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.
Buscar ayuda
Número Decisión Problema Fecha de publicación
2004-06 IRS v. Donald Snyder, 343 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir. 2003). Whether the value of a debtor's interest in a pension plan that is excluded from the bankruptcy estate under Bankruptcy Code Section 541(c)(2) should be included in the value of the Service's secured claim under Bankruptcy Code Section 506(a). RELEASE DATE: 10/18/2004. 10/18/2004
2010-05 VERITAS Software Corp. v. Commissioner, 133 T.C. No. 14 Whether the U.S. Tax Court erred in concluding that the comparable uncontrolled transaction (CUT) method, with adjustments, was the best method to determine an arm’s length result. 11/10/2010
2019-03 GreenTeam Materials Recovery Facility PN, GreenWaste Recovery, Inc., Tax Matters Partner, et al. v. Commissioner Whether the transfer of a non-capital asset is treated under § 1253 as the sale or exchange of a capital asset if the transferor does not retain any significant power, right, or continuing interest. 10/15/2019
2012-08 Media Space, Inc. v. Commissioner, 135 T. C. 424 (2010), vacated, 477 Fed. Appx. 857 (2nd Cir. 2012) Whether the taxpayer’s forbearance payments to its preferred shareholders were (1) ordinary and necessary business expenses that were not required to be capitalized under section 263(a), (2) not nondeductible distributions to the shareholders under section 301, and (3) not pursuant to a reacquisition or an exchange of stock to which section 162(k) or section 361(c)(1) applied. 08/05/2013
2011-05 William & Sharon Norris v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 2011-161 Whether the Tax Court erred when, in evaluating evidence of fraud, it weighed each of eleven badges of fraud equally, tallied the number “for,” “against” or “neutral,” and concluded that the Service did not establish fraud because only four of those badges had been proven. 12/09/2011
2012-01 Baer Revoc.Trust v. U.S.,105 AFTR 2d 1544, 2 (D. Neb. 2010) Whether the stock includible in Decedent’s gross estate qualifies for the marital deduction under Sec. 2056(b)(7) when the stock is subject to contingent bequests. 04/09/2012
2006-02 Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. U.S., 417 F.3d 1375. Whether the statute of limitations barred the Service from recovering erroneously paid overpayment interest by offsetting against a subsequent refund of tax and interest determined to be due to the taxpayer for the same taxable year. RELEASE DATE: June 26, 2006 10/26/2006
2010-04 Shoukri Osman Saleh Abdel-Fattah v. Comm., 134 T.C. No. 10 Whether the State Department certification required under I.R.C. Sec. 893(b) is a prerequisite for the tax exemption provided for in I.R.C. Sec. 893(a). 10/13/2010
2021-04 Mayo Clinic v. United States, 997 F.3d 789 (8th Cir. 2021), rev’g, 412 F.Supp.3d 1038 (D. Minn. 2019) Whether the primary function of an educational organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code must be the presentation of formal instruction. 11/22/2021
2010-03 Xilinx, Inc. v. Commissioner, 598 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2010) Whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in concluding that under regulations promulgated under section 482 effective for taxable years 1997-1999, employee stockoption (ESO) compensation should not be shared in a qualified cost sharing arrangement (CSA). 07/16/2010
2019-01 Jacobs v. Commissioner, 148 T.C. No. 24 (2017) Whether the IRS will follow the Tax Court’s decision in Jacobs v. Commissioner that Taxpayer’s expenses for provision of pregame meals at away city hotels to professional hockey players and team personnel were de minimis fringe benefits under § 132(e)(2) and were therefore exempt from the 50% deduction limit for meal and entertainment expenses under § 274(n)(1) . 02/21/2019
2011-02 Keller v. Comm., 556 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), rev'g TCM 2006-131 Whether the gross valuation misstatement penalty under I.R.C. Sec. 6662(h) applies when a deduction or credit is disallowed in full, regardless of the reason for the disallowance. 10/11/2011
2004-04 Kaffenberger v. U.S., 314 F.3d 944 (8th Cir. 2003. Whether the Form 4868, Application for Automatic Extension of Time to File U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, constitutes an informal claim for refund, and whether the 2-year period of limitations, set forth in I.R.C. Sec. 6532(a)(1), for bringing a refund suit can be extended once the 2-year period has expired. RELEASE DATE: 08/30/2004. 08/31/2004
2021-02 Machacek v. Commissioner, 906 F.3d 429 (6th Cir. 2018), rev’g T.C. Memo. 2016-55 Whether the economic benefits of a compensatory split-dollar life insurance arrangement may be treated as a distribution with respect to stock under I.R.C. § 301. 05/24/2021
2006-01 Erickson Post Acquisition, Inc. v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 2003-218. Whether the cash payment from the wholesaler to the retailer was a taxable advance payment or a nontaxable loan. RELEASE DATE: June 12, 2006 06/12/2006
2011-04 Appleton v. Comm., No. 10-4522 (3d Cir. June 10, 2011) Whether the 3rd Circuit erred in holding that the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands should be permitted to intervene in the Tax Court deficiency proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b)(2). 11/08/2011
2020-03 Rothkamm v. United States, 802 F.3d 699 (5th Cir. 2015), rev’g 2014 WL 4986884 (M.D. La. Sept. 15, 2014) Whether section 7811(d) of the Code suspends the running of the limitations periods for filing a wrongful levy claim and a wrongful levy suit. 04/20/2020
2008-01 Herbert V. Kohler, Jr. et al. v. Comm.; T.C. Memo. 2006-152 Whether Sec. 2032 allows a discount for transfer restrictions and a purchase option (“restrictions”) imposed on closely-held corporate stock pursuant to a post-death taxfree reorganization in determining the fair market value of the decedent’s stock on the alternate valuation date. 03/03/2008
2011-01 Robinson Knife Manuf. v. Comm., 600 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2010) Whether sales-based royalties that taxpayer paid for the right to use trademarks on the kitchen tools that it manufactures and sells are production costs "allocable to property produced" (inventory) within the meaning of Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.263A-1(e). 02/08/2011
2022-02 CSX Corp. v. United States, 18 F.4th 672 (11th Cir. 2021). Whether relocation benefits payments that are made to or for the benefit of employees are excludable from compensation for purposes of RRTA under § 3231(e)(1)(iii) 03/21/2022
2007-02 Moore v. Comm., T.C. Memo. 2006-171, T.C. Dock. #11634-05L. Whether prohibited ex parte communications during a collection due process hearing before the Office of Appeals may be remedied by sharing the content of the communications with the taxpayer and allowing the taxpayer an opportunity to respond. RELEASE DATE: February 27, 2007 02/27/2007
2019-02 Union Pacific Railroad Company v. United States, 865 F.3d 1045 (8th Cir. 2017), rev’g No. 8:14CV237 (D. Neb. July 1, 2016) Whether lump-sum payments made to unionized employees upon ratification of collective bargaining agreements are taxable compensation under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act ("RRTA"). 10/09/2019
2012-03 Decision: L & S Industrial & Marine, Inc. v. United States, 633 F.Supp.2d 727 (D. Minn. 2009) Whether L & S Industrial & Marine, Inc.’s (Taxpayer) vessels engaged in “commercial waterway transportation” as defined in § 4042(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (Code). 09/12/2012
2009-01 Cox v. Comm., 514 F.3d 1119 (10th Cir. 2008), rev'g 126 T.C. 367 Whether indirect consideration of a tax liability in conjunction with evaluating collection alternatives disqualifies an appeals officer from conducting a subsequent CDP hearing focusing on that liability. 05/07/2009
2012-06 Zapara v. Commissioner, 652 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2011) Whether in a post-jeopardy levy Collection Due Process hearing, the Tax Court has the authority to order a credit to the taxpayer for the Service’s failure to comply with I.R.C. § 6335(f). 03/18/2013

Official Adobe Website