Featured

Recent Tax Court decision could wreak ha

Glover v. Comm, a recent tax court decision, presents several issues to Merchant Mariners. Mr. Glover worked for Reinauer Transportation. His tugs pushed oil coastwise as far as Virginia. The tugs wou

Read More
Recent Tax Court decision could wreak havoc on Mariners

State Taxes and Mariners

Suz asked this question So, what about if you live in one state (TN) and work as a merchant mariner in another state (HI), 45 days on/45 days off rotation? Do you pay HI state taxes, or does the payro

Read More
State Taxes and Mariners

Mariner Tax Update January 2011

E-Filing alert! How many times have you read that mariners cannot E-File? How many websites have posted this. Year after year. And then all of a sudden preparers start proclaiming “mariners can

Read More
Mariner Tax Update January 2011

Employee vs. Non-Employee LLC and S-Corp

I’ve been a client of yours for a few years now and I had a general tax question concerning my wife’s job status. She currently works full time for a marketing firm in “Deleted”

Read More
Employee vs. Non-Employee LLC and S-Corp Planning for Mariners and their families

Maritime Tax Preparers and the Alternati

What they don’t want you to know… This video points out the tremendous effect of the AMT on merchant mariners. Seamen taking business deductions and offsets may very well be realizing litt

Read More
Maritime Tax Preparers and the Alternative Minimum Tax

Recent Tax Court decision could wreak havoc on Mariners

0
by on March 1, 2012 at 5:11 pm

Glover v. Comm, a recent tax court decision, presents several issues to Merchant Mariners. Mr. Glover worked for Reinauer Transportation. His tugs pushed oil coastwise as far as Virginia. The tugs would assist on docking jobs when in the New York area.

Mr. Glover took deductions on his income tax returns that would be considered acceptable if he was on a “temporary assignment”. Mariners have generally been characterized as such. Thus, their tax home has been considered to be their residence.

Mr. Glover’s attorney cited the now infamous Sailor Tax cases Johnson and Westling, stating that Glover’s tax home was in Missouri as per the decisions. Mr. Glover’s attorney did not introduce any statutory evidence (Jones Act Law) defining tax home for State tax liability purposes.

The attorney failed to meet substantiation requirements to shift burden of proof to the respondent. This means that the IRS’s position is considered to be correct and that Glover was required to meet the burden of proof.

The Tax Court has defined a Tax Home as the area surrounding a taxpayer’s principal place of business. If a taxpayer does not have a principal place of business, it can shift to their residence.

The Court concluded that all of Glover’s arguments were moot irrelevant, or without merit. This is a dangerous outcome that could cause global implications if not addressed. We’re talking coastwise and foreign.

We need someone to appeal this decision….