Whose Money Is It?

Another in the annals: what is OPM—the EU’s use of money earned by European national citizens and paid over to the EU in the form of taxes?  Or is it the EU’s money, and it’s the citizens who are using OPM—the money the EU allows the citizenry to have?

This one comes from the world of (Spanish) sports.

Real Madrid, FC Barcelona, and five other Spanish soccer clubs will have to return tens of millions of euros to Spain’s government after benefiting from illegal tax breaks, the European Union’s antitrust regulator said Monday.

The European Commission said the tax breaks, property deals, and loans and bank guarantees granted by the Spanish government gave those clubs an unfair advantage over their competitors.

Because the worthies of the EU Know Better what the Spanish should do with their money than does the Spanish government.

Tax Complexity

A Private Letter Ruling is a letter the IRS issues to a particular taxpayer—corporate or business—to provide specific instructions/clearance to a specific taxpayer about that taxpayer’s particular circumstance.  PLRs set no precedent for any other taxpayer; even if that other has a substantially similar circumstance.  The price for such a Letter, charged by the IRS to the Letter’s recipient, ranges from $2,200 to $28,300.

The procedure for getting a PLR is set out in Internal Revenue Bulletin:  2016-1, which runs past 260 .pdf pages (the Table of Contents runs nearly 6 pages).  There’s a hint there.

Here’s another hint, from the opening paragraph of 2016-1‘s Section 1, which lays out the purpose of this procedure:

This revenue procedure explains how the Service provides advice to taxpayers on issues under the jurisdiction of the Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate), the Associate Chief Counsel (Financial Institutions and Products), the Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax and Accounting), the Associate Chief Counsel (International), the Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs and Special Industries), the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration), and the Associate Chief Counsel (Tax Exempt and Government Entities). It explains the forms of advice and the manner in which advice is requested by taxpayers and provided by the Service. A sample format for a letter ruling request is provided in Appendix B. See section 4 of this revenue procedure for information on certain issues outside the scope of this revenue procedure on which advice may be requested under a different revenue procedure.

Seven different tax specialist head lawyers are needed by the IRS to explain the IRS’ own tax rules to prospective tax advice seekers.

Hmm….

Tony Blair Misunderstands

Great Britain’s Ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair has sensed danger from the Brits’ vote to leave the European Union.

Blair said in a Friday column in The Daily Telegraph that the future of the United Kingdom is at stake as the country faces negotiations on the terms of leaving the European Union.

Of course there’s danger—there always is when a change as large as this is embarked on.  But Great Britain didn’t get to be as great as it was and still is by being timid.  This move is a great opportunity for the nation, much more so than it is a risk, however real that risk is.

Blair also worried:

Britain is dangerously divided, with “profound dismay” felt by many of the 48 percent who wanted to remain in the EU.

He’s missing the other question, though: would Great Britain be any less divided had they voted to Remain?  Not a bit.

Look forward, not backward.

EU and Taxes

The European Union agreed Tuesday on a set of rules and standards aimed at closing loopholes that allow wealthy multinationals to shift profits and avoid footing large tax bills.

“Today’s agreement strikes a serious blow against those engaged in corporate tax avoidance,” said Pierre Moscovici, the bloc’s tax affairs commissioner.

Notice that.  There’s not the slightest glimmer of a concept of discouraging corporate tax avoidance by lowering tax rates.  No, it’s not the corporation’s money; it’s the EU’s, and they’ll decide how much of the money gained by a corporation the EU will permit it to retain.

IRS Shenanigans

The IRS, after three years of stonewalling and after a Federal judge’s explicit order to stand and deliver, has at last released the list of the organizations it claims to have targeted for blocking from tax exempt status.  “Claims” because the list has grown, from the 298 avowedly conservative organizations originally identified by the Treasury Department’s IG to a total of 426 that the IRS finally listed for the judge.

Edward Greim, a lawyer for NorCal Tea Party Patriots, a party to the suit demanding the IRS give up its list, had this about the difference in size between the list Treasury released three years ago and the list the IRS released:

Based on these changes, which to date remain unexplained, a very real possibility—if not probability—exists that the IRS modified its targeting in light of the investigations, packing its own internal lists of targeted groups to support its preferred narrative, including by adding ideologically diverse groups[.]

It would be interesting to see the dates of something representing the initial delay applied to each of these groups.