ARTICLE
17 April 2014

Court Of Federal Claims Refuses To Amend The Judgment In Salem Financial

AO
A&O Shearman

Contributor

A&O Shearman was formed in 2024 via the merger of two historic firms, Allen & Overy and Shearman & Sterling. With nearly 4,000 lawyers globally, we are equally fluent in English law, U.S. law and the laws of the world’s most dynamic markets. This combination creates a new kind of law firm, one built to achieve unparalleled outcomes for our clients on their most complex, multijurisdictional matters – everywhere in the world. A firm that advises at the forefront of the forces changing the current of global business and that is unrivalled in its global strength. Our clients benefit from the collective experience of teams who work with many of the world’s most influential companies and institutions, and have a history of precedent-setting innovations. Together our lawyers advise more than a third of NYSE-listed businesses, a fifth of the NASDAQ and a notable proportion of the London Stock Exchange, the Euronext, Euronext Paris and the Tokyo and Hong Kong Stock Exchanges.
The Court of Federal Claims refused to reconsider its decision that BB&T was not entitled to claim deductions for interest expenses on its STARS loan.
United States Tax

The Court of Federal Claims refused to reconsider its decision in Salem Financial that BB&T was not entitled to claim $74,551,947.40 in deductions for interest expenses on its STARS loan.1 In September, the Tax Court granted a similar motion in the Bank of New York case and subsequently issued an opinion permitting Bank of New York to deduct interest on its STARS loan. Bank of New York Mellon Corp. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2013-225 (Sep. 23, 2013). On the basis of its holding that the STARS loan was separate from the STARS trust, the Tax Court analyzed the loan separately from the trust and determined that Bank of New York was entitled to interest deductions because the loan was a bona fide loan. The Court of Federal Claims rejected the other argument that BB&T raised in the motion for reconsideration: the Loan was commercially viable on its own because it did not play a role as a technical matter in the claim for foreign tax credits. The court dismissed this argument because it was not raised earlier.

Footnote

1 Salem Financial Inc. v. United States, No. 1:10-cv-00192 (Fed. Cl. Jan. 6, 2014).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More