James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
IRS Loses Court Case Against Yankees Co-Owner Hal Steinbrenner
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: June 18, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
A court case against Yankees co-owner and managing partner Hal Steinbrenner ruled that he will not be required to repay the Internal Revenue Service $670,000 in what the agency called an “erroneous” tax refund that it mistakenly extended to Steinbrenner and his wife in 2009, a federal court ruled.
The issues go back to IRS audits of the Major League Baseball team’s parent company for 2001 and 2002, as well as amended returns filed by Steinbrenner during the 2001 tax year, Accounting Today reports. Hal Steinbrenner is one of the children of the late George Steinbrenner, the latter of whom settled the audit disputes in an agreement with the IRS in 2007. As part of that agreement, certain alterations were made to the tax returns of the beneficiaries of a family trust, including Hal Steinbrenner’s share, the news source explains.
Following the adjustments, Hal Steinbrenner paid his taxes in 2008, and filed an amended 2001 tax return in 2009 seeking a refund as a result of a $6.8 million net operating loss carried back from 2002. The tax agency extended a refund to Steinbrenner, only to argue later that the amount never should have been approved because it passed the statute of limitations.
In a 19-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday detailed the intricacies of U.S. tax law and said many of the phrases and jargon in the Internal Revenue Code are essentially “nonsense,” according to the Tampa Bay Times.
Merryday referred to the complex tax rules as “the forbidding arcana of partnership taxation, a subject intractably muddled by archaically and chaotically composed – and therefore, nearly inscrutable – statutes and regulations and by the bold proliferation and proud maintenance of abstruse distinctions and obscure jargon,” the Tampa Tribune reports.
The IRS failed to comment on the case, and has not yet announced whether it will appeal the ruling in federal court.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
IRS Loses Court Case Against Yankees Co-Owner Hal Steinbrenner
Author: James F. McDonough
A court case against Yankees co-owner and managing partner Hal Steinbrenner ruled that he will not be required to repay the Internal Revenue Service $670,000 in what the agency called an “erroneous” tax refund that it mistakenly extended to Steinbrenner and his wife in 2009, a federal court ruled.
The issues go back to IRS audits of the Major League Baseball team’s parent company for 2001 and 2002, as well as amended returns filed by Steinbrenner during the 2001 tax year, Accounting Today reports. Hal Steinbrenner is one of the children of the late George Steinbrenner, the latter of whom settled the audit disputes in an agreement with the IRS in 2007. As part of that agreement, certain alterations were made to the tax returns of the beneficiaries of a family trust, including Hal Steinbrenner’s share, the news source explains.
Following the adjustments, Hal Steinbrenner paid his taxes in 2008, and filed an amended 2001 tax return in 2009 seeking a refund as a result of a $6.8 million net operating loss carried back from 2002. The tax agency extended a refund to Steinbrenner, only to argue later that the amount never should have been approved because it passed the statute of limitations.
In a 19-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday detailed the intricacies of U.S. tax law and said many of the phrases and jargon in the Internal Revenue Code are essentially “nonsense,” according to the Tampa Bay Times.
Merryday referred to the complex tax rules as “the forbidding arcana of partnership taxation, a subject intractably muddled by archaically and chaotically composed – and therefore, nearly inscrutable – statutes and regulations and by the bold proliferation and proud maintenance of abstruse distinctions and obscure jargon,” the Tampa Tribune reports.
The IRS failed to comment on the case, and has not yet announced whether it will appeal the ruling in federal court.