James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Victoria's Secret Lawsuit May Have Tax Implications
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: April 8, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
The outcome of a Victoria’s Secret lawsuit may have significant tax law implications for companies that use U.S.-based contract manufacturers, according to a new Reuters analysis.
L Brands Inc, owner of Victoria’s Secret and Bath & Body Works stores, is currently involved in a tax case surrounding whether $25.4 million in tax breaks are valid. A 2004 law was designed to help bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. by allowing American companies with manufacturing operations to claim a Section 199 tax deduction. L Brands, formerly Limited Brands, employed U.S.-based contract manufacturers produce gels, creams and other items for its stores and gave its contractors specific instructions to follow, Reuters explained.
Despite not owning the contract manufacturing company that produced and labeled its products, L Brands then claimed the tax deductions, arguing that it “controlled and monitored every stage of the production cycle,” the news source reports.
However, the Internal Revenue Service is disputing the deductions taken between 2007 and 2009.
The federal agency theorizes that L Brands did not “communicate frequently with the contract manufacturers” or have any control over the types of raw materials included in the manufacturing process. As a result, it claims the tax breaks are not valid.
The case has not yet began, but analysts say it will have large implications for several U.S. companies.
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
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
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.
Victoria's Secret Lawsuit May Have Tax Implications
Author: James F. McDonough
The outcome of a Victoria’s Secret lawsuit may have significant tax law implications for companies that use U.S.-based contract manufacturers, according to a new Reuters analysis.
L Brands Inc, owner of Victoria’s Secret and Bath & Body Works stores, is currently involved in a tax case surrounding whether $25.4 million in tax breaks are valid. A 2004 law was designed to help bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. by allowing American companies with manufacturing operations to claim a Section 199 tax deduction. L Brands, formerly Limited Brands, employed U.S.-based contract manufacturers produce gels, creams and other items for its stores and gave its contractors specific instructions to follow, Reuters explained.
Despite not owning the contract manufacturing company that produced and labeled its products, L Brands then claimed the tax deductions, arguing that it “controlled and monitored every stage of the production cycle,” the news source reports.
However, the Internal Revenue Service is disputing the deductions taken between 2007 and 2009.
The federal agency theorizes that L Brands did not “communicate frequently with the contract manufacturers” or have any control over the types of raw materials included in the manufacturing process. As a result, it claims the tax breaks are not valid.
The case has not yet began, but analysts say it will have large implications for several U.S. companies.