Discussion:More CA FTB News

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> More CA FTB News


Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

8 September 2008
It's reported that a Nevada jury has awarded Gilbert Hyatt 388M in his suit against the FTB for hounding him for the past 15 years over a residency issue.

Hyatt v. Franchise Tax Board of California; Aug. 6, 2008 compensatory award, Aug. 14, 2008 punitives award; 8th Judicial District Court, Clark County Courts, Nev.; Judge Jesse Walsh.

Can anyone supply a link; I received an email from NJEA's president highlighting this case.

Mscash (talk|edits) said:

8 September 2008
I can't provide a link to the actual decision, but do have one to the Supreme Court ruling that Hyatt could sue FTB in Nevada State Court.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-42.ZO.html

Here are a couple of other links about the case.

http://www.lvrj.com/news/27122989.html http://www.billleonard.org/ll.php?show=278

KatieJ (talk|edits) said:

10 September 2008
This is a trial court decision (Clark County, Nevada District Court) and would not result in a published decision. The jury makes its award and that's it. You're not going to find a judge's opinion anywhere, because the judge did not decide the case.

Even if it had been a judge rather than a jury trial, there likely would not be a published opinion, although sometimes trial judges issue memoranda of decision explaining their reasoning. You don't find that in a jury trial.

Here's a link to the court's status report on the case. The decision hasn't been entered yet, but likely will be in a short time. http://courtgate.coca.co.clark.nv.us/DistrictCourt/asp/Summary.asp

There is no question that this decision will be appealed, so stay tuned.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

10 September 2008
From what I could read, the case did not hinge on a lengthy period of Nevada versus California residency, but rather a period of less than one year according to an account by Nora Lockwood Tooher.

"Hyatt's 1991 California income tax return stated that he had moved to Nevada in October 1991, shortly before he began receiving millions of dollars in licensing fees from his inventions, including a microprocessor patent he received in 1990.

"The California tax board determined that he was a California resident until April 1992, and assessed taxes for 1991 and part of 1992, along with substantial civil fraud penalties totaling $51 million."

KatieJ (talk|edits) said:

11 September 2008
Hyatt's residency status was not at issue in this lawsuit; that is yet to be determined through the California administrative process (the case is pending at the State Board of Equalization). Hyatt sued the FTB in Nevada state court for damages alleging the commission of various torts against him in the investigation of his residency. The U.S. Supreme Court held that the Nevada suit for damages could proceed despite the provisions of California law protecting the administrative agency from such lawsuits and the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution.

KatieJ (talk|edits) said:

12 September 2008
I see that the link I posted above takes you to a blank page. To look at the current status of the case, go here: http://courtgate.coca.co.clark.nv.us/DistrictCourt/asp/CaseNo.asp and enter the case number, 98 A 382999.

A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 19 on the FTB's motion to stay execution of the judgment pending appeal.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

13 September 2008
I can see another court case, this time in California, if the 'evidence' gathered through the efforts of Ms. Cox and others comes into play in the California administative process to determine his residency. Perhaps I've been watching too much Law and Order but I can see Hyatt objecting. If Ms. Tooher's story has truth behind it, Ms. Cox, the FTB agent, is just the type of person who should never be permitted to hide behind a 'badge.'

I suspect that if TA is still here, we will be posting about this matter in 2010 and beyond.

KatieJ (talk|edits) said:

14 September 2008
No doubt.

I had a client who was subjected to somewhat similar tactics -- not quite as egregious as what is alleged in the Hyatt case, but the auditor did get information from sources in Nevada that she should not have had access to. Unfortunately that information wasn't crucial to the case, and our facts were not all that good. Also, the client's attorney insisted on presenting the oral argument at the SBE hearing and did a terrible job -- only got about halfway through what needed to be said. Not that I necessarily could have won the case if I'd argued it myself.

It will be interesting to see how the administrative proceeding plays out. I wouldn't be too surprised to see some kind of settlement, at some point.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools