Conservation easement disputes have lasted nearly a decade and the end is far for clear. What is apparent, though, is that the IRS is now eager conclude as many cases as possible, and fast. Why? The IRS might be concerned about losing a major case on valuation issues, which could unleash many taxpayer victories in later cases. Another possibility is that the IRS wants to clear its massive inventory of existing SCET cases. Yet another motive might be that battling sophisticated taxpayers in high-dollar, complex, document-intensive cases takes a serious toll on the IRS. The true reasons for the IRS’s desire to resolve conservation easement cases now is not particularly important; what matters is understanding the relevant settlement programs and their nuances. This article, which expands on several of my earlier ones, compares and contrasts three different IRS programs.

What began as an initiative to help businesses keep workers on the payroll during the COVID crisis has become a quagmire. The processing of new employee retention credit (“ERC”) claims is on hold, guidance is often dense and retroactive, legislation is in limbo, and audits and investigations are starting in earnest. Convinced that billions of dollars in ERC claims were improper, the government has initiated several actions. This article, another in a long series by the author, explores recent administrative, legislative and executive actions to address ERC issues.

Most people are somewhat confused about Employee Retention Credit (“ERC”) issues. This is logical given the massive amount of information, much of it inaccurate, released by various sources over the past four years. Among the aspects that escape most people are the enforcement actions taken by the IRS. Understanding these is critical because taxpayers and other parties that might end up in the IRS’s crosshairs cannot effectively defend themselves if they do not know what their adversary is doing. This article, another in a long series, explores the major enforcement tactics used by the IRS thus far in challenging what it considers improper ERC claims.