Skip to main content

Actions on Decisions (AOD)

 

An Action on Decision (AOD) is a formal memorandum prepared by the IRS Office of Chief Counsel that announces the future litigation position the IRS will take with regard to the court decision addressed by the AOD.

The following list initially presents these documents in reverse chronological order, from the present back to calendar year 1997.

View information about Using IRS Forms, Instructions, Publications and Other Item Files.

  1. Enter a term in the Find box.
  2. Click the Search button.
Find Help
Number Decision Issue Release Date
1997-08 May Department Stores Co. v. United States, 36 Fed. Cl. 680. May Department Stores Co. v. United States, 36 Fed. Cl. 680 (Ct. Fed. Cls. 1996). AOD reflects the Service's agreement that, if a taxpayer elects to have overpayments of tax reported on a timely filed income tax return credited to the next year's tax liability without specifying the estimated tax installment against which the overpayment is to be credited, the Service, in computing interest on any subsequently determined tax deficiencies for the tax year in which the overpayments were reported, will not treat the reported overpayments of tax as having been credited against installments of 03/03/2000
1997-07 The Edna Louise Dunn Trust v. Commissioner. Reflects the Service's agreement that a corporation's distribution of stock to shareholders in a spinoff of a subsidiary was tax-free under I.R.C. § 355(a)(1). 03/03/2000
1997-06 Risman v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 1991 (1993) (T.C. # 11429-91). AOD reflects the Service's continued disagreement with the factual finding that the taxpayer made a deposit, not a payment of tax, when the remitted a check with a request for extension of time for filing a return. 03/03/2000
1997-05 Hurt v. USA, 70 F.3d 1261 (4th Cir. 1995). Reflects the Service's disagreement with the Fourth Circuit's opinion that the Service was not entitled to collect statutory interest on the taxes assessed pursuant to a Tax Court decision based upon a settlement agreement. 03/03/2000
1997-04 Duncan v. U.S., Docket No. 95-228 (U.S. D.C.,E.D. Ky.) Reflects the Service's agreement that disability benefits paid from a Kentucky policemen and firefighter's retirement fund can be excluded from gross income under I.R.C. § 104(a)(1) as benefits paid under a statute in the nature of a workmen's compensation act. 03/03/2000
1997-03 Buckeye Countrymark v. Comm., 103 T.C. 547 (1994) Reflects the Service's agreement that nonexempt cooperatives subject to subchapter T of the Internal Revenue Code are permitted to carry back losses from furnishing goods and services to its members to earlier tax years under I.R.C. § 172. 03/03/2000
1997-02 United States v. Kao, 81 F.3d 114 (9th Cir. 1996). Reflects the Service's acquiescence in the result that the Service could not, by issuing summonses, compel taxpayers to sign consent directives authorizing the release of records from unidentified domestic and foreign banks. 03/03/2000
1997-01 Xerox Corporation v. United States, 41 F.3d 647 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Reflects the Service's disagreement that the U.S.-U.K. Income Tax Treaty allows a United States corporation to treat advance tax paid by a U.K. subsidiary as a creditable tax under I.R.C. § 902(a). 03/03/2000
-04: My n, Inc. v. Commissioner, 76 F.4th 230 (3d Cir. 2023), aff’g 156 T.C. 137 (2021). Whether legal expenses incurred in defending suits brought under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) during the pendency of a generic drug manufacturer’s ANDA are required to be capitalized under I.R.C. § 263. 10/16/2026
-03: Ac vis Laboratories, FL, Inc. v. The United States, 131 F.4th 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2025), aff’g 161 Fed. Cl. 334 (2022). Whether legal expenses incurred in defending suits brought under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) during the pendency of a generic drug manufacturer’s ANDA are required to be capitalized under I.R.C. § 263. 10/16/2026
Get Adobe Acrobat Reader