Elliot Pisem

June 16, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In their Taxation column, Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, analyze a recent tax Court decision on IRAs where the transaction in question appeared to enable the owners to add to the value of their Roth IRAs on the basis of what were in substance non-arm's length transactions and in a manner in excess of what the statutory limitations on Roth IRA contributions would otherwise permit.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

11 minute read

April 21, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, write that certain liquidations, corporate formation transactions and reorganizations are ordinarily nontaxable, in the sense that neither gain nor loss is recognized by a party disposing of stock or assets in such a transaction. The IRS has recently proposed regulations that address the consequences of a transfer of assets that, after taking into account obligations assumed or taken subject to, lack net value.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

11 minute read

February 19, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen, members of Roberts & Holland, write that one question that arises from time to time is whether a purchaser or seller of a business is bound for tax purposes by any contractual allocation of consideration, or whether a party may take a different tax return position that, if respected, would provide that party with a better tax result. A recent ruling in the First Circuit, they say, throws light on this issue.

By Elliot Pisem and David E. Kahen

9 minute read

April 17, 2008 | New York Law Journal

David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem, membersof Roberts & Holland, write that a recent appellate ruling underscores the need for U.S. advisors to a foreign corporation engaged or deemed engaged in a U.S. trade or business, even a corporation that regularly incurs losses and appears to have no U.S. tax liability, to be alert to the requirement that the corporation timely file U.S. returns, at least in part so as to preserve deductions that may otherwise be lost.

By David E. Kahen and Elliot Pisem

13 minute read

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