James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
IRS Loses Court Case Against Yankees Co-Owner Hal Steinbrenner
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: June 18, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
A court case against Yankees co-owner and managing partner Hal Steinbrenner ruled that he will not be required to repay the Internal Revenue Service $670,000 in what the agency called an “erroneous” tax refund that it mistakenly extended to Steinbrenner and his wife in 2009, a federal court ruled.
The issues go back to IRS audits of the Major League Baseball team’s parent company for 2001 and 2002, as well as amended returns filed by Steinbrenner during the 2001 tax year, Accounting Today reports. Hal Steinbrenner is one of the children of the late George Steinbrenner, the latter of whom settled the audit disputes in an agreement with the IRS in 2007. As part of that agreement, certain alterations were made to the tax returns of the beneficiaries of a family trust, including Hal Steinbrenner’s share, the news source explains.
Following the adjustments, Hal Steinbrenner paid his taxes in 2008, and filed an amended 2001 tax return in 2009 seeking a refund as a result of a $6.8 million net operating loss carried back from 2002. The tax agency extended a refund to Steinbrenner, only to argue later that the amount never should have been approved because it passed the statute of limitations.
In a 19-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday detailed the intricacies of U.S. tax law and said many of the phrases and jargon in the Internal Revenue Code are essentially “nonsense,” according to the Tampa Bay Times.
Merryday referred to the complex tax rules as “the forbidding arcana of partnership taxation, a subject intractably muddled by archaically and chaotically composed – and therefore, nearly inscrutable – statutes and regulations and by the bold proliferation and proud maintenance of abstruse distinctions and obscure jargon,” the Tampa Tribune reports.
The IRS failed to comment on the case, and has not yet announced whether it will appeal the ruling in federal court.
- Practices: Tax and Trusts & Estates
- Locations: Red Bank, NJ, New York City, Little Falls, NJ
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
What Business Owners Get Wrong Before Meeting a Litigation Attorney
What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki
Arbitration vs. Litigation vs. Mediation: What New Jersey Businesses Should Know Before Signing a Contract
Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Author: Graham Staton
Can You Own Part of a New Jersey Business Without a Written Agreement?
Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki
Crisis-Proofing Your New Jersey Business: Building a Crisis Response Plan Before You Need One
For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
Monmouth County's Next Development Wave: What Developers and Investors Need to Know
Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe
Are Your Conversations with AI Shielded from Discovery? Courts Are Split
Whether a client’s prompts to a generative AI tool and the documents it produces are protected from disclosure depends on the case type, who claims protection, and whether counsel was involved. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled that a criminal defendant’s communications with an AI platform were protected by neither […]
Author: Chris Seelinger
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.