Should the States Piggyback on Federal Schedule UTP?
J. Richard (Dick) Harvey
Villanova University School of Law and Graduate Tax Program
August 1, 2011
State Tax Notes, p. 327, 2011
Villanova Law/Public Policy Research Paper No. 2011-09
There has been much written about Schedule UTP since its announcement by IRS commissioner Shulman in January 2010. However, little has been written about issues other tax administrators may need to consider if they plan on adopting some version of Schedule UTP for their own purposes. State tax administrators are definitely thinking about Schedule UTP. In addition, the Australian Taxation Office has published a draft form for 2012 that is based, in large part, on the IRS Schedule UTP.
Although corporations are hoping that most other tax administrators do not adopt some version of Schedule UTP, corporations will likely be disappointed. However, some state tax administrators believe it will be a simple process to adopt Schedule UTP for their purposes. They also could be disappointed. This article discusses several issues surrounding Schedule UTP that state tax administrators may need to consider if they are seriously planning to pursue Schedule UTP.
Issues discussed include: Will the IRS Schedule UTP be of much benefit to state tax administrators, or should states consider a state specific Schedule UTP? If a state specific Schedule UTP is adopted, should the states follow the IRS model for Schedule UTP? If not, where might they want to deviate? Will states be able to defend a state specific Schedule UTP against privilege/work product challenges? Should states adopt a specific penalty for failing to adequately complete Schedule UTP?
Number of Pages in PDF File: 6
Keywords: Schedule UTP, State Taxes, Tax Gap, Tax Accrual Workpapers, Work-Product DoctrineAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: August 3, 2011
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.406 seconds