David E Kahen

August 18, 2021 | New York Law Journal

In this edition of their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen discuss 'GSS Holdings (Liberty) v. United States', a recent decision of the Court of Federal Claims that discusses (1) the scope of what is sometimes referred to as the 'Danielson' rule, and (2) substance over form and transaction integration principles in the context of multiple payments that were ultimately integrated for tax purposes by the court into a single transaction.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

9 minute read

June 16, 2021 | New York Law Journal

In this edition of their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem explore a case in which a taxpayer's current position was preluded on the ground of equitable estoppel, as it was inconsistent with the taxpayer's prior position.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

10 minute read

April 14, 2021 | New York Law Journal

In this edition of their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem discuss a recent Tax Court decision disallowing deductions for purported management fees paid by a closely held corporation to its shareholders, in which the court concluded that the payments were disguised dividends and that the petitioner failed to establish that the payments were reasonable in relation to services rendered.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

8 minute read

February 17, 2021 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen discuss 'Complex Media v. Commissioner', in which a corporate taxpayer that acquired a business in exchange for stock and other property prevailed over the IRS, on the basis of an argument that the substance of the transaction was different from its form, and was allowed to claim amortization deductions attributable to a basis step-up arising from the substance of the transaction.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

10 minute read

December 16, 2020 | New York Law Journal

A taxpayer suffers a loss by reason of errors made by a tax advisor, and the tax advisor makes a payment to compensate the taxpayer for the loss. May the payment be excluded from the taxpayer's income subject to tax? In this edition of their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem discuss a recent decision in which the Eleventh Circuit court concluded that the taxpayers before it could not exclude the payment at issue from income.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

8 minute read

October 14, 2020 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem examine how an irregularity in corporate form may invalidate an election and give rise to adverse consequences that become apparent only in the context of a tax audit years after the election was attempted.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

8 minute read

August 19, 2020 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem discuss Estate of Kechijian v. Commissioner, the third opinion addressing tax consequences of a 1998 acquisition of stock by Larry Austin and Arthur Kechijian.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

10 minute read

June 17, 2020 | New York Law Journal

n their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem discuss the allowability of a theft loss deduction in a particular year has often been challenged by the IRS, particularly on the grounds that the injured taxpayer had a "reasonable prospect of recovery" against the wrongdoer or someone else in the year of discovery.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

9 minute read

April 15, 2020 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem discuss the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, particularly focusing on the loosening of limitations on the use of net operating loss carryovers and carrybacks by corporate and non-corporate taxpayers and of "excess business losses" by non-corporate taxpayers, including shareholders in S corporations and owners of equity interests in entities treated as partnerships for tax purposes.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

10 minute read

February 19, 2020 | New York Law Journal

The appropriate tax treatment is not clear where a taxpayer makes a payment not in respect of a guarantee of another person's debt obligation, but, rather, by reason of a guarantee of performance of some other sort of contractual obligation of another person. In their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen discuss a recent Fifth Circuit decision affirming a district court decision, in which a deduction was disallowed for an expenditure that was at least arguably of this nature.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

9 minute read