in that case in the first district appellate court specifically stating that it was reviewing the trial court's findings of fact which are entitle to death it was not a conclusion law second it dealt with the company section three oh yes you were in the contest this case though as it does in that case it was an eighty twenty company which would have been exempt from tax even if they did business in illinois what we have is we have the insurance company return it was not the underlying issue or whether it was but i can see kind of a glimmer of a reason why they might have thought it was an exemption of the kids i can see no reason in this case why anyone would consider this to be an exemption it has been followed for what it said in that case but i'm not aware of any other case nor has it so and cite any other case that stands for the proposition deciding whether an insurance company is or is not included here federal law not only has the regulation of the first part of our period and the statute but second part of our period and cases and rulings there is an actual determination by the internal revenue service but illinois law and the i r s doesn't make mistakes well i would suggest i suppose they could make mistakes and i'll be happy to explain why i think that's correct the determination that they made but under illinois law this or this supposed to follow the company that's a patient twenty one and i ask should we still cerrito yodel as an insurance company since the i r s has determined that they are an insurance company and the technical advice they get that if the i r s has accepted so you know is insurance company is going to be very difficult rest convince the judge that we have a better understanding of the i r s rules and us so while the department put its own audit on hold waiting the federal auditor could not get support and had to drop so they did not cite a single case for the proposition that when there has been an actual i r s audit of the issue and the illinois statute says we follow federal interpretation that has considered it and so the fact that that individual put zero on his federal income tax return but not and they say the second pay smacks of trolling in which the michigan court of appeals held that it had to pay or could not liver and a letter willing is of no greater value than the actual arrest terminations a letter ruling binds the taxpayer but no one else the court should not hesitate to follow what the guy arrested because if you look at the critical but that was not only did it did all sorts of workers comp product liability all sorts of issues it allow better management of these insurance risks from out the priorities do not allow companies to set themselves up without there's no doubt that any insurance company has to have significant assets to secure its life potential liabilities it faces catastrophic potential liabilities that's why that investment interest you know market transferred to the came back to the company and asked them for further analysis of their model they they advised that they were satisfied with the adverse scenario so as a matter of insurance of spreading the risk of the companies and not every one of the means cloudy packing company i'm not sure if that's the case that you had in mind but there that there was a parent and a and a directly owned subsidiary in between the parent and the open that subsidy twenty definition of company does i believe it's less than eighty percent of its business for us it's excluded from the jury room where shall we go to the bottom line is there an insurance company then they're not included right that's correct and they were doesn't even believe this regulation as they've never cited in any of their briefs what do they need to do in your opinion to become a recognized insurance company federally that the state offices with questions about sato's modified to get you will have the the national office did not decide not to investigate them for now this is the national office decision not to decide to investigate company has specific definition of a federal law and i mean even if you look to some of the other factors that you know federal courts look to subject in state insurance laws a relative distribution of employees the amount of space devoted to that came through siad oh they weren't they were not in significant in two thousand and two two thousand three years at sea one seventy nine three that three hundred ninety six million dollars bonus twenty's international dividends it could have been using as a treasury function it could have been used as an investment company it could have been used as loss reserves i mean there's there was evidence of the record they have purchased these insurance policies and they were paying some claims all that is all well and good loading money back to the parent company because the you know even when you have what humana and other sports have said is risk distribution betweens or brother sister affiliates at that level if the premiums are coming in from the s down there was genuine risk distribution because of the amount of risk distributions are the one who was quantified because each of the subsidiaries in those cases have liability less no less than five percent no more than fifty percent of the  the internal coming in the technical support memo that's great i'm you know i think it's important that there's a robust discussion tax policy and the department doesn't suggest any mate i'm sorry insurance claims yes they were they weren't sure it's claims paid because i did the same thing your when i read that sentence i personally was not involved in that case but i went to my partner who was and i said isn't this a problem and he said that it's just what's your response to that our response was that the activities of engaging in the insurance business to outsource to their party and affidavit from that third party was introduced into the record those were the only individuals who formed services