Monday, June 06, 2005


I had intended to comment on Littriello v. U.S., which addressed the question of whether the check-the-box regulations were valid.

The Service had made an assessment against Littriello, who was the sole member of a single member LLC, for the entire amount of employment taxes that the LLC had not paid, including both the employer's and the employee's share of FICA and the income tax required to be withheld. The Service contended that it could assess these amounts directly against Littriello because the LLC in question was a disregarded entity under the regulations. Thus, the Service did not have to comply with the requirements necessary for the assessment of a penalty under Section 6672 and the assessment included the employer's share of FICA.

The Court upheld the Service's position and the regulations.

However, before I could post my comments, TaxProf Blog posted extensive comments by Professors Charlotte Crane and Steve Johnson. Their comments adequately addressed the federal tax implications of the case, making any comments that I might have a couple of days late and a few dollars short. In other words, I was scooped.

However, some days you eat the bear and other days the bear eats you. I seem to have scooped the NY Times in at least one case. Compare yesterday's lead story in the NYT ("The Bush administration tax cuts stand to widen the gap between the hyper-rich and the rest of America. The merely rich, making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, will shoulder a disproportionate share of the tax burden") with my postings here and here.

1 comment:

Texas Brian said...

It wasn't really a scoop. Times reporter David Cay Johnston published a book on the shifting tax burden last year.