The U.S. Supreme Court recently rendered a unanimous opinion holding that the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) did not block a lawsuit brought by CIC Services against the Internal Revenue.
In CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, a unanimous US Supreme Court allowed CIC, a tax advisor, to proceed with a pre-enforcement challenge to the Internal Revenue Service’s.
In CIC Services, LLC,v. IRS, 127 AFTR 2d2021-XXXX, (S. Ct.) 05/17/201, the U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously held that the Anti-Injunction Act did not prohibit a pre-enforcement.
, a unanimous US Supreme Court allowed CIC, a tax advisor, to proceed with a pre-enforcement challenge to the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) “reportable transaction” regime. CIC alleged that the IRS violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when it issued Notice 2016-66 (Notice), deeming certain micro-captive insurance transactions as “reportable transactions” and sought an order enjoining enforcement of the Notice. The IRS sought to avoid judicial review by hiding behind the Anti-Injunction Act’s (AIA) bar on suits brought “for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax.” Disagreeing with the trial and appellate courts, the Supreme Court allowed CIC’s suit to proceed, finding that CIC was challenging a regulatory mandate separate from any tax. As the Court explained, “The tax appears on the scene – as criminal penalties do too – only to sanction that mandate’s violation.” By choosing to address their concerns about micro-c
On May 17, 2021, the Supreme Court held that the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA), section 7421(a) of the Code, does not preclude a pre-enforcement challenge to an IRS notice enforced through.