XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns, alt.society.liberalism
XPost: alt.irs.general, talk.politics.misc
On 2/16/2024 5:32 PM, Francis Mark Hansen <
fmhlaw@comcast.net>, sleazy rent-skip
chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun nut, lied:
On 2/16/2024 6:17 PM, UCLA Economics 100B wrote:
IRS AM 2007-0015 describes the analytical steps the IRS will take to
determine whether settlement payments made to compromise civil
actions brought by, or on behalf of, the government are deductible
by the payor. The memorandum states that the IRS first will look to
the nature of the statute pursuant to which the settlement is being
paid. If the statute allows only compensatory remedies, the inquiry
ends, and the settlement payment is deductible in full. However,
under section 162(f), no part of a settlement payment is deductible
if the compromised action was brought pursuant to a civil statute
having a wholly "punitive" purpose of enforcing the law and
punishing the violator.
The memorandum acknowledges that discerning the purpose of
settlement payments made to compromise an action under a statute
that serves both compensatory and punitive purposes is a difficult
task, requiring the IRS to analyze the settlement to determine the
intent of the parties. Discerning that intent is an intensely
factual inquiry, requiring close examination of the relevant facts
and circumstances of the specific payment at issue and the manner in
which it was calculated.
The IRS could still permit Trump to write off the judgements because
no actual harm was done.
That's why the whole fraud trial is a farce.
It's not, Francis.
Damages is a necessary element. No harm = no damages = no fraud.
The harm was to the entire New York business community and economy, Francis.
--
Canoza's law: Francis Mark Hansen is *always* wrong.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)