Free Notice (Other) - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:01-cv-00344-LB

Document 127

Filed 07/17/2007

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS No. 01-344 T Judge Lawrence J. Block

ROBERT J. ISLER and SUSAN L. ISLER, Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

CHART

Pursuant to the Court's Order filed May 2, 2007, the parties provide the attached chart detailing the claims alleged in the complaints in each of the AMCOR cases currently before Judge Block. In addition, the chart reflects whether a Form 870-P(AD) settlement is alleged to have been entered by the taxpayer/s in each case. The chart was created with Microsoft Excel and uses the following abbreviations in the headline columns: SY84 = 1984 Source Year Claim SY85 = 1985 Source Year Claim UA = Untimely Assessment Claim SY86 = 1986 Source Year Claim TMI = Tax Motivated Interest Claim IA = Interest Abatement Claim TY = Termination Year Claim (claim for any year other than 1984, 1985, or 1986)

-1-

Case 1:01-cv-00344-LB

Document 127

Filed 07/17/2007

Page 2 of 3

B/T = Basis/Termination Claim IR = Income Recapture Claim 870-P(AD) = Taxpayer/s alleged to have entered Form 870-P(AD) settlement MT = plaintiffs include multiple sets of taxpayers If the Court desires, defendant will provide the Court with a disk containing the attached chart in Microsoft Excel. The disk would enable the Court to sort the data in the chart based on one or more column headings. Generally speaking, AMCOR claims fall within two large categories: 1) claims for tax years 1984, 1985, or 1986; and 2) claims for other tax years. Within the first category, there are three types of claims: 1) Untimely assessment claims for 1984 and 1985; 2) Tax motivated interest claims for all three years; and 3) Interest abatement claims for all three years. Each of the three types presents jurisdictional questions. Judge Allegra issued an opinion in Keener, Fed. Cl. 03-2028 T and Smith, Fed. Cl. 04907 T, concluding that jurisdiction over the untimely assessment and tax motivated interest claims was lacking. Plaintiffs' counsel intend to appeal the Keener decision, when it is entered. The Supreme Court issued an opinion in Hinck, concluding that jurisdiction over the interest abatement claims was lacking. The parties agree the Hinck opinion controls that issue in these AMCOR cases. In the second category of AMCOR claims (tax years other than 1984, 1985, or 1986), there are two types of claims: 1) Basis termination claims; and 2) Income recapture claims (which are alleged somewhat infrequently). Each type presents global issues.

-2-

Case 1:01-cv-00344-LB

Document 127

Filed 07/17/2007

Page 3 of 3

Some AMCOR cases or sub-groups thereof present non-global jurisdictional and/or other non-global non-merits based issues, for example, whether a refund claim was filed timely with the IRS, whether a taxpayer already reported and received a reduction in taxes for the very losses on which the taxpayer bases her refund suit, or whether IRS assessments were untimely. Respectfully submitted, 7/17/2007 Date s/Thomas E. Redding by s/Bart D. Jeffress THOMAS E. REDDING Redding & Associates, P.C. 2914 West T.C. Jester Houston, Texas 77018 (713) 965-9244 (713) 621-5227 (fax) Attorney for Plaintiffs 7/17/2007 Date s/Bart D. Jeffress BART D. JEFFRESS Attorney of Record U.S. Department of Justice Tax Division Court of Federal Claims Section Post Office Box 26 Ben Franklin Post Office Washington, D.C. 20044 (202) 307-6496 (202) 514-9440 (fax) RICHARD T. MORRISON Acting Assistant Attorney General DAVID GUSTAFSON Chief, Court of Federal Claims Section STEVEN I. FRAHM Assistant Chief, Court of Federal Claims Section 7/17/2007 Date s/Steven I. Frahm Of Counsel Attorneys for Defendant

-3-