Dow Lohnes’ tax controversy practice combines the expertise of its tax specialists with that of its litigators, which enables Dow Lohnes to handle all stages of tax controversy matters from the audit and administrative appeals stage through all levels of the federal and state court systems. Given the wide range of skill and experience of the firm, Dow Lohnes is able to provide its clients with unique expertise involving an understanding of the substantive aspects of tax law coupled with a practical understanding of audit, conference and litigation technique and strategy through all stages of the controversy.
The majority of the tax controversy matters that Dow Lohnes handles are resolved by negotiation in the audit and administrative appeals levels or after litigation has commenced but before trial and decision. Litigation is sometimes necessary, however, and Dow Lohnes has litigated federal tax controversies at all levels of the federal court system, including the United States Tax Court, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United States District Courts and Courts of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. Dow Lohnes also has litigated tax cases in the administrative boards and courts of a number of states. The tax cases have varied in magnitude from tens of thousands to hundreds of millions of dollars in asserted tax liability, while the trials have ranged in duration from one day to nearly two months.
The nature of the substantive tax controversy matters handled by Dow Lohnes is broad. The firm has represented businesses, individuals, estates and trusts in all types of tax deficiency and refund cases including income, gift, estate and sales and use tax matters. Dow Lohnes has particular expertise in matters involving business valuation and the valuation and tax treatment of intangible assets. For example, Dow Lohnes represented the taxpayer in Estate of Samuel I. Newhouse v. Commissioner (a U.S. Tax Court case involving the valuation of stock of closely-held businesses and the largest estate tax deficiency ever asserted by the government, in which the Tax Court adopted the estate’s stock valuations) and Newark Morning Ledger v. United States (a U.S. Supreme Court decision establishing the existence and depreciable character of the intangible asset, acquired newspaper subscribers).