the tee from a parking lot two miles from the golf course.

Judge Scholar Al is benignly literal. This is a passport case. All Tax Court can do is tell State to return Ifeoma’s passport. If she wins, that is.

And if this were a CDP case, all Tax Court could do is enjoin collection if a timely petition were filed from a NOD. “But this is not a CDP case. And even if it were, we would lack authority to enjoin collection action because petitioner has supplied no evidence that a notice of determination has been issued to her, much less that she effected a timely appeal therefrom.” Order, at pp. 1-2.

We really need another Tax Court Judicial Conference, just to sit around and swap war stories. Perhaps Chief Judge Elect Kathleen (“TBS = The Big Shillelagh”) Kerrigan might consider convoking one when she takes office.


In Uncategorized on 05/25/2022 at 16:27

This formerly pejorative (not to say offensive and objectionable) phrase certainly does not apply to Martha L. Albrecht, T. C. Memo. 2022-53, filed 5/25/22. Martha did donate a substantial collection of Native American jewelry and artifacts to the Wheelwright Museum of the American Indian, as substantiated by a five-page deed of gift.

But the Wheelwright’s draftership falls short of the Section 170(f)(8)(B) contemporaneous written agreement standard. The deed does not say that no goods or services were provided by the Wheelwrights, although there’s no suggestion that there were. Nor does the deed state that there is no other agreement respecting the donation.

Judge Travis A. (“Tag”) Greaves plays the literalist here.

“Although the deed in this case provides that the donation was ‘unconditional and irrevocable,’ it continues that ‘all rights, titles and interests held by the donor in the property are included in the donation, unless otherwise stated in the Gift Agreement.’ (Emphasis added.) Thus, the terms of the deed were subject to a separate agreement, but the Wheelwright Museum did not provide petitioner with this document before the return was filed.” T. C. Memo. 2022-53, at pp. 4-5. (Footnote omitted, but it says that even though the parties stiped that Martha got nothing, that was after the fact, so it doesn’t help).

And that there never was a “Gift Agreement” doesn’t help either, because the deed says there was. Besides, the drafter of the deed made the rookie error of omitting an integration clause, which should say that this deed sets forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and may not be varied otherwise than in writing and signed by the party against whom any variation is asserted.

“We appreciate what appears to have been a good faith attempt by petitioner to substantially comply with the Code by executing the deed with the Wheelwright Museum. Substantial compliance, unfortunately for petitioner, does not satisfy the strict requirements of section 170(f)(8)(B). See 15 W. 17th St. LLC, 147 T.C. at 562. Thus, for the reasons given above, petitioner is not entitled to a charitable contribution deduction with respect to the donation as the deed does not satisfy these requirements.” T. C. Memo. 2022-53, at pp. 5-6.

For the 15 West 17th St. LLC story, see my blogpost “Executive Nullification,” 12/22/16.

Note well, I characterized that case as “one of those overblown façade farragoes.” With the façade and conservation chicanery, currently rife, IRS is going scalphunting. Charities and donors beware: those deeds of gift need to be bulletproof.

I’ll wager an ale or two that the drafter of this deed is getting The Phone Call.











In Uncategorized on 05/25/2022 at 09:07

This coming October will mark Year Fifty-Three (count ’em, Fifty-Three) since I shouted the above-captioned under the “blue and staring” Southeast Asian sky.

If the foregoing is obscure, consider yourself lucky; I cannot further explicate, as this blog is meant for reading around the family circle.

I am sure Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley is too well-bred to shout anything like that, but I am also sure he shares the feeling, with a scant week to go before he hands over the Chieftainship to Chief Judge Elect Kathleen (“TBS = The Big Shillelagh”) Kerrigan.

So today his order in Darcy Mae Englert, Docket No. 3464-22, filed 5/25/22, reflects his vision of “a truce, then, to our labors” that is so soon to come.

Darcy Mae has favored Ch J Mighty Mo with correspondence, but perhaps same is a trifle opaque. So rather than attempt to reconstruct, or request clarification (which can only lead to further opacity), Ch J. Mighty Mo orders the following.

]” …to the extent there is a request in petitioner’s Letter…that the place of trial in this case be changed to Cheyenne, Wyoming, that request is denied. It is further ordered that, to the extent there is any other request for relief in petitioner’s Letter… that request is denied.” Order, at p. 1.