A recent Tax Notes article analyzes the "standard of review" that the Tax Court will apply to the IRS's transfer pricing adjustments. In transfer pricing cases, the Tax Court determines whether the IRS has abused its discretion by proposing an adjustment that is "arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable." Although courts often describe this standard as a "heavy" burden for the taxpayer to prove, the Tax Notes article concludes that "recent experience suggest[s] that taxpayers and the IRS are on mostly even ground in transfer pricing litigation."
We won't comment on that conclusion in this blog post, although we encourage anyone interested in the intersection between transfer pricing and court procedure to read the article.
We do, however, want to point out that there is at least one area where our experience tells us that the standard of review really might matter: in dealings with IRS personnel. While the IRS has indeed lost many transfer pricing cases, the IRS has always had considerable leverage at administrative levels (e.g., in audit or before Appeals) and in settlement discussions in litigation. No matter whether a court practically puts the IRS and taxpayers "on mostly even ground," the IRS continues to believe (or at least argue) that the abuse-of-discretion standard of review gives the government the advantage. This could in some cases make IRS agents, Appeals officers, and IRS trial counsel less willing to resolve transfer pricing controversies on terms that are favorable to the taxpayer. It could also mean that IRS personnel will make arguments about the standard of review, which the taxpayer will need to address. Even if IRS personnel are not justified in their thinking, the standard of review does have practical significance in that sense, at least in our experience.
Visit us at mayerbrown.com
Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe - Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.
© Copyright 2020. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.
This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.