Attorney-at-Law

(SUB)PARTING WAYS

In Uncategorized on 10/28/2026 at 16:35

Judge Alina I. (“AIM”) Marshall rebuffs IFRS’ belated attempt to shift from straight individual taxation to the anfractuosities of Subpart F in Richard M. Rund, Docket No. 869-22, filed 10/28/26. As Richard’s trusty attorneys point out, “…this case was investigated and litigated for years as a bank deposit and foreign account reconstruction case and that respondent’s proposed Subpart F allegations introduce materially different factual issues involving foreign corporations and manufacturing activities occurring approximately two decades ago.” Order, at p.1.

True, Richard’s bookkeeping was near to nonexistent. But Richard claims his cancer treatment has debilitated him, his longtime CPA died and workpapers cannot be found, and the years at issue go back more than twenty (count ’em, twenty) years.

Even if IRS raised the Subpart F (foreign corporations) issues two years ago, they didn’t come up with numbers for another year.

IRS now want to amend its answer for a second time, after nearly five (count ’em, five) years since the original SNDs were issued. And there’s $30 million on the table now, five trial continuances already granted, and trial less than three (count ’em, three) weeks away.

And a general throwaway reference to Subpart F in the original SNDs was insufficient to alert Richard’s trusty attorneys to the rabbithole at their feet.

Trusty attorney boasts over thirty (count ’em, thirty) years of experience navigating unique challenges. Good job.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.