Loopholes

As tax professionals, we must recognize a profound truth that most Americans never fully grasp: The United States doesn't have a single tax system, it has two fundamentally different systems operating in parallel. Understanding this dichotomy is perhaps the most important insight you can share with your clients, as it forms the foundation for virtually every advanced tax strategy.

Life insurance is such a great income tax deal that it really disturbs me when people manage to create income tax nightmares with it. The build-up in value of a whole life policy is not currently taxed if the policy is properly structured. And even better, except for the insured, the proceeds are totally income tax free when paid because of the death either actual or clearly coming soon of the insured. Of course one of the greatest pieces of marketing genius ever was calling it life insurance, as it is in its pure form, actually death insurance. Here are some stories of life insurance tax nightmares and we’ll see if we can draw a moral from them.

For me, the most exciting Tax Court opinion of 2025 was Judge Joseph Goeke's supplement to his 2024 opinion in the case of Gary M. Schwarz. With a $1,851,878 tax deficiency, it is the largest hobby loss opinion since 2019. (The really big dollar cases tend to settle.)

A short but busy month in Tax Court, with the non-shutdown, new wrinkles in law and regulation, and, as always, problems arcane and mundane; so let's jump in.

The Cohan rule is named for George M. Cohan. George Michael Cohan (1878 – 1942) was a theatrical producer. In the decade before World War I, he was called the “man who owned Broadway” and is considered the father of American musical comedy. In 1940 he was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal for his contribution to morale during World War I with his songs “You’re a Grand Old Flag” and “Over There,” the first time the medal was awarded to someone in an artistic field. But his most enduring legacy may be the tax rule that shared its name.

I can’t say that 2025 was anything less than tumultuous, or that 2026 isn't likely to be more of the same. Boechler, P. C., Jarkesy, Zuch, the Affordable Care Act, FBAR, and even long-gone FASIT and SDLIA are already starting the year. Come along for the ride!

One of my greatest frustrations as a tax writer is that I just don’t have the time to cover everything that I notice. Early in my blogging career, when I was younger and had more energy, I set myself on a Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule like the college professors I envied. Even that did not keep up with everything I noticed, so periodically I would do a post that had short blurbs about interesting things I didn’t dig further on. Here is an example from 2010 of a post that covers an entity not considered a church by the IRS, S corp shareholder basis issues, definition of alimony and two Chief Counsel Advices on TEFRA issues. So here are some things for 2025, that I opened a file on but never managed to make an article with.

Though 2025 was a gamechanger in many ways, Tax Court went on resolving controversies both arcane and mundane. Inventive counsel tried extending Supreme Court pronouncements and stretching narrow jurisdictional limits as always, Tax Court dealt with the Supreme Court's efforts to bring "discipline" to Tax Court practice, and self-represented petitioners continued to wander into sand traps of their own making.