- Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Fiduciary Disputes
Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
Ediscovery, Applied Science and Economics, and Litigation Support Solutions
March 28, 2023Robins Kaplan LLP Announces 2023 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Fellow and Pathfinder
March 22, 2023Benchmark Litigation Names Robins Kaplan 2023 Minnesota Law Firm of the Year
March 16, 2023Second Circuit Affirms Record $5.6 Billion Recovery in Antitrust Case
March 29-30, 2023ACI Managed Care Disputes and Litigation
April 3, 2023Conference of Tribal Lending Commissioners
April 11-13, 2023Mass Torts Made Perfect Seminar
March 2023Unintended Consequences of Banning Noncompete Agreements
March 26, 2023What I’ll Be Watching for in the Amgen Oral Arguments
March 13, 2023The Antitrust Case that Could Reshape Professional Golf
September 16, 2022Uber Company Systems Compromised by Widespread Cyber Hack
September 15, 2022US Averts Rail Workers Strike With Last-Minute Tentative Deal
September 14, 2022Hotter-Than-Expected August Inflation Prompts Massive Wall Street Selloff
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Find resources to help navigate legal and business complexities.
Privileged Taxes? The Gray Area for Protecting Tax Advice in Estate Planning
It is no question that the current tax code is complex. Taxpayers—including settlors or trustees of a trust, individuals, and businesses—therefore frequently obtain legal and financial advice regarding how to structure businesses or transactions to minimize tax liability. But what happens when the IRS demands to see that advice?
THE IRS’S POWER TO DEMAND INFORMATION
The IRS has broad summons powers it can use to examine any documents or compel testimony from a taxpayer.1 That power extends to the taxpayer’s representative or a third party with potentially relevant information. The IRS routinely directs summonses to attorneys, accountants, and trustees, in addition to the taxpayers themselves. Those summonses often seek “all documents” relating to a particular transaction or filing. If the subject of a summons refuses to turn over the documents or testify as requested, the IRS can file a petition in federal court to enforce the summons.
Courts generally impose a minimal burden on the IRS, only requiring the IRS to show (1) the investigation will be conducted for a legitimate purpose, (2) the inquiry is relevant to the investigation’s purpose, (3) the IRS does not already possess the information, and (4) all administrative steps required by the IRS Code have been followed.2 If the IRS meets that burden, then the taxpayer must establish a reason why the IRS is not entitled to the information it seeks.
THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND THE WORK PRODUCT DOCTRINE
One reason the IRS may not be entitled to information sought in a summons is if an evidentiary privilege applies. The courts widely recognize two evidentiary privileges: the work product doctrine and the attorney-client privilege. The work product doctrine—which generally prevents the disclosure of one side’s legal theory, mental impressions, and strategy—is broad, but it only applies once litigation is reasonably anticipated. Usually, taxpayers seek tax advice before anticipating litigation, so the work product doctrine does not apply.
The attorney-client privilege protects all confidential communications between a client and an attorney for the purpose of providing legal advice. Unlike the work product doctrine, the attorney-client privilege applies regardless of whether litigation is imminent. Documents shared with third parties, such as other parties to a transaction, are unlikely to be privileged. An exception is that the attorney-client privilege can include third parties—such as accountants—when their expertise is necessary for effective consultation between the attorney and client.3 Note, however, that lawyers retaining a third-party expert should carefully document the engagement and its purpose, particularly if the taxpayer has previously used the services of that third party.
TO WAIVE OR NOT TO WAIVEImportantly, the attorney-client privilege can be waived, particularly if a taxpayer raises a defense that he or she relied on legal advice. For example, if the IRS assesses an accuracy-related penalty against a taxpayer, the taxpayer can avoid the penalty if he or she shows that there was reasonable cause for, and he or she acted in good faith with respect to, the alleged underpayment.4
Raising a “reasonable cause and good faith” defense based on a legal opinion permits the IRS to obtain otherwise privileged attorney-client communications relating to the defense.5 The taxpayer can choose to waive the privilege and disclose the privileged communications, particularly if those communications firmly establish the taxpayer’s reasonable belief and good faith. The IRS, however, may then be entitled to all communications relating to whether the taxpayer’s belief was more than likely reasonable. A recent 2017 case in the Eastern District of Kentucky showed how, in some circumstances, the taxpayer can also choose to abandon the defense rather than waive the privilege.6
Applying the attorney-client privilege is fact-intensive and determined case by case. When responding to an assessment of an accuracy-based penalty, a taxpayer waiving the attorney-client privilege can facilitate cooperation and an amicable resolution with the IRS. Waiving the privilege can also help a taxpayer prove the intent behind a transaction or establish a “reasonable cause and good faith” defense. Conversely, improper assertion of this defense can inadvertently waive the attorney-client privilege. Even an intentional waiver of the privilege can lead to broader disclosure than originally intended.
Before waiving the privilege or raising a defense based on reliance on legal advice, a taxpayer should always consult an experienced litigation attorney knowledgeable about privilege issues.
(1). I.R.C. § 7602(a).
(2). See U.S. v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964).
(3). See U.S. v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918, 922 (2d Cir. 1961).
(4). I.R.C. § 664(c)(1).
(5). See Ad Investment 2000 Find, LLC v. C.I.R., 142 T.C. 248 (2014).
(6). U.S. v. Micro Cap KY Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44261, at *8 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 27, 2017).
The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.