BAR REPORT - Capitol Report
NJSBA's Double Taxation Bill Faces Full Senate Vote; Testimony in Committee
February 26, 2018 at 07:45 AM
3 minute read
This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.
NJSBA's Double Taxation Bill Faces Full Senate Vote; Testimony in Committee
The New Jersey State Bar Association's bill seeking to end the double taxation of attorney's fees awarded in unlawful discrimination and retaliation claims was voted out of the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee earlier this month. S-784 (Sarlo) would end New Jersey's practice of taxing attorney's fees to the attorney who receives the fee and the plaintiff who never receives this portion of the award. NJSBA member Bruce P. McMoran, of McMoran, O'Connor, Bramley & Burns, P.C., testified in support of the bill.
“What we're trying to do is bring this in line with what the federal government realized in 2004 when it allowed an above the line deduction to the individual who doesn't receive a dime and who is now paying taxes,” said McMoran.
The bill's posting comes on the heels of a recent unpublished Appellate Division decision in which the court upheld the Division of Taxation's assessment of additional taxes, penalties and interest on a qui tam plaintiff, also known as the relator, who was awarded a share of the United States' recovery of $7.5 million. Kite v. Division of Taxation, Docket No. A-3349-15T3, Feb. 8, 2018 (App. Div.).
Anthony Y. Kite retained a law firm to file a qui tam action on behalf of the United States to prosecute fraudulent practices by certain hospitals that were submitting false claims under the Medicare program. When the initial complaint was unsealed, Kite learned there were two other private parties who filed qui tam actions against many of the same hospitals as in his action. They entered into a joint prosecution agreement that resulted in all three being awarded $1,229,255 in total recovery. The attorney retained its fee and distributed to the other two relators $307,313.75. Kite retained the balance of the recovery and reported it on his federal taxes, but not on his New Jersey gross income tax return.
In his complaint to the tax court, Kite argued the amount he recovered was not subject to the New Jersey gross income tax, and alternatively argued he was entitled to deductions for attorney's fees and the money paid to the other relators. Interpreting the current statute, the tax court ruled that under N.J.S.A. 54A:5-1(l), the entire amount constituted an “award” and was therefore considered taxable gross income. It also ruled that the amounts paid to his attorneys and the other relators was not tax deductible. The Appellate Division upheld this decision.
McMoran noted the inequity to Kite, “who saved the state and federal government millions of dollars based on hospital fraud,” by requiring Kite to pay income taxes on parts of the award to other individuals. “So he got to pay the taxes, but never got a dime.”
McMoran suggested that an amendment may be in order to address this inequity, which is being pursued by Senator Sarlo.
An Assembly sponsor is pending, and the association continues to monitor and support its movement in the Legislature.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOn the Move and After Hours: Fisher Phillips; Cohn Lifland; Porzio Bromberg; GSBA
7 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Greenberg Traurig; Helmer Conley; Greenbaum Rowe; Trenk Isabel; Federal Bar of NJ
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250