Kuretski – Was Legal Dream Team Really Trying To Help The Taxpayers?
What strikes me more than anything about this drama is that it is hard to see how it could be helping the taxpayers. Judge Srinvasan noted that there has never been an instance of a President removing a Tax Court Judge. Judge Robert Wherry Jr., the Tax Court judge who decided the Keretski case was once accused of falling asleep during a trial, but the notion that the threat of President Obama reaching out and firing him over how he decided a collection due process case seems really silly. Were the attorneys really maintaining that was a real potential influence?
Facade Easement Valuation Cannot Be Percentage Rule Of Thumb
The approach that NAT ended up promoting was to use a percentage valuation that had been accepted in other cases. If that had worked, it would have ended up being circular reasoning as each valuation in the 10% range would reinforce the notion that that was the correct valuation. You could see why they would want to do it this way. It made planning much easier. Once tax advisors grasped the concept, they could easily see how it would apply to their clients. Pay something like 1% of the value of your property to a group like NAT and you get a charitable deduction for 10% +/- of its value. The thing that did not fully register with some people was that in order for the donation to be legitimate the value of your property should actually go down by 10%.
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.