The Fabricated Unwind Doctrine: The True Meaning of Penn v. Robertson
John Prebble QC
Victoria University of Wellington - Faculty of Law; Institut für Österreichisches und Internationales Steuerrecht, Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien; University of Notre Dame Australia - School of Law
University of Auckland
Hastings Business Law Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2011
Victoria University of Wellington Legal Research Paper No. 17/2011
When taxpayers discover that their transactions have unwanted tax consequences, they routinely rely on the unwind doctrine found in Internal Revenue Service Revenue Rulings 80-58. Nowadays, “unwinding” has become a “common if not ubiquitous feature of tax practice.” This article finds that the unwind doctrine has no firm basis in case law. Instead, the unwind doctrine is an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) fabrication based on the IRS’s misinterpretation of the case Penn v. Robertson 115 F2d 167 (4th Cir 1940). If the authors are correct one result may be that recipients of TARP-funded bonuses who gave the money back in the face of public opprobrium may (a) be taxable on the bonuses and (b) be unable to set the repayment off against taxable receipts in calculating their taxable income.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 52
Keywords: income tax, tax law refrom, unwind doctrine, unwanted tax consequences, rescission doctrine
JEL Classification: K34
Date posted: March 8, 2011 ; Last revised: April 7, 2015
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.204 seconds