Captive insurance remains one of the most closely examined tax planning strategies in use today, not because it is inherently flawed, but because small missteps can carry outsized consequences. Many taxpayers assume that careful formation and proper documentation are enough to protect the intended tax outcome. A recent Tax Court decision, Kadau v. Commissioner, serves as a reminder that those assumptions deserve closer scrutiny. The court’s analysis did not hinge on whether captive insurance can work, but on how a specific arrangement actually functioned in practice. For tax professionals advising clients who rely on micro-captives, the case raises important questions about where structures tend to break down, why some arrangements attract IRS attention while others do not, and what really separates a defensible captive from one that invites challenge.

Bad chemistry with one client can disrupt the flow with everyone. That one client who doesn’t follow your processes and messes up the workflow during tax season. The client who never turns things in on time but then wants results from you immediately when they do. These things affect how you interact and work with your other clients as well. As the firm owner we should do whatever we can to protect good chemistry within our business. As a tax advisor the people we work with become our family. We help them make decisions that impact them and their families. That is why firing clients can be a delicate matter when you are doing the firing.

As I write this, the most recent Tax Court opinion on a syndicated conservation easement deal is Jackson Stone South LLC. Good chance there will be another before I finish. Estimates indicate that there are over a thousand docketed cases. Jackson Stone can serve as a pretty good example of how the conservation easement opinions have been going, basically not well for the taxpayers. So we will take a look at it, but mainly I want to look at what tax practitioners have to reflect on.

The IRS is not the same agency we dealt with a decade ago, or even three years ago. The pandemic accelerated operational strain, exposing long-standing infrastructure weaknesses while also prompting overdue investment and modernization. Some areas have improved meaningfully, including digital tools, faster account updates, and improved phone service during filing season. Other areas, however, feel frozen in time. Correspondence units remain slow, backlogs persist, and automated notices often fail to reflect what is actually happening on a taxpayer’s account. This article outlines the practical realities of working with the IRS in 2025, what strategies are working, what remains broken, and how to set clear, healthy expectations so you can deliver results without burning out.

As we head into the 2026 filing season, tax professionals are operating in an environment unlike any we have seen in recent memory: a smaller and more automated IRS, the new OBBBA, and rapid experimentation with AI-enabled tools inside the Service. This field guide is designed to separate what we know for sure from where the IRS is likely to move next, and to translate both into practical planning moves. It does not predict the future; instead, it offers a structured way to think about enforcement, documentation, and client strategy when the rules, the technology, and the politics are all in motion.

I recently attended a two-day marketing workshop that made me think about whether I am effectively communicating with prospects on my websites. I do an annual review of my websites and update them to keep them fresh. According to Forbes' article "Top Website Statistics for 2025", there are close to 1.2 billion websites on the internet in 2025, and only 43% of small business owners plan to invest in their website performance. Additionally, 21% of business owners report low website traffic, which can affect attracting and retaining customers, revenue growth, and overall success.

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.

When most people think about saving for the future, their minds jump to retirement accounts—401(k)s, IRAs, maybe even defined benefit plans. But business owners have another option that often goes overlooked: using a C corporation as a strategic savings vehicle. By leveraging the flat 21% corporate tax rate, smart income shifting, and careful timing of distributions, business owners can “stockpile” cash inside a corporation, building wealth for future use without the red tape of traditional retirement plans. Want to see how top tax strategists legally use C corporations as private retirement vaults while avoiding double taxation and IRS scrutiny? Continue reading to learn the blueprint.