Top Law Schools

lawdog97 wrote:Can any of you elucidate what a tax attorney does? Qualifications, trial, dealing with the IRS, day-to-day etc.

Seems like an interesting field. Do you guys "give it back" to the IRS?

Thanks.

nealric wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:31 pm

lawdog97 wrote:Can any of you elucidate what a tax attorney does? Qualifications, trial, dealing with the IRS, day-to-day etc.

Seems like an interesting field. Do you guys "give it back" to the IRS?

Thanks.

I'm a tax attorney. I started at a large NYC-based law firm and have since moved to the tax department of a Fortune 500 company.

The majority of tax attorneys focus on planning and do not do a significant amount of controversy work (at least on the institutional level). There are very few tax trials, and when they do happen a trial lawyer who is not necessarily a tax specialist will likely be brought in. Controversy work has actually declined over the years due to financial reporting standards that disincentivize public companies from taking aggressive tax positions, as well as cuts to IRS audit staff. Trial work may be a bit more common for tax lawyers who represent small businesses and individuals, but tax court (where most tax controversies end up if they go to court) is usually more like an appellate argument than a full blown trial. I did a summer internship at the Department of Justice tax division, which litigates tax cases on behalf of the government in federal court (other than the tax court). Most of the DOJ tax folks are litigators who happen to be litigating over tax, rather than tax folks who happen to litigate.

My practice is about 70% planning and 30% controversy work, but the vast majority of controversy work is handled at the audit and audit appeals level (administratively within the IRS). I've worked on matters where a Tax Court petition was filed, but never one where it progressed all the way though to a Tax Court decision. I also do controversy work at the state level and in foreign jurisdictions (I actually have worked on a case in the U.K. that went to trial and resulted in a published decision, but the actual trial worked was handled by a barrister). Foreign controversy can be interesting in developing countries because it tends to be much less centered on law and is more of a negotiation than anything else. I've had experiences with developing country tax authorities that are more like purchasing a used car than an administrative hearing or trial.

As far as "giving it back to the IRS," I'd say that the experience is a lot less hotly adversarial than you might think. The IRS has experienced a lot of brain drain over the years (a huge portion of the staff is retirement eligible) and many controversies can be headed off or solved by simply walking them through the facts and the law. Many times they appreciate anything you can do to reduce their workload by getting them comfortable that they do not need to make an audit adjustment. The IRS isn't out to get you- they are just trying to fairly administer the tax system and prevent abuse with the limited resources they have available.

On the planning side, you spend your time structuring transactions and optimizing company structures. For example, the purchase of a business may bring up issues like purchase price allocations (how much is for the equipment, how much is for land, how much is goodwill), tax attributes of the purchaser or acquirer (accumulated net operating losses, foreign tax credits, etc.), or entity choice (disregarded entity, partnership, S-corporation, C-corporation). You may also deal with exempt organizations (not just charities, but unions, trade organizations, and pension funds), which commonly have issues related to what they can and cannot do on a tax exempt basis.

Qualifications: technically, the only qualification you need is a JD, and there are many successful tax attorneys who do not have any tax-specific credentials. However, it's common for tax attorneys to have an LLM in tax (often done part time in your first few years of practice) and/or a CPA designation. Most tax attorney- CPAs spent time in public accounting prior to going to law school and have gone as a career shift. It's not really practical to get a CPA designation after the law degree due to accounting practice requirements required for it. However, keep in mind that while accounting and tax law have overlap, they are very different fields. There are plenty of CPAs who know very little about tax (many learned just enough to pass the tax portion of the CPA exam), as tax is just one small portion of what accountants do. There are also CPAs whose practice is very similar to a tax attorney's practice. I personally had no tax background prior to law school, and got my law firm offer in tax prior to getting my LLM.

New_Englander wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 14, 2020 8:42 am

nealric wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:31 pm

lawdog97 wrote:Can any of you elucidate what a tax attorney does? Qualifications, trial, dealing with the IRS, day-to-day etc.

Seems like an interesting field. Do you guys "give it back" to the IRS?

Thanks.

I'm a tax attorney. I started at a large NYC-based law firm and have since moved to the tax department of a Fortune 500 company.

The majority of tax attorneys focus on planning and do not do a significant amount of controversy work (at least on the institutional level). There are very few tax trials, and when they do happen a trial lawyer who is not necessarily a tax specialist will likely be brought in. Controversy work has actually declined over the years due to financial reporting standards that disincentivize public companies from taking aggressive tax positions, as well as cuts to IRS audit staff. Trial work may be a bit more common for tax lawyers who represent small businesses and individuals, but tax court (where most tax controversies end up if they go to court) is usually more like an appellate argument than a full blown trial. I did a summer internship at the Department of Justice tax division, which litigates tax cases on behalf of the government in federal court (other than the tax court). Most of the DOJ tax folks are litigators who happen to be litigating over tax, rather than tax folks who happen to litigate.

My practice is about 70% planning and 30% controversy work, but the vast majority of controversy work is handled at the audit and audit appeals level (administratively within the IRS). I've worked on matters where a Tax Court petition was filed, but never one where it progressed all the way though to a Tax Court decision. I also do controversy work at the state level and in foreign jurisdictions (I actually have worked on a case in the U.K. that went to trial and resulted in a published decision, but the actual trial worked was handled by a barrister). Foreign controversy can be interesting in developing countries because it tends to be much less centered on law and is more of a negotiation than anything else. I've had experiences with developing country tax authorities that are more like purchasing a used car than an administrative hearing or trial.

As far as "giving it back to the IRS," I'd say that the experience is a lot less hotly adversarial than you might think. The IRS has experienced a lot of brain drain over the years (a huge portion of the staff is retirement eligible) and many controversies can be headed off or solved by simply walking them through the facts and the law. Many times they appreciate anything you can do to reduce their workload by getting them comfortable that they do not need to make an audit adjustment. The IRS isn't out to get you- they are just trying to fairly administer the tax system and prevent abuse with the limited resources they have available.

On the planning side, you spend your time structuring transactions and optimizing company structures. For example, the purchase of a business may bring up issues like purchase price allocations (how much is for the equipment, how much is for land, how much is goodwill), tax attributes of the purchaser or acquirer (accumulated net operating losses, foreign tax credits, etc.), or entity choice (disregarded entity, partnership, S-corporation, C-corporation). You may also deal with exempt organizations (not just charities, but unions, trade organizations, and pension funds), which commonly have issues related to what they can and cannot do on a tax exempt basis.

Qualifications: technically, the only qualification you need is a JD, and there are many successful tax attorneys who do not have any tax-specific credentials. However, it's common for tax attorneys to have an LLM in tax (often done part time in your first few years of practice) and/or a CPA designation. Most tax attorney- CPAs spent time in public accounting prior to going to law school and have gone as a career shift. It's not really practical to get a CPA designation after the law degree due to accounting practice requirements required for it. However, keep in mind that while accounting and tax law have overlap, they are very different fields. There are plenty of CPAs who know very little about tax (many learned just enough to pass the tax portion of the CPA exam), as tax is just one small portion of what accountants do. There are also CPAs whose practice is very similar to a tax attorney's practice. I personally had no tax background prior to law school, and got my law firm offer in tax prior to getting my LLM.

What kind of exit options would you say are available? How would you compare these to those enjoyed by a more corporate generalist? Have you heard of US tax lawyers getting positions in Europe?