Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
John Hancock Loses $560 Million Tax Lawsuit
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: August 23, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
The U.S. Tax Court recently ruled against the John Hancock Life Insurance Co. in a tax lawsuit involving hundreds of millions in deductions, Bloomberg News reports.
The court opposed John Hancock’s argument that tax deductions on a series of leveraged lease transactions – including depreciation, rental and interest expense, and transaction costs – amounting to $560 million were valid. The issue involves the insurance company’s use of lease-in-lease-out and sale-in-lease-out transactions – notably referred to as LILO and SILO. These transactions occur when companies purchase sizable assets, which are then leased to third parties for use. Most companies then adopted the practice of claiming deductions on the assets, Bloomberg notes.
Since 2008, however, the IRS has determined that these types of transactions are vehicles for improper tax avoidance. The agency claims that firms cannot legally claim deductions under federal law because they never actually owned the assets. After giving companies a chance to terminate LILOs and SILOs in exchange for 20 percent of the savings, the IRS has won a series of cases relating to these vehicles.
In John Hancock’s tax case, the IRS argued that the transactions “lacked economic substance and the substance of the transactions is not consistent with their form.” U.S. Judge Harry Haines agreed with the federal agency on the latter half of the argument, according to his court opinion.
“John Hancock did not acquire the benefits and burdens of ownership” wrote Judge Harry Haines.
However, he did not directly address the economic substance argument, which may give the company some room to appeal the decision. In an emailed statement, John Hancock alluded to the possibility of appealing the ruling.
“We continue to believe our position on the tax treatment of our lease investments was appropriate and factually distinguishable from other recent cases addressing the tax treatment of leverage lease investments,” wrote Roy Anderson, a spokesman for Bloomberg.
- Practices: Tax and Trusts & Estates, Corporate Transactions & Business, Sophisticated Estate Planning & Wealth Preservation
- 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
Crypto Enforcement: A Former Prosecutor’s Warning to Criminals and the Public
Cryptocurrency intimidates most people. The reason is straightforward. People fear what they do not understand. When confusion sets in, the common reaction is either to ignore the subject entirely or to mistrust it. For years, that is exactly how most of the public and even many in law enforcement treated cryptocurrency. However, such apprehension changed […]
Author: Bryce S. Robins
Understanding Chattel Paper: A Key Component in Secured Transactions
Using chattel paper to obtain a security interest in personal property is a powerful tool. It can ensure lenders have a legal claim on collateral ranging from inventory to intellectual property. To reduce risk and protect your legal rights, businesses and lenders should understand the legal framework. This framework governs the creation, sale, and enforcement […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Crypto Compliance: A Comprehensive Guide
For years, digital assets operated in a legal gray area, a frontier where innovation outpaced the reach of regulators and law enforcement. In this early “Wild West” phase of finance, crypto startups thrived under minimal oversight. That era, however, is coming to an end. The importance of crypto compliance has become paramount as cryptocurrency has […]
Author: Bryce S. Robins
Supreme Court and Title VII: Implications for Reverse Discrimination
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services vitiating the so-called “background circumstances” test required by half of federal circuit courts.1 The background circumstances test required majority group plaintiffs pleading discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to meet a heightened pleading standard […]
Author: Matthew F. Mimnaugh
SPACs Are Back, What You Need to Know
Special purpose acquisition companies (better known as SPACs) appear to be making a comeback. SPAC offerings for 2025 have already nearly surpassed last year’s totals, with additional transactions in the pipeline. SPACs last experienced a boom between 2020–2021, with approximately 600 U.S. companies raising a record $163 billion in 2021. Notable companies that went public […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Short Form Merger: Streamlining the Process for Businesses
Merging two companies is a complex legal and business transaction. A short form merger, in which an acquiring company merges with a subsidiary corporation, offers a more streamlined process that involves important corporate governance considerations. A short form merger, in which an acquiring company merges with a subsidiary corporation, offers a more streamlined process. However, […]
Author: Dan Brecher
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.