Feral Jundi

Friday, February 4, 2011

Legal News: Contractor That Worked In Iraq Cannot Exclude Compensation Under § 112

     Ok gang, this is important and please feel free to pass this around.  This contractor lost in this case and the one thing that saved his bacon was this little memo that came from an IRS Acting Deputy Director in 2004.  If you filed your taxes with the impression that you fell under the same ‘combat zone compensation’ that the members of the Armed Forces received back then, then this memo could be your life saver. If anyone has a copy of this thing, I will make an edit and add it to this post so everyone knows where to find it. Robert L. Hunt was the IRS Acting Deputy Director at the time.

     The other point I wanted to bring up here is this. The powers that be are certainly trying all they can to put us under military/government control or under UCMJ, but god forbid if contractors actually enjoyed the same tax benefits as the Armed Services in combat zones? –Matt

Edit: 02/06/2011 – Thanks to Chris for sending me a copy of this memo.  I put it up in my Scribd account here if you want to check it out.

Court: Blackwater Contractor in Iraq Cannot Exclude Compensation Under § 112

By The Tax Prof

February 1, 2011

The Tax Court yesterday held that a Florida man who earned $98,400 in 2005 working for Blackwater (since renamed Xe) providing security services to the U.S. Army in Iraq could not exclude the compensation from income under § 112 as “combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces.” Holmes v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2011-26 (Jan. 31, 2011). The Tax Court concluded that the taxpayer did not serve in the Armed Forces of the United States but instead was a private citizen hired by and paid by a private company (Blackwater). The Tax Court refused to impose a penalty because the taxpayer relied on an IRS memorandum wrongly stating that civilian personnel in direct support of combat zone military operations qualified for the § 112 exclusion.

Link to TaxProf blog post here.

——————————————————————

From the Tax Court memo Holmes v. Commissioner, Page 9

     Petitioner admitted on brief that he did not file a return for calender year 2005.  Petitioner’s only explanation for failing to file is that in 2005 while in Iraq, he was given a memorandum that caused him to believe that the income he was receiving from Blackwater was not taxable.  This memorandum was an internal memorandum written to give the Commissioner’s employees field guidance for examination and collection activity involving taxpayers in Iraq.  The memorandum, titled “Memorandum for Acting Deputy Director, Compliance Field Operations”, was issued by the Internal Revenue Service Small Business/Self-Employment Division on June 28, 2004.  The memorandum states that civilian or military personnel who are in direct support of a combat zone military initiative and physically located in the combat area are entitled to the exclusion.  It also states that time spent in a combat zone by an individual serving in support of the Armed Forces will be disregarded with respect to “certain acts required under the Internal Revenue Code.”  It goes on to state that “This change in procedure will be reflected in the next revision of the IRM, which is in the process of being written.”

     Petitioner satisfies all the criteria found in the memorandum.  He was serving in Iraq alongside the military, provided security to Government officials, and aided in giving air support, medical aid, and emergency response assistance. Petitioner had no background in tax law and was given this memorandum written by an IRS employee while serving in Iraq.  We believe that receiving this memorandum while serving in Iraq could give someone reasonable cause to believe that his payments from Blackwater were excluded from gross income.  Therefore, petitioner is not liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1).

——————————————————————

From the Judicial Review

     While in Iraq, petitioner was given a memorandum issued by Robert L. Hunt, the Acting Deputy Director, Compliance Field Operations, Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This memorandum discussed the appropriate steps for civilian personnel to take when engaged in an IRS examination and collection activity involving a taxpayer deployed to a Qualified Combat Zone. Petitioner did not remember who gave the memorandum to him.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Industry Talk: Contractor Census- More Security Contractors, Less Overall Contractors in the USCENTCOM AOR

   There is a lot of juice in this report(s), and I recommend reading through it to get a feel for where things stand right now.  The stuff that jumped out at me, is the increase in security contractors in both Iraq(23%) and Afghanistan(29%) from the last quarter census.  You would think with all the negative press out there, that the US would be cutting down on the use of armed contractors.  It looks to me like someone at least appreciates what we do, enough so to contract even more of us.  

   To me this is significant.  With Iraq, troop withdrawals will be creating security vacuums in some areas, and security contractors will be filling those gaps. And with the RUF being that we are only limited to defensive operations, you will see us taking over many defensive operations in Iraq and more Coalition troops being freed up for offensive operations.  The numbers don’t lie.

   With Afghanistan, this makes sense as well.  With an increase of troops, there will be an increase in support in the form of contractors.  But someone has to protect those contractors while they build stuff, and those security contractors will be used to defend FOBs to free up the troops so they can go on the offense.

   I highly recommend checking out the report, because it showed the graphs that went along with the report, as well as the break down in contractor types.  It is broken down under US Citizens, Third Country Nationals, and Local Nationals.  In Iraq, Third Country Nationals outnumbered everyone- lots of Ugandan security contractors is one example.  In Afghanistan, it is the Local Nationals that outnumber everyone, and there is no surprise there.   

   The trend line is there and security contractors are stepping up to fill these defensive security needs in the war. My hope is that the reforms needed to manage and account for these contractors is able to catch up.  And this report below showed some promising new developments in that area as well.  It sounds like the SPOT database is starting to work it’s magic, and I am glad they were able to get a better handle on the accountability area.  The decrease in overall contractor numbers from last quarter was somewhat contributed to this new database tracking system.  There is a description of the SPOT in the link I provided below, and I recommend reading that report as well.    

   In other areas, we will see how the SOFA and UCMJ issues turn out, because that is an area that definitely needs leadership and enforcement.  I still think that we need to be moving faster on the issue of contractor management and accountability, and for it to take this long to get just this far is disheartening.  We have a war to fight and this is all stuff that should have been hashed out years ago. –Matt

—————————————————————— 

CONTRACTOR SUPPORT OF U.S. OPERATIONS

IN USCENTCOM AOR, IRAQ, AND AFGHANISTAN

BACKGROUND:  This update reports DoD contractor personnel numbers in theater and outlines DoD efforts to improve management of contractors accompanying U.S. forces.  It covers DoD contractor personnel deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR) as of March 31, 2009.

KEY POINTS:

Ending 2nd quarter FY 2009, USCENTCOM reported approximately 242,657 contractor personnel working for the DoD in the USCENTCOM AOR.     

(more…)

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Industry Talk: Contractors Oppose Move to End Immunity from Iraqi Law

Filed under: Industry Talk,Iraq — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 11:30 AM

 

   This is just a follow up to the story I posted earlier about lifting the immunity of security contractors from Iraqi law.  I have been following the security industry forums out there, and there seems to be two schools of thought forming on this issue.  

    The first school of thought is ‘deal with it’.  That security contractors have been operating in countries all over the world, and working under the laws of other countries for a long time now and Iraq is no different. Big boy rules they say. blah blah blah (I hate the term ‘big boy rules’- that is ‘manager speak’ for I could care less what you think and deal with it)

    The other school of thought is ‘no way’.  That Iraq is still a weakened state, and really does not have the capacity to deal with this issue.  That their legal system is not insulated from corruption and the infiltrations of the enemy.  And because there are so many questions that have not been answered with this latest move, that guys are really not interested in being the guinea pig for these new set of operational rules.   

    My personal belief on this is that security contractors are already covered by UCMJ, and that we should be off limits to Iraqi law until the war is over and Iraq has a fully functioning government and legal system.  I also think that it is extremely hypocritical for the DOD and DOS to expect security contractors to fall under Iraqi law, but not put their own military/government personnel under Iraqi law?    

    And in my observations on the forums, it seems that most are not too happy with this at all. –Head Jundi 

——————————————————————

Contractors oppose move to end immunity from Iraqi law

By Joseph Giordono, Stars and Stripes

Mideast edition, Saturday, July 5, 2008

Contractors working for the U.S. military in Iraq say a move to end their immunity from Iraqi law would make many leave their jobs instead of face a justice system they do not trust.

Earlier this week, the Iraqi foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said the immunity issue was one of the American concessions made in ongoing negotiations over a long-term security agreement. Since the announcement, contractors — both current and former workers in Iraq — have been buzzing about its implications. There are an estimated 180,000 foreign contractors working in Iraq, more than there are U.S. troops in the country. More than 1,000 have been killed.

“Having worked for two years and two months in Iraq, I can tell you without a doubt, I would in no way work if I fell under Iraqi Law,” a deputy sheriff who trains Iraqi police said in an e-mail to Stars and Stripes. “Are you kidding? You wouldn’t be able to get but the most desperate people to work if they fell under their ridiculous laws.”

(more…)

Powered by WordPress