Source: https://www.dentons.com/en/jeffry-erney
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 14:47:05+00:00

Document:
Jeff Erney is the chair of the US Tax Controversy practice, which was recognized by The Legal 500 in 2018 for outstanding work in contentious tax. Jeff focuses his practice on tax litigation and dispute resolution. When representing clients faced with complex issues, he draws on years of experience as a senior tax attorney for the Office of Chief Counsel with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), as well as his background as a certified public accountant (CPA), to most effectively provide counsel. His background, both in private practice and as a government attorney, provides him with the tools to assess the strengths and risks of each issue, negotiate favorable settlements with the government and, if necessary, litigate the matter before the appropriate court. Jeff easily adapts to the venue in which he finds himself practicing, whether it is in front of the IRS or at trial, and he does not lose focus of his clients' objectives throughout the representation process.
Jeff has obtained over 100 favorable settlements from negotiations with the IRS at the Examination and Administrative Appeals. The matters settled involved both international and domestic issues, with many of the such matters requiring expert testimony from Appraisers and Economists.
Jeff is recognized as a leading lawyer in International Tax Review Tax Controversy Leaders and in The Best Lawyers in America for 2016-2019. Jeff has been a frequent speaker before the Tax Executive Institute and the American Bar Association's Tax Section.
US Greeting Card Company. Lead counsel for a dispute before the United States Tax Court, in which the IRS has treated certain costs as acquisition costs.
Canadian Company. Lead counsel for a dispute involving transfer pricing issues related to production and distribution of films.
European Manufacturing Company. Lead counsel for a dispute involving the following issues: debt vs. equity, cancelation of indebtedness and the insolvency exception.
Lead counsel in obtaining favorable ruling from the IRS National Office involving the treatment of renewable energy credits (RECs).
Lead counsel in obtaining Section 7805(b) relief for a previous ruling incorrectly issued by the IRS National Office. Preserved $2.1 billion in immediate deductions to the client.
Lead counsel in obtaining a favorable ruling from the IRS National Office relating to a factoring company for international manufacturer.
Lead counsel in obtaining favorable ruling from the IRS National Office relating to the treatment of expenditures for the deregulation of public utility power generation.
Obtained a US$27 million settlement from the IRS for public utility in a matter involving a federal research tax credit.
Provided a legal opinion to establish the timing of a US$57 million foreign worthless stock deduction, which was accepted by the IRS during the audit of such issue.
Member of the team that secured a US$57 million investment tax credit for a telecommunication company.
Lead counsel with respect to three substantial tax issues, including capitalization of a portfolio of leases, a captive insurance company and the exemption from discharge of indebtedness income for an individual member. All issues were favorable settled in the appeals division.
Parker Hannifin Corporation v. United States, United States Court of Federal Claims: Successfully defended a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, in a matter involving an overpayment of deficiency interest.
AWG Leasing Trust v. United States: Trial counsel to a partnership, in which KeyCorp. and PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. were partners. Defended a challenge to a sale-in-lease out (SILO) transaction involving a German waste-to-energy facility. Also responsible for 56 other SILO transactions resolved in IRS appeals.
1770 Sherman Street, LLC, Martin Wohnlich Tax Matters Partner v. Commissioner: Lead counsel in defending a challenge to a charitable contribution of interior and exterior historic conservation easement.
Sherwin Preserve v. Commissioner: Lead counsel for a challenge to an allowance of a charitable contribution for the donation of a parcel of land to a tax-exempt conservancy. Obtained a 95 percent concession from IRS counsel prior to trial.
Ohio Edison Company (subsidiary of FirstEnergy) v. Commissioner: Lead counsel for a challenge to the allowance of a Research and Development Credit for internal use software. Obtained a favorable settlement from IRS counsel prior to trial.
Pennsylvania General Energy Company v. Commissioner: Trial counsel for a challenge to a charitable contribution for the donation of 13,000 acres to the state of Pennsylvania.
Gibson Greetings, Inc. (subsidiary of American Greetings Corp.) v. Commissioner: Lead counsel for a challenge of a contingent earn-out agreement, and whether the event was a closed transaction. Favorable settlement obtained from IRS counsel prior to trial.
Burlington Group v. Commissioner: Lead counsel for a challenge to a charitable contribution taken for the donation of an aquifer to the local township for use in its water supply. Reached a favorable settlement with IRS counsel prior to trial.
Fishermen’s Hospital, Inc. v. Commissioner: Lead counsel for a petition for declaratory judgment (exempt organization). Sustained the client's status as an exempt Section 501(c)(3) entity.
Argo Sales Co. v. Commissioner: Lead government counsel to defend the IRS' position that certain items of income were properly treated as built-in gain pursuant to Section 1374 (D)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. Received a favorable opinion from the court.
Rondy, Inc. v. Commissioner: Lead government counsel to defend the IRS' position that certain items of income were properly treated as built-in gain pursuant to Section 1374 (D)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code. Received a favorable opinion from the court.
Southwestern Energy v. Commissioner: Lead government counsel to defend the IRS' position that the return of over-recovered gas costs to the utility’s customers through a reduction in future rates does not qualify as a Section 162 business expense, merely a reduction in the future income. Received a favorable opinion from the court on all issues.
Edward and Rosalie v. Commissioner: Lead government counsel to defend the IRS' position that advances made by the taxpayer were equity rather than debt and that such losses were no subject to ordinary loss under Section 1244 of the Internal Revenue Code, along with other various issues. Received a favorable opinion from the court on all issues.
Steven and Betty Babin v. Commissioner: Lead government counsel to defend the IRS' position that the discharge of recourse mortgage was not excludable from taxpayers' income. Received a favorable opinion from the court.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.