David E Kahen

February 16, 2006 | New York Law Journal

David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem, members of Roberts & Holland, analyze a ruling earlier this month by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that is of interest both with respect to its careful parsing of the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code dealing with the assumption of liabilities in the context of nontaxable corporate transactions and as an indication of how the courts are likely to apply the "sham transaction" doctrine to future transactions.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

11 minute read

December 17, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, write that two recent decisions show that some lessons seem reasonably clear: it is generally helpful to focus on the intended tax reporting of the transaction in the transactional documents, such that the parties' reporting positions are reconcilable with each other; but, as the IRS will not be bound by any agreements or understandings between the lender and the borrower, it is also important to make sure that the parties comply with the relevant legal requirements.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

10 minute read

February 15, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, write that the gain realized on an exchange of property must ordinarily be recognized for federal income tax purposes. However, important exceptions to this rule of gain recognition exist in the case of many corporate organization and reorganization transactions.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

8 minute read

October 20, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of the law firm of Roberts & Holland, review tax consequences of shareholder loans to S corporations and a recent Tax Court decision which held that shareholders did have to recognize gain upon the repayment of advances, notwithstanding that the shareholders' tax basis in these loans had been reduced to zero before the payments were made.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

10 minute read

October 21, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, partners with Roberts & Holland, report that a new deduction for qualified production activities income is intended to benefit large segments of the economy, at what may be a significant cost.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

9 minute read

October 19, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, write that where more than one person - e.g., a corporation and its shareholders - could appropriately make a restorative payment, consideration should be given to whether the designation of the person responsible for making the payment may give rise to a better result with respect to questions of deductibility, including the application of the AMT provisions of the Code.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

10 minute read

February 22, 2005 | The Legal Intelligencer

When the founders of a family-owned corporation decide to retire and to transfer ownership of the corporation to one or more family members, a common concern is whether a cash distribution by the corporation to effect a redemption of the founders' stock can be treated as a sale or exchange of shares resulting in capital gain, rather than as a dividend, taxable as ordinary income under Internal Revenue Code Section 301, to the extent of the current and accumulated earnings and profits of the corporation.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

10 minute read

June 16, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland LLP, write that the IRS frequently challenges the deduction of transaction-related costs that may fall into a gray area between "deduction" and "capitalization." One category of costs that can fall into this gray area consists of payments by a target corporation to terminate a proposed acquisition transaction � "break-up fees" � that are paid when the target is ultimately acquired by a different acquiror.

By Eliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

8 minute read

June 17, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, write that a recent Tax Court case addresses an aggressive, but thusfar successful, effort by a taxpayer to obtain a tax benefit through a deemed liquidation.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

11 minute read

December 16, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of the law firm of Roberts & Holland, write that the Internal Revenue Code has long had limitations on the deductibility of certain expenses such as interest that are owed to a related party, but not yet paid. A recent case illustrates the application of these limitations.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

8 minute read