Source: https://www.mayerbrown.com/en/people/k/kittlekamp-thomas
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 16:23:41+00:00

Document:
"Extremely confident and persuasive in the courtroom and a pleasure to work with."
Tom Kittle-Kamp is co-leader of Mayer Brown’s Tax Controversy and Transfer Pricing practice. Since joining the firm in 1990, Tom has represented clients in every phase of tax controversy and litigation—from IRS examinations and administrative appeals, through the litigation, trial and appellate review of highly complex tax controversies running the range of international and domestic tax issues. Tom has particular expertise in the litigation and administrative resolution of large-dollar transfer-pricing matters. As an adjunct to his controversy practice, Tom also advises clients with respect to the planning of related-party transactions. He is co-author of the treatise Federal Income Taxation of Intellectual Properties and Intangible Assets (Thomson Reuters WG&L Tax Series 1997), which is updated twice a year.
Before joining Mayer Brown, Tom served as law clerk to Judge John A. Nordberg of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Tom also worked as a newspaper reporter before entering law school—experience he brings to bear in crafting written advocacy that presents complex legal and factual issues simply and persuasively.
Tax Litigation: Tom’s experience includes the litigation, trial and appeal of major corporate cases involving transfer pricing disputes with respect to intangibles, services and goods (Westreco, National Semiconductor, Nestlé, UPS and Altera); substance-over-form, economic substance and step-transaction theories; valuation disputes, capitalization questions and debt-equity characterization issues; Subpart F and other international tax issues; Subchapter C and other domestic tax issues, such as the amortization of acquired intangible assets; leasing transactions; and procedural matters, including disputes about post-trial tax computations and statute of limitations questions. Tom also has repeatedly represented corporate clients with respect to tax-sharing disputes.
IRS Administrative Proceedings: Tom maintains an extensive practice of advising and representing clients with respect to administrative matters, including pre-audit planning, pre-filing agreements, and representation of taxpayers in examination, including the preparation of company personnel for IRS interviews and presentations; IRS Appeals, including fast track and appeals mediation procedures; and competent authority and Advance Pricing Agreement negotiations.
Transfer Pricing and Tax Advice: Tom has deep experience in all aspects of international transfer pricing, particularly matters involving intangible assets and intellectual property. He provides tax planning advice with respect to cross-border transactions involving intangible assets, goods and services; transfer-pricing documentation; and the development, exploitation and disposition of intangible assets, including licenses, sales and cost-sharing arrangements. He also provides tax planning advice with respect to domestic tax issues arising from the development and exploitation of intellectual property and intangible assets.
In other activities, Tom serves on the Board of Trustees of Court Theatre, the professional theater of the University of Chicago, and the Law Board of Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law.
Altera Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 145 T.C. No. 3 (2015), in 15-0 reviewed Tax Court opinion, holding invalid section 482 regulations requiring cost sharing participants to share amounts attributable to stock-based compensation.
Guidant LLC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Docket No. 5989-11 (IRC § 482 reallocations) .
Unionbancal Corp. v. The United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 166 (2010), denying government motion for summary judgment in case involving leasing transaction.
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. & Subsidiaries v. The United States, 90 Fed. Cl. 228 (2009), upholding at trial taxpayer's leasing transaction involving Dutch power facility.
Tribune Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 125 T.C. 110 (2005), holding that divestiture of Matthew Bender was a taxable sale and not a tax-free reorganization. Case settled on appeal.
The Limited, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 286 F.3d 324 (6th Cir. 2002), rev'g, 113 T.C. 169 (1999), reversing Tax Court holding that CFC's purchase of CDs from affiliated credit card bank failed to quality as § 956(b)(2)(A) "deposits with [a] person "carrying on banking business."
United Parcel Service of America v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 254 F.3d 1014 (11th Cir. 2001), rev’g and remanding, T.C. Memo. 1999-268, 78 T.C.M. (CCH) 262 (1999), vacating Tax Court’s finding on sham, assignment of income and penalties.
Nestlé Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Memo. 2000-374, 80 T.C.M. (CCH) 829 (2000), involving unagreed computation under Tax Court Rule 155 and holding IRS to prior stipulations in resolving computations in favor of taxpayer.
Intel Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 111 T.C. 90 (1998), imposing statutory interest on deficiencies offset by foreign tax credit carrybacks.
Nestlé Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 152 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 1998), involving Carnation acquisition and the valuation of trademarks.
RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 76 T.C.M. (CCH) 71 (1998), permitting taxpayer to deduct package design costs, contrary to terms of IRS Revenue Ruling, subsequently revoked in the wake of the case, and upholding taxpayer’s characterization of income from foreign expropriation under I.R.C. § 1231.
Overseas Partners Ltd. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Docket No. 15966-95, involving engaged in business issues arising under I.R.C. §§ 882 and 842, which were conceded by the IRS.
Tele-Communications, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 104 F.3d 1229 (10th Cir. 1997), involving the R.M. Smith Issue and precluding IRS argument on appeal for failure to fully develop it before the Tax Court.
Nestlé Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 70 T.C.M. (CCH) 682 (1995), involving I.R.C. § 482 reallocations and valuation issues arising from Carnation acquisition.
Nabisco Brands, Inc. (RJR) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 69 T.C.M. (CCH) 2230 (1995), permitting taxpayer to amortize acquired trademarks pursuant to I.R.C. § 1253.
Fruit of the Loom, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 72 F.3d 1338 (7th Cir. 1996), upholding a decision of the United States Tax Court in favor of the taxpayer on IRS mitigation of statute of limitations theory.
Fruit of the Loom, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 68 T.C.M. (CCH) 867 (1994), involving an unsuccessful attempt by the IRS to assess an untimely tax deficiency by use of the mitigation rules of I.R.C. §§ 1311-1314.
National Semiconductor Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 67 T.C.M. (CCH) 2849 (1994), acq. in result, 1995-2 C.B. 1, involving I.R.C. § 482 reallocations.
Intel Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 100 T.C. 616 (1993), aff’d, 67 F.3d 1445 (9th Cir. 1995), upholding taxpayer position with respect to allocation of source of income partly from sources within a foreign country under Treas. Reg. § 1.863-3(b)(2).
Commodore Business Machines Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, T.C. Docket No. 6096-89, involving an I.R.C. § 482 case settled by stipulated decision in 1993 while taxpayer’s motion for summary judgment was pending before the United States Tax Court.
Westreco, Inc. (Nestlé) v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 64 T.C.M. (CCH) 849 (1992), involving I.R.C. § 482 reallocation of income between the foreign parent corporation and a US subsidiary.
Treasury’s New Anti-Inversion Regulations: Do They Go Too Far?

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 482
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 956
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1231
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 482
 v. 
 § 1253
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 482
 v. 
 § 1
 v. 
 § 482
 v. 
 § 482