1 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. The US tax rescission doctrine: when the parties want an agreement to disappear

    DLA Piper LLPJanuary 23, 2014

    80-58 and the Penn case discussed above remain the leading authorities, and accordingly, the US tax-based version of a golf “mulligan” of the rescission doctrine remains very much in play for taxpayers seeking to avoid the tax consequences of transactions that may have landed in the rough.[1]See, e.g., Commissioner v. Danielson, 378 F2d 771 (3d Cir. 1967) (holding that a taxpayer can challenge IRS’ construction of an agreement’s unambiguous form only by proving that the agreement was unenforceable), cert. denied, 389 US 858 (1967); Elrod v. Commissioner, 87 TC 1046, 1066 (1986) (adopting the “strong proof” standard).