David E Kahen

February 14, 2018 | New York Law Journal

Taxation columnists David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem write: Public Law 115-97, the “tax reform” legislation enacted last December, effected major changes to federal income tax law. While many of the changes are of relevance specifically to individuals, others affect all businesses, regardless of their form of organization, and some are particularly relevant to corporate taxpayers. David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem are members of the law firm of Roberts & Holland.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

10 minute read

December 20, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In this Taxation column, David E. Kahen writes: A common example of a mismatch of character of income and loss involves the exercise of compensatory stock options and immediate sale of the stock so acquired. The potential for both ordinary income and capital loss in such situations is illustrated by the recent Court of Federal Claims decision in 'Hann v. United States'.

By David E. Kahen

8 minute read

October 18, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen write: 'Avrahami' was at least arguably an extreme case in several respects, but seems likely to encourage the IRS to pursue tax adjustments with respect to transaction structures involving micro-captives.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

10 minute read

August 16, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In his Taxation column, David E. Kahen discusses 'Bell v. Commissioner', writing: Overall, the results reached in 'Bell' are not surprising in light of the case law. This case is a reminder of the courts' willingness to reclassify transactions—including reclassification as stock of obligations intended to be debt for tax purposes—even without express authorization by statute or regulation, and to plan in a manner that avoids or minimizes such risks.

By David E. Kahen

10 minute read

June 14, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David Kahen discuss 'Hurford Investments No. 2 v. Commissioner', which underscores the continued potential for confusion as to the consequences of transfers of compensatory rights in non-arm's length transactions, and continued uncertainty regarding the scope of §1234A.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

16 minute read

April 19, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen discuss the structure of the accumulated earnings tax and Chief Counsel Advice 201653017 (Dec. 30, 2016), a memorandum which concluded that the AET may apply to a corporation that lacks ready access to cash or other liquid assets for distribution.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

15 minute read

February 15, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem of Roberts & Holland discuss two recent Tax Court memorandum decisions relating to S corporations and a recent change in IRS policy regarding private letter rulings on common S corporation issues.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

17 minute read

December 14, 2016 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem write: Seemingly mundane questions concerning the proper allocation of consideration in determining the basis of purchased assets can have a surprisingly large impact. The authors discuss a recent decision of the Court of Federal Claims which illustrated precisely that point when tackling issues of goodwill under IRC §1060.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

17 minute read

October 19, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen of Roberts & Holland discuss surprising and unfavorable results recently stemming from Internal Revenue Code §1234A, which governs the character of gain or loss attributable to the cancellation, lapse, expiration, or other termination of a right or obligation with respect to "property which is (or on acquisition would be) a capital asset."

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

18 minute read

August 18, 2016 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem of Roberts & Holland discuss a recent Eleventh Circuit decision involving a surprising application of the 'Danielson' rule.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

14 minute read