Tax Court Sorts Out Basis On Russian Fast Food Merger
The reason Mr. Testyn’s new argument doesn’t work is a kind of heads I win, tails you lose rule when it comes to “substance over form”. The IRS can argue that what you said you did – the form – is not what actually happened – the substance. You can’t generally do that yourself, because you got to choose the form, so you are stuck with it.
Mass Appeals Court Supports Revenue Department In Penalizing Paper Check
Something tells me that there is more at stake here than a lousy hundred bucks, because the Mass DOR appealed the ATB decision. And I am sorry to say that the Appeals Court of Massachusetts ruled in favor of Mass DOR. The Appeals Court was influenced by the fact that Mr. Haar had been warned when he used a paper check with his 2005 extension and had complied with the mandate when he sent in his 2007 extension.
Follow Me
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one’s affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.