A few more Foreign Earned Income cases were decided by the Tax Court in 2016. (See prior blog posts about the Co, Gerencser, and Hirsh cases in January and February 2017).
In Amadi v. IRS, TC Memo 2016-120 (Jun. 21, 2016), http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcInOp/OpinionViewer.aspx?ID=10823, Mr. and Mrs. Amadi conceded they did not meet the definition of a “qualified individual” under the FEIE tax law (IRC Section 911(d)).
In Owens v. IRS, TC Summary Op. 2016-83 (Dec. 13, 2016), http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcInOp/OpinionViewer.aspx?ID=11039, the Court held, “Although petitioner’s time in Kuwait was sufficient for exclusion of a portion of his earnings under section 911, the circumstances of his employment preclude his qualification for the exclusion.” Consequently, Owens would be a good case to read for FS families with a non-USG employee working overseas for a domestic US company.
Finally, in Wilson v. IRS, TC Summary Op. 2016-119 (Apr. 25, 2016), http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcInOp/OpinionViewer.aspx?ID=10772, the Court enforced a prior holding, “income earned in international waters is not excludible under section 911(a).” In summary, Amadi, Owens, and Wilson compliment the FEIE opinions Co, Gerenscer, and Hirsh, rounding out the 2016 summary of FEIE law from the US Tax Court.
Circular 230 Notice: Pursuant to U.S. Treasury Department Regulations, all tax advice herein is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for the purposes of avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or promoting, marketing or recommending advice on any tax-related matters addressed herein.
The EFM Lawyer.