Supreme Court to decide IRS Audit Time Limits

[taxea]

I am not so concerned with the details of this particular case as I am as to whether the SC rules that the IRS is subject to the three year tax rule or whether the SC allows them to continue to expand the 3 years to 6years or even 10 as they have been doing.

[Snaggletooth]

Corporate Bonanza

Many corporations and small businesses have not had profits for three years in this recession. If they prevail, will this give IRS the license to go back and plunder into more profits instead of wasting time in recent losses?

[veritas]

Words mean something

This is something we all need to keep an eye on:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwo...ar-audit-push/

Excerpt from Home Concrete & Supply v. U.S.

"Lawyers of course are adept at finding ambiguity, and language
of course is by its nature imprecise. One need not consult
a dictionary, however, to understand that the plain
meaning of "omit" is "to leave out" or "to fail to mention."
The taxpayers here did not omit, leave out, or fail to mention
their transaction. Instead, they provided the details on their
returns. See Majority Op. at 4. To be sure, the IRS asserts that
the returns overstated Home Concrete’s basis and thus understated
the overall tax liability resulting from the sale of its
assets. But as the Court noted in Colony, if Congress had been
concerned with that problem, "it could have chosen another
verb such as ‘reduces’ or ‘understates,’ either of which would
have pointed significantly in the Commissioner’s direction."
Colony, 357 U.S. at 32."

[taxea]

This is something we all need to keep an eye on:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2011/09/29/supreme-court-to-rule-on-irs-6-year-audit-push/