On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Nuts and Bolts of Tax Penalties 2016: A Primer on the Standards, Procedures and Defenses Relating to Civil and Criminal Tax

Released on: Mar. 21, 2016
Running Time: 06:27:08

Running Time Segment Title Faculty Format
[01:36:37] Delinquency & Accuracy-Related Penalties Bryan C Skarlatos ~ Kostelanetz & Fink LLP
Kathleen M Pakenham ~ Cooley LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:02:10] But It's Not My Fault: Reasonable Cause Defenses Lisa Flores ~ Deputy Area Counsel (Strategic Litigation); LB&I, Area 1 (Financial Services), Internal Revenue Service, Office of the Chief Counsel
Roland Barral ~ Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:59:31] Special Rules for the Professionals: Return Preparer Penalties and Ethical Standards Christopher S Rizek ~ Caplin & Drysdale
Professor Linda Galler ~ Professor of Law, Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:30:44] Reportable Transaction & Foreign Asset Reporting Penalties Maria T Stabile ~ Associate Area Counsel (LB&I, Financial Services), Internal Revenue Service
Ian M Comisky ~ Blank Rome LLP
Frank Agostino ~ Agostino & Associates, P.C.
Megan L Brackney ~ Kostelanetz & Fink LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:59:03] Crossing the Line: Civil and Criminal Tax Fraud Monica E Koch ~ Associate Area Counsel (Small Business/Self-Employed); Office of the Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service
Thomas E Bishop ~ Assistant Special Agent in Charge (Criminal Investigation), Internal Revenue Service
Barbara T Kaplan ~ Greenberg Traurig, LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4

The number of accuracy-related penalties assessed against individual taxpayers increased from 58,366 in 2005 to 554,467 in 2014.  That is nearly a 1,000% increase over the past decade!  Are there more bad taxpayers?  Or, is the IRS just getting more aggressive about asserting penalties?  Regardless of the answer, responsible tax practitioners must understand what triggers a penalty assessment and how to protect their clients and themselves against such assessments.  Unfortunately, accounting and law school tax classes rarely focus on penalties, leaving practitioners to pick up the relevant standards and procedures from the trial and error of daily practice. 
 
This seminar is a unique opportunity to review the various tax penalties that can be imposed, the standards and transactions that can trigger penalties and sanctions, the procedures the Internal Revenue Service must follow to assess penalties and the defenses that can be asserted.  We have assembled an expert faculty of experienced private practitioners and government representatives to explain how penalties work, why they are assessed and how you can protect yourself and your clients.    
 
Lecture Topics [Total time 06:27:08]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Introduction and Opening Remarks* [00:19:03]
    Bryan C. Skarlatos
  • Delinquency & Accuracy-Related Penalties [01:36:37]
    Bryan C. Skarlatos, Kathleen M. Pakenham
  • But It's Not My Fault: Reasonable Cause Defenses [01:02:10]
    Roland Barral, Lisa Flores
  • Special Rules for the Professionals: Return Preparer Penalties and Ethical Standards [00:59:31]
    Christopher S. Rizek, Professor Linda Galler
  • Reportable Transaction & Foreign Asset Reporting Penalties [01:30:44]
    Frank Agostino, Megan L. Brackney, Ian M. Comisky, Maria T. Stabile
  • Crossing the Line: Civil and Criminal Tax Fraud [00:59:03]
    Barbara T. Kaplan, Thomas E. Bishop, Monica E. Koch

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Delinquency Penalties
    Kathleen M. Pakenham
  • Accuracy Related Penalties
    Kathleen M. Pakenham
  • Reasonable Cause
    Bryan C. Skarlatos
  • Special Rules for Tax Professionals: Return Preparer Penalties and Ethical Standards
    Linda Galler
  • Reportable Transaction Penalties
    Megan L. Brackney
  • International Tax Forms—An Overview of the Reporting Requirements for Taxpayers with International Activities
    Frank Agostino
  • Reportable Transaction & Foreign Asset Reporting Penalties (PowerPoint slides)
    Ian M. Comisky
  • Now That’s Aggressive: Reportable Transaction Penalties (PowerPoint slides)
    Megan L. Brackney
  • Crossing the Line: Civil and Criminal Tax Fraud (March 14, 2016)
    Barbara T. Kaplan, Tom Bishop, Monica E. Koch

Presentation Material


  • Nuts and Bolts of Tax Penalties
    Kathleen M. Pakenham, Bryan C. Skarlatos
  • Are You Sure You Are Right? Accuracy-Related Penalties
    Kathleen M. Pakenham, Bryan C. Skarlatos
  • But It’s Not My Fault: Reasonable Cause Defenses
    Roland Barral
  • Special Rules for Tax Professionals: Return Preparer Penalties and Ethical Standards
    Professor Linda Galler
  • Now That’s Aggressive: Reportable Transaction Penalties
    Megan L. Brackney
  • Nuts and Bolts of Tax Penalties
    Ian M. Comisky
  • Reportable Transaction & Foreign Asset Reporting Penalties
    Ian M. Comisky
  • Failure to File Informational Returns
    Frank Agostino
  • Crossing the Line: Civil and Criminal Tax Fraud
    Barbara T. Kaplan
Chairperson(s)
Bryan C. Skarlatos ~ Kostelanetz & Fink LLP
Speaker(s)
Frank Agostino ~ Agostino & Associates, P.C.
Roland Barral ~ Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Thomas E. Bishop ~ Assistant Special Agent in Charge (Criminal Investigation), Internal Revenue Service
Megan L. Brackney ~ Kostelanetz & Fink LLP
Ian M. Comisky ~ Blank Rome LLP
Lisa Flores ~ Deputy Area Counsel (Strategic Litigation); LB&I, Area 1 (Financial Services), Internal Revenue Service, Office of the Chief Counsel
Professor Linda Galler ~ Professor of Law, Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University
Barbara T. Kaplan ~ Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Monica E. Koch ~ Associate Area Counsel (Small Business/Self-Employed); Office of the Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service
Kathleen M. Pakenham ~ Cooley LLP
Christopher S. Rizek ~ Caplin & Drysdale
Maria T. Stabile ~ Associate Area Counsel (LB&I, Financial Services), Internal Revenue Service
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at cleadministrator@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at cleadministrator@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

IIEI Recertification:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may qualify for the Continuing Education Units (CEUs) necessary to fulfill the Certified U.S. Export Compliance Officer® (CUSECO) continuing education requirements.

 

Print Share Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2016 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.