Tax Controversy

Taxpayers trust Alston & Bird with U.S. and international tax issues during all phases of a tax dispute, including audits, administrative appeals, trial and appellate litigation at all levels of the federal court system, and mediation of both docketed and nondocketed cases. 

Tax controversy is a highly technical and specialized area of legal practice, so you shouldn’t have to rely on general litigators. Our clients have benefited from our team of true tax litigators who have extensive, substantive command of income, estate, gift, and employment taxes. Our controversy attorneys bring to bear their knowledge of the complex procedural options of tax law to effectively defend client positions through written and oral advocacy.

When facing tax controversy, you need a team with broad experience in behind-the-scenes assistance in strategizing and responding to audit information requests in a way that best reflects the merits of your position. You want someone who can preserve the attorney-client, work product, and other applicable privileges. We also have extensive experience with special procedures such as summons enforcement proceedings, requests for technical advice, closing agreements, and fast-track and accelerated issue resolution. On your behalf, we interact with the IRS revenue agents and field specialists, including ISP specialists, engineers, employee benefits specialists, and international specialists.

Our advocacy for our clients focuses on the administrative appeals phase of a tax dispute. We campaign for your best interests by being actively involved in the oral and written justification of your position. We are trusted to lead negotiations with the IRS appeals officer and technical guidance coordinator to determine whether the dispute can be favorably resolved without litigation.

If the dispute cannot be resolved administratively, you need an experienced team to strategically select the logical forum for litigating the tax dispute. We have litigated cases in the U.S. Tax Court, U.S. district courts, bankruptcy courts, and appellate courts around the country. We also have settled or mediated cases after they were docketed for litigation.

Our clients value our ability to evaluate the big picture—we consider and understand the payment of tax, trial location, judges, government attorneys, timing and nature of the trial, settlement authority, publicity of proceedings, evidentiary rules, procedural rules, appellate jurisdiction, and judicial precedent.

Click here to learn more about our experience with controversy and litigation on the state level.

• In U.S. Tax Court litigation, obtained a full concession from the IRS regarding worker classification. Florida State University v. Commissioner, No. 3291-20, U.S. Tax Court.
• In U.S. district court penalty enforcement litigation, achieved a 99% concession of a Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) penalty for a taxpayer following an unsuccessful opt-out in the IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program.
• In U.S. district court refund litigation, obtained a 75% concession from the government in a matter involving penalties for failure to file gain recognition agreements pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 367(a)(2). AVX Corporation v. U.S., No. 6:20-cv-01244 (D.S.C.).
• Obtained a full concession from the IRS Office of Appeals and Joint Committee on Taxation regarding the statute of limitations for taxpayers claiming refunds attributable to loss-carrybacks.
• In U.S. district court refund litigation, won summary judgment for a multinational enterprise on a question of statutory interpretation of foreign tax credits in a case expected to be taxpayer-favorable precedent for regulatory challenges under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).
• Resolved a client’s long-running tax dispute with the IRS by negotiating a partial pay installment agreement, saving the client approximately $700 million in penalty and interest payments.
• In bankruptcy court, represented an investment fund facing significant IRS penalties for failure to provide information returns to investors. Following trial, the court held that no penalties could be imposed because the fund had reasonable cause for the failure to provide returns. In re Refco Public Commodity Pool L.P., 554 B.R. 736 (Bankr. D. Del.).
• In federal summons enforcement litigation, quashed a summons for tax advice given to a large multinational enterprise during high-stakes refinancing and restructuring transactions. Developed a taxpayer-friendly theory adopted by the Second Circuit on appeal, protecting advice shared with third parties under the common-interest doctrine. Schaeffler v. United States, 806 F.3d 34 (2nd Cir.).
• In U.S. Tax Court litigation, represented an Atlanta-based corporation facing $30 million in additional taxes, penalties, and interest. Before trial, obtained a 100% concession from the IRS. First Multiple Listing Service Inc. v. Commissioner, No. 25141-14, U.S. Tax Court.
• In U.S. Tax Court litigation, represented a Puerto Rico–based corporation facing substantial additional tax liabilities based on the IRS’s assertion that it failed to report U.S.-sourced income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business. Obtained a settlement before trial reducing the proposed additional liabilities by more than 90%. Kiyavi Corp. v. Commissioner, No. 8021-14, U.S. Tax Court.