|
| 11.16.09 | FMLA Expanded Yet Again To Provide Military Families With Greater Leave Rights: What Employers Must Know
David B. Ritter
Abstract: On October 28, 2009, President Barack Obama followed the lead of former President George W. Bush in expanding the rights of military families under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA”). President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, now Public Law No. 111-084. The new law significantly broadens the Military Family Leave provisions of the FMLA and promises to increase the number of employee requests for military family leave. Employers should stay informed of these changes and continue to develop strategies for successfully navigating the increasingly employee-friendly employment laws. |
|
| 11.12.09 | An Introduction to FBAR Reporting Obligations for Foreign Situs Trusts With U.S. Beneficiaries
CCH's Journal of Passthrough Entities
Lawrence I. Richman
Abstract: The Treasury Department Regulation requiring reports of foreign financial accounts is short and seemingly simple. The format for the required report is Form TD F 90- 22.1, entitled “Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts,” or simply FBAR for short. Given (a) the sparseness of the Treasury Regulation; (b) the fact that it uses undefined terms like “financial interest,” “signature or other authority,” and “bank, securities or other financial account;” and (c) that it advises U.S. taxpayers to just follow instructions in a form, it is no wonder that the FBAR Form and its accompanying instructions provide more legislative guidance (and arguably more rule making) than any other form taxpayers fi le with the Internal Revenue Service. Neal Gerber Eisenberg Private Wealth Services Practice Group chair Lawrence I. Richman authored an article that appears in the September-October 2009 edition of CCH's Journal of Passthrough Entities. |
|
| 11.12.09 | New York Taxes Nonresidents on Gains From Sales of Equity Interests in Entities with New York Real Property
CCH's Journal of Passthrough Entities
John A. Biek
Abstract: A recent amendment to Section 631 of the New York Tax Law provides a useful reminder that nonresident individuals are not always taxable only in their state of residence on a gain from a sale or exchange of the nonresident individual’s equity interest in a passthrough entity or closely held business. New Section 631(b)(1)(A)(1) of the New York Tax Law requires a nonresident to allocate part or all of the gain from a sale or exchange of an ownership interest in a partnership, limited liability company, S corporation or a closely held corporation with 100 or fewer shareholders if New York real property comprises more than 50 percent of the entity’s assets, on a fair market basis, on the date of the sale or exchange of the nonresident’s interest in the entity. Neal Gerber Eisenberg Tax Practice Group partner John A. Biek authored an article that appears in the September-October 2009 edition of CCH’s Journal of Passthrough Entities. |
|
| 11.12.09 | Recent Decisions Find Extended Six-Year Limitations Period Not Triggered by Basis Overstatements
CCH's Journal of Passthrough Entities
Kenneth L. Harris, Burton H. Litwin
Abstract: Under Code Sec. 6501(a), the IRS is generally required to assess the tax, or send a notice of deficiency, within three years after a federal income tax return is filed. Code Sec. 6501(e)(1)(A) extends the limitation period to six years “[i]f the taxpayer omits from gross income an amount properly includible therein which is in excess of 25 percent of the amount of gross income stated in the return.” An ongoing issue, which has gained increased importance in recent years because of the proliferation of “tax shelter” transactions designed to reduce taxable income through basis adjustments, is whether the IRS can use this extended six-year limitation period to assess a deficiency where a taxpayer has overstated its basis in an asset, thereby lowering the amount of gross income reported in its return. Neal Gerber Eisenberg Tax Practice Group chair Kenneth L. Harris and senior counsel Burton H. Litwin co-authored an article that appears in the September-October 2009 edition of CCH’s Journal of Passthrough Entities. |
|
| 11.09.09 | Stopping Out-of-State Litigation Against an Insurer Subject to Insolvency Proceedings
Journal of Insurance Regulation
Christopher D. Mickus, Patrick Frye
Abstract: When one state’s insurance commissioner initiates insolvency proceedings against an insurer that is subject to litigation in other states, the commissioner has no device for forcing that litigation to stop so as to preserve the insurer’s assets. Most states, however, have a statute that the insurer’s attorney should raise in order to stay or dismiss that litigation—the Foreign Insolvency Section. This paper explains what the Foreign Insolvency Section is and how an insolvent insurer’s attorney can use it. This paper also contrasts the Foreign Insolvency Section with two other possible and often-argued devices for staying or dismissing litigation— enforcement of the Attachment Section and enforcement of the injunction ordered by the court overseeing the insolvency proceedings. These are distinct devices that the insurer’s attorney should take care not to conflate when seeking to bar litigation against the insurer in another state. Neal Gerber Eisenberg Litigation Practice Group attorneys Christopher D. Mickus and Patrick Frye co-authored this article that appears in the Spring 2009 edition of the Journal of Insurance Regulation (a publication of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners).
|
|
