Description: Full version of Taxing Times, May 2007, Volume 3, Issue No. 2.

Description: In PLR 202109001, the IRS ruled that a proposed assumption reinsurance transaction between related foreign parties changing the counter party obligated to a domestic corporation (“Taxpayer”) under an existing agreement did not give rise to Taxpayer being treated as making a base erosion payment (“BEP”), as Taxpayer did not receive a deduction under §832(b)(4)(A) from the amount of gross premiums written on insurance contracts during the taxable year for premiums paid for reinsurance.

Description: Discusses proposed regulations regarding reserve deductions for certain captives under IRC Section 1502 related to consolidated group intercompany insurance transactions.

Description: A discussion of new IRS rulings with respect to the taxation of life settlement transactions.

Description: Discusses the IASB insurance contract project and the major components of the new accounting standard, including the guidance it provides regarding how to define the term “insurance contract.”

Description: Discusses the impact of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, FATCA, on U.S. insurance industry.

Description: A discuss of notice and consent requirements for employer-owned life insurance policies and the IRS rules again on an annuity-LTC combination product.

Description: Examines the Treasury Department and IRS guidance in determining whether a financial arrangement qualifies as insurance under federal tax law. It concerns the concepts of fortuity, homogeneity, and risk distribution, among others.

Description: Issues covered in this article include 1. Tax treatment of advance interest on policy loans, 2. Tax treatment of Credit default swaps, 3 Application of SRLY [Separate Return Limitation Year] Cumulative Register Concept to Dual Consolidated Losses, and 4. FATCA [Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act] Transitional Relief.

Description: On June 30, 2015, the U.S. Tax Court reaffirmed the viability of the Investor Control Doctrine in Webber v. Commissioner. The case serves as a valuable example of what not to do with regard to the investment of assets supporting a variable life insurance contract purchased through a private placement transaction. In the end, however, the Webber court leaves a lot of questions unanswered—most significantly, the elusive answer to how to define investor control. This article examines the Investor Control Doctrine, as explained and applied by the U.S. Tax Court in Webber, and considers some of the open questions that remain after June 30, 2015.