The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today upheld a federal district court dismissal of an action filed by taxpayers who challenged the IRS’s decision not to allow them to enroll in a new IRS disclosure program.
The D.C. Circuit concluded that the Anti-Injunction Act bars this lawsuit because this judicial action would have the effect of stopping the IRS from collecting accuracy-related penalties for which the taxpayers are currently liable under a voluntary disclosure program.
The case is: Maze v. IRS, No. 16-5265 (D.C. Circuit July 14, 2017). Read the D.C. Circuit’s decision [PDF 110 KB]
The taxpayers failed to report and pay tax on foreign income. To be relieved of liability for their past non-compliance on reporting and paying taxes with respect to undisclosed foreign income or assets, the taxpayers in 2012 enrolled in the IRS “offshore voluntary disclosure program” (2012 OVDP).
The 2012 OVDP enabled the taxpayers to settle most potential penalties for which they would be liable by means of a lump-sum compromise equal to 27.5% of the aggregate value of the foreign assets, provided that certain payment and filing requirements were satisfied (for instance, the taxpayers would have to pay eight years’ worth of accuracy-related penalties).
In 2014, the IRS launched an expanded “streamlined procedures” program that offered fewer benefits to noncompliant taxpayers, but it also had fewer compliance requirements. For instance, the streamlined procedures did not require the payment of any accuracy-related penalties.
The IRS provided “transition rules” to allow taxpayers currently participating in the OVDP and who satisfied the eligibility requirements for the expanded streamlined procedures program to remain in the OVDP but to take advantage of the favorable penalty structure. However, the transition rules left in place the requirement to pay eight years of accuracy-related penalties.
The taxpayers tried to withdraw from the 2012 OVDP and apply for the streamlined procedures, but the IRS denied their requests and directed them to apply for treatment under the transition rules.
Instead, the taxpayers filed suit in federal district court, seeking among other relief, an injunction allowing them to transfer from one IRS voluntary program to another. The federal district court dismissed their complaint, asserting that it lacked jurisdiction under the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) provisions of section 7421.
On appeal, the D.C. Circuit affirmed the dismissal. The appeals court explained that as participants in the 2012 OVDP, the taxpayers were required to pay eight years’ worth of accuracy-related penalties and that these penalties were to be treated as taxes under the AIA. Thus, any lawsuit that seeks to restrain their assessment and collection was barred.
<p>© 2018 KPMG LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership and the U.S. member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.</p> <p>KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”) is a Swiss entity. Member firms of the KPMG network of independent firms are affiliated with KPMG International. KPMG International provides no client services. No member firm has any authority to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member firm vis-à-vis third parties, nor does KPMG International have any such authority to obligate or bind any member firm.</p>
The KPMG logo and name are trademarks of KPMG International. KPMG International is a Swiss cooperative that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent member firms. KPMG International provides no audit or other client services. Such services are provided solely by member firms in their respective geographic areas. KPMG International and its member firms are legally distinct and separate entities. They are not and nothing contained herein shall be construed to place these entities in the relationship of parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners, or joint venturers. No member firm has any authority (actual, apparent, implied or otherwise) to obligate or bind KPMG International or any member firm in any manner whatsoever. The information contained in herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. For more information, contact KPMG's Federal Tax Legislative and Regulatory Services Group at: + 1 202 533 4366, 1801 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.