United States: Comfortable With Your International Tax Planning? - The Playing Field may Have Just Changed

Last Updated: June 2 2005
Article by Thomas F. Carlucci and Mark Schieble

You are tax director of a multinational corporate group sitting in your office in New York. It is late Friday and, after a difficult week (like every other week), you are looking forward to some time off at the beach. Based on information that Country X, with a new administration and a view to maintaining its manufacturing base, has recently adopted a lax transfer pricing enforcement policy, you have just signed-off on a new transfer pricing strategy for the sale of goods by your company's Country X manufacturing unit to your sales unit in Country Y, a well-known low tax jurisdiction. Based on Columbia Rope Co. and PPG Industries, you are comfortable that your foreign tax planning strategy has a valid business purpose for U.S. tax purposes, and that your U.S. parent does not have constructive dividend exposure. You also are comfortable that your source of information on Country X's new policy is reliable and that Country X will not be challenging you. Time to head to the beach? Not just yet. You now need to consider whether you have just exposed yourself and your company to criminal tax liability in the U.S. Perhaps you also need to consider the possibility of a civil RICO claim by that contentious competitor always on the look-out for any possible advantage.

In Pasquantino v. United States, decided April 26 of this year, a bare majority of the Supreme Court held that persons smuggling liquor into Canada in violation of Canadian excise tax laws (but not U.S. law) violated the federal wire fraud statute. Pasquantino spells bad news not only for smugglers. Under the rationale of that decision, any lawyer, accountant, corporate tax officer or other person developing or implementing strategies to reduce someone's foreign taxes might similarly be criminally prosecuted. The only elements needed for conviction are that the planning or implementation activity occurred on U.S. soil and relied on the use of a telephone, e-mail or mail, and that the tax savings strategy evades the laws of a foreign country, all as determined by a U.S. court.

The Court in Pasquantino faced two principal issues: first, whether the smuggling scheme before it violated the wire fraud statute in the first instance and, second, if so, whether the common law "revenue rule" excepted frauds directed at foreign tax avoidance from the reach of the wire fraud statute.

As to the first issue, the defendants argued that their conduct failed to constitute a "scheme or artifice to defraud" and that, even if it did, the object of their fraud was not money or property, as required by the statute. Justice Thomas, writing for the majority, wasted little time finding both that the right to be paid taxes is a property right worth of protection by the wire fraud statute and that the defendants. conduct, involving concealment and a failure to declare the liquor in their trunk to customs officers, plainly constituted a "scheme or artifice to defraud."

Justice Thomas took a more studied approach to the defendants' revenue rule contentions. The Court appeared amenable to the proposition that the revenue rule, of ancient common law origin, would bar a foreign sovereign from suing in a U.S. court to collect taxes owing to it under its own laws. Pasquantino, however, involved an action, not by a foreign sovereign to collect a tax owed to it, but by the United States to enforce a penal statute in its own courts, and on this distinction the majority Justices and the defendants parted ways. The defendants marshaled an abundance of authority to the effect that the revenue rule enjoyed a far broader reach and foreclosed any use of the courts of this country where the underlying conduct at issue was the violation of a foreign country's tax laws. Granting that that case against the defendants effectively enforced Canadian tax law, at least "in an attenuated sense," Justice Thomas concluded that revenue rule jurisprudence, as it existed in 1952 in any event (when the wire fraud statute was enacted), did not clearly proscribe all access to U.S. courts just because foreign tax evasion was an element of the underlying conduct. Moreover, Thomas found nothing in revenue rule law suggesting that it should be so construed. While acknowledging that the principal evil that the revenue rule was designed to guard was "judicial evaluation of the policy-laden enactments of other sovereigns," Thomas concluded that the executive branch's very involvement in the case may be taken as an indication that it has assessed "the prosecution's impact on the Nation's relationship with Canada and concluded that it poses little danger of causing international friction." As to the defendants' final assertion that U.S. courts lack the competency to evaluate the validity of foreign tax laws and/or schemes to avoid them, Thomas simply found that "[f]oreign law, of course, posed no unmanageable complexity in this case. The District Court had before it uncontroverted testimony of a Government witness that petitioners' scheme aimed at violating Canadian tax law."

At bottom, however, the Court's action sanctions use of the wire fraud statute as a means to enforce foreign tax law. Clearly, the defendants' conduct fell within the scope of the wire fraud statute only because such conduct violated Canadian tax law. But for the violation of Canadian law, no aspect of the defendants' conduct was criminal in the U.S.

Certainly, one might legitimately wonder why or to what extent the federal government would be motivated to prosecute its own citizens for violating the laws of a foreign country, particularly when the conduct involved is not a universally recognized crime such as smuggling, or when the foreign laws involved and/or the alleged violation of them are not clear. Pasquantino consequently may see little real life application. But a wire fraud violation conceivably may serve as a predicate offense triggering claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), and a wide range of private interests can have standing to bring civil RICO actions, including not only a foreign government whose tax laws have been skirted but also a competitor seeking to wrest any advantage it may over a tax-aggressive rival.

In fact, in the week following Pasquantino, the Court vacated and remanded a decision of the Second Circuit barring the European Community from pursuing on behalf of itself and member states a RICO claim in the U.S. courts against the major tobacco companies based on their alleged participation in cigarette smuggling schemes in violation of the tax laws of various European countries. In that case, European Community v. RJR Nabisco, the alleged predicate offenses included a variety of crimes, including violations of the wire fraud and mail fraud statutes. The plaintiffs sought an injunction and damages based on lost tax revenue and costs of prosecution. The Second Circuit upheld the District Court.s rejection of the case, holding that the substance of the action was for the collection of foreign taxes and that the revenue rule therefore barred the same.

To the extent that the revenue rule, after Pasquantino, does not bar a case such as RJR Nabisco, the volume of foreign tax issues heard in U.S. courts could increase dramatically. If a foreign sovereign can sue in U.S. courts to collect tax owed to it, the classic evil targeted by the revenue rule, then any person with standing to bring a RICO claim could also sue in a U.S. court on account of alleged foreign tax evasion, using a violation of the mail or wire fraud statutes as the predicate offense.

It is by no means clear that the Pasquantino Court's reading of the revenue rule will compel the Second Circuit to find that RJR Nabisco can go forward. As discussed in Pasquantino, part of the rationale informing the revenue rule is avoidance of the international friction that conceivably may follow from the courts of one country interpreting the tax laws of another ("policy-laden enactments" in the words of Justice Thomas). Under our Constitution, international relations are the exclusive province of the executive and legislative branches, and U.S. courts therefore arguably should avoid the interpretation of foreign tax laws altogether. In response to the defendants' contentions along these lines in Pasquantino, Justice Thomas wrote that it is "[t]rue a prosecution like this one requires a court to recognize foreign law to determine whether the defendant violated U.S. law. But we may assume that by electing to bring this prosecution, the Executive has assessed this prosecution's impact on this Nation's relationship with Canada and concluded that it poses little danger of causing international friction." The same conclusion may not follow where the claimant is a foreign sovereign. It particularly may not follow where the claimant is a private citizen with little or no stake in the world of foreign relations.

Accordingly, the scope of Pasquantino's full impact will need to await another day. At a minimum, however, the case is remarkable for allowing the conviction of a U.S. criminal statute to stand on nothing more than the evasion of foreign taxes and it stands as yet an additional beacon counseling a new level of prudence in the conduct of international business affairs in the United States in the early twenty-first century.

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions