Taxing Definitions

Definition — Fines and Penalties

Thanks for sharing!
3 minute read

You already know section 162(a) of the Internal Revenue Code lets you deduct the ordinary and necessary expenses you pay while carrying on your trade or business. An ordinary expense is one that is common and acceptable in your business. A necessary expense is appropriate and helpful in carrying on your business.

Image source: Johnacastro2012 via Wikimedia Commons
Image source: Johnacastro2012 via Wikimedia Commons

You may also know that section 162(f) says you get no deduction under 162(a) for any fine or similar penalty paid to a government for the violation of any law, and that the disallowance is not limited to criminal fines and penalties.

The taxpayer in T.C. Memo. 2013-285 (Chaganti), an attorney, deducted three separate fines on his 2006 and 2007 tax returns, all of which the IRS denied.

    • The first fine was $262 of fees and charges a district court ordered the taxpayer to pay because his client failed to appear at a deposition. This fine was paid to the opposing attorney.
    • The second fine was a late fee of $2,300, also ordered by the district court when the taxpayer failed to pay the $262 fine. The taxpayer paid this fine to the Clerk of the District Court.
    • The third fine was $18,125 for the “taxpayer’s willful and unreasonable protraction of the litigation”, and was paid to the opposing attorney to reimburse that attorney’s client for the extra fees attributed to the taxpayer’s misconduct.

The tax court disallowed two of the fines because they were not ordinary and necessary to the practice of law, and said a genuine dispute of fact existed for the remaining fine.

Which two do you think were disallowed?

***

Other posts you might enjoy

Definition – A whale of a breach   Image source: Sho Hatakeyama on Unsplash Once more into the breach… The security breach of an Equifax online dispute portal from May to July 2017 was a whopper. According to a report published by the US Government Accountability Office in August 2018, records containing personally iden...
Definition — Collecting the debt   Image source: Kody Gautier on Unsplash   Have you heard about the guy who walked into an accounts receivable department to pay a compliment? The old joke may be a possibility for the private debt collection agencies hired by the government to collect delinquent tax debts. A cus...
Definition — Losing the deduction   Image source: Dawid Zawiła on Unsplash   One casualty of the December 2017 federal tax law was the personal casualty and theft loss deduction (section 165 of the internal revenue code). With a few exceptions, as of January 1, 2018, nonbusiness losses from sudden, unexpected, or...
Definition — Stirring up the salt   Image source: openclipart.org     Are you watching your sodium levels by limiting your salt intake? The IRS says the time has come to limit the SALT on your tax return too—including the SALT you may be treating as charitable deductions under programs run by your state. ...

It is unknown at this time under which statute the taxpayer was ordered to pay the $262 sanction to opposing counsel. It is similarly unknown what criteria were required to impose this sanction and whether such an imposition in and of itself would indicate that the expense was not ordinary or necessary to the practice of law. A genuine dispute of material fact exists.

It is clear that the $2,300 fine imposed on the taxpayer was for the violation of his duties as an officer of the court in being held in contempt and failing to timely pay the $262 sanction. This amount was paid to the Clerk of the Court for the District Court, a governmental agency responsible for collecting such fines and penalties. Accordingly, the taxpayer is not entitled to deduct the $2,300 sanction as an ordinary and necessary business expense for tax year 2007.

The mere fact that the taxpayer was ordered to pay opposing counsel attorney’s fees demonstrates that those amounts were not ordinary and necessary to the practice of law. The District Court’s analysis in removing the amounts attributable to typical legal expenses confirms that the remaining $18,125 that the taxpayer was ordered to pay was not common to the practice of law, nor was it appropriate or helpful to his business. Accordingly, the taxpayer is not entitled to deduct the $18,125 fine levied against him as an ordinary and necessary business expense for tax year 2007.

Tagged , ,