Sugarloaf Funding, LLC, et al v. US Dept of the Treasury

Filing 920091007

Opinion

Download PDF
var gAgent = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase() var gWindows = ( (gAgent.indexOf( "win" ) != -1 ) || ( gAgent.indexOf( "16bit" ) != -1 ) ) var gIE = ( gAgent.indexOf( "msie" ) != -1 ) var bInlineFloats = ( gWindows && gIE && ( parseInt( navigator.appVersion ) >= 4 ) ) var floatwnd = 0 var WPFootnote1 = 'See In re: Good Karma, LLC, 528 F. Supp. 2d 1361, 1362-63\ sch. A (J.P.M.L. 2007)(denying motion for consolidation of pre-trial proceedings).\ ' var WPFootnote2 = 'See, e.g., Bodensee Fund, LLC v. United States, No. 07-3209,\ 2008 WL 4490361 (D.N.J. Sept. 30, 2008); Howa Trading, LLC v.\ United States Dep\'t of Treasury-Internal Revenue Service, No.\ 3:07CV324-R, 2008 WL 2323872 (W.D.N.C. June 2, 2008); Bodensee\ Fund, LLC v. United States Dep\'t of Treasury, No. 07-MC-0111, 2008\ WL 1930967 (E.D. Pa. May 2, 2008); Ironwood Trading, LLC v. United\ States, No. 8:07-mc-59-T-30MSS, 2008 WL 817066 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 25,\ 2008), aff\'d, Nero Trading, LLC v. United States, 570 F.3d 1244\ (11th Cir. 2009); Good Karma, LLC v. United States, 546 F. Supp. 2d\ 597 (N.D. Ill. 2008); Sterling Trading, LLC v. United States, 553\ F. Supp. 2d. 1152 (C.D. Cal. 2008); Lyons Trading, LLC v. United\ States, No. 3:07-mc-13, 2008 WL 361533 (E.D. Tenn. Feb. 8, 2008);\ Rook Trading, LLC v. United States, No. 1:07-651 (W.D. Mich. Dec.\ 19, 2007); Tiberius Trading, LLC v. United States, No. 1:07-718\ (W.D. Mich. Dec. 19, 2007).\ \ ' var WPFootnote3 = 'The IRS issues CIPs to "provid[e] guidance to field examiners\ and to ensur[e] uniform application of the law" relating to\ "complex and significant industry wide issues." Internal Revenue\ Service publication, available at http://www.irs.gov/businesses/\ article/0,,id=96445,00.html.                          \ ' var WPFootnote4 = 'Jetstream was a British Virgin Islands limited company during\ the time period relevant to this appeal. \ ' var WPFootnote5 = 'The summons regarding Sugarloaf was typical of this first set\ served on Hartigan. It sought:\ \               1. All documents, including but not limited to engagement\ letters, representation letters, agreements, invoices,\ billing records, fee allocations, and correspondence\ related to any fees for legal, professional, management,\ accounting and tax advice and assistance incurred by you\ and/or any entity controlled by you in connection with\ Sugarloaf Fund, LLC, and/or its activities.\ \               2. All minutes, notes, correspondence, emails, calendar\ entries, and other recordings relating to or reflecting\ meetings, conferences and telephone conversations in\ which Sugarloaf Fund, LLC, and/or its activities was\ discussed.\ \               3. All documents showing payments of any funds,\ including, but not limited to fees, paid or received by\ any party in connection with Sugarloaf Fund, LLC, and/or\ its activities.\ ' var WPFootnote6 = 'The second summons contained forty three specific document\ requests, broken down into the following categories: 1) materials\ related to Rogers\'s marketing efforts; 2) engagement letters and\ documents related to participants\' involvement; 3) documents\ discussing expected tax benefits; 4) legal or tax opinions; 5)\ information about fees paid in connection with the shelters; and 6)\ documents related to Rogers\'s role. \ ' var WPFootnote7 = 'Even though they were not the summoned parties, the\ petitioners are permitted to move to quash. See 26 U.S.C. §\ 7609(b)(2).\ ' var WPFootnote8 = 'Hartigan, the "summoned party" has interposed no objections\ to the summonses.\ ' var WPFootnote9 = 'The Derringer FPAA was issued approximately six weeks after\ the summons and two weeks after the summons return date.\ ' var WPFootnote10 = 'Ironwood Trading, supra.\ ' var WPFootnote11 = 'The appellants\' overarching theory is that the large number\ of pending legal proceedings is evidence of a nationwide harassment\ effort.\ ' var WPFootnote12 = 'The IRS is generally authorized to audit tax returns within\ three years of their filing. 26 U.S.C. §§ 6501, 6229. \ ' var WPFootnote13 = 'The limitations period with respect to Derringer and Rogers\ were tolled by the issuance of an FPAA and deficiency notice,\ respectively. \ ' function WPShow( WPid, WPtext ) { if( bInlineFloats ) eval( "document.all." + WPid + ".style.visibility = 'visible'" ); else { if( floatwnd == 0 || floatwnd.closed ) floatwnd = window.open( "", "comment", "toolbars=0,width=600,height=200,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,dependent=1" ); floatwnd.document.open( "text/html", "replace" ); floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" ); floatwnd.document.write( " p { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; } \r\n" ); floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" ); floatwnd.document.write( WPtext ); floatwnd.document.write( 'Close'); floatwnd.document.write( "

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?