Has the Internal Revenue Service's Challenge of Semi-Naked Lapsing Powers Become Frivolous?

15 Widener L.J. 299

Posted: 15 Jun 2016

See all articles by Jeffrey Kinsler

Jeffrey Kinsler

Belmont University - College of Law

Date Written: 2006

Abstract

Litigants and lawyers are subject to sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for asserting frivolous claims and defenses. Likewise, lawyers may be disciplined under Rule 3.1 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct for asserting frivolous claims and defenses. Both rules define frivolous claims and defenses as those not "warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law." A claim contrary to "long-standing, unequivocal, dispositive precedent" is frivolous despite the claimant's subjective belief as to its validity. This Article will examine a tax dispute that exemplifies the IRS's ostensible impunity for asserting frivolous claims. In this dispute, the IRS repeatedly has raised an irrelevant, unsuccessful claim in the same court without any sanctions or discipline. The dispute at issue in this Article is whether semi-naked lapsing powers qualify for the federal gift tax annual exclusion. The courts have invariably determined such powers do so qualify, but the IRS continues to challenge such powers with an argument the courts have rejected as wholly irrelevant.

Keywords: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11, frivolous claims and defenses, Internal Revenue Service

Suggested Citation

Kinsler, Jeffrey, Has the Internal Revenue Service's Challenge of Semi-Naked Lapsing Powers Become Frivolous? (2006). 15 Widener L.J. 299. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2795171

Jeffrey Kinsler (Contact Author)

Belmont University - College of Law ( email )

1900 Belmont Boulevard
Nashville, TN 37212
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
89
PlumX Metrics