There are losing streaks and then there are really long losing streaks. Larry Harvey has not had a good year battling IRS attorney Randall Preheim. Yesterday, as Joe Kristan noted, Mr. Harvey lost his 64th and 65th cases. Today, that streak reached 67.
Look, the Washington Generals did win six games. (Well, they lost 13,000 games during that same time span….) And the Cubs are celebrating the 100th anniversary of their last World Series triumph so there is hope, Mr. Harvey.
If you ever go and see the Harlem Globetrotters, you’ll be treated to a great show. And, of course, there’s a basketball game, where the Globetrotters beat the Washington Generals (or today, the New York Nationals).
Meanwhile, attorney Larry D. Harvey has represented quite a few taxpayers—48 by my count—alleging that Antarctica is a separate country and that the taxpayers can exclude income earned their (using the foreign earned income exclusion). Unfortunately, he’s 0 for 48. Today the Tax Court handed down the 48th defeat.
Joe Kristan compares Mr. Harvey to Wile E. Coyote and the government attorney, Randall Preheim, to the Roadrunner. No matter, use your own comparisons (for me, the Generals or the old Washington Senators come to mind). Well, there’s always hope that the 49th time will be the charm….
Last week I wrote a post about a Tax Court ruling that said that for purposes of §911 of the Internal Revenue Code (the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion) that Antarctica is not a foreign country. Well, one reader wrote me back, noting:
Two separate courts (US Supreme and US District in MA) have ruled that in the case of other statutes (FTCA and FLSA), Antarctica IS a foreign country. The rulings in questions by the Tax Court, supported by the 7th Circuit of Appeals, only mean that for the purposes of the interpretation of this particular section of the Tax Code, Antarctica does not fall within the IRS’s regulatory definition of the term “foreign country.”
Quite true. Antarctica is definitely not part of the United States. I will point out, for the record, that I do not see a “Republic of Antarctica” among the world’s countries.
The reader then goes on to note that he thinks the Kunzes may appeal the Tax Court decision to the 10th Circuit. I have no idea if they will, but I am very doubtful of them winning this battle. Section 911 of the Code is quite specific, and I think that the Courts got this issue correct. Now whether the law should be written this way is another question. Unfortunately for our reader and the Kunzes, there just aren’t a lot of Americans in Antarctica, so I don’t expect Congress to change the law any time soon.
Finally, it’s nice to know that we have a reader on Antarctica. For those of you wondering, it’s cold at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. Here are the current conditions (courtesy of NOAA):
Wind from the NNE (020 degrees) at 17 MPH (15 KT)
Visibility 1 mile(s)
Sky conditions mostly cloudy
Weather: Ice crystals, Blowing snow
Temperature -79 F (-62 C)
Windchill -122 F (-86 C)
Pressure (altimeter) 28.31 in. Hg (958 hPa)
To contrast, here are the current conditions in Irvine:
Wind from the ENE (070 degrees) at 3 MPH (3 KT)
Visibility 9 mile(s)
Sky conditions overcast
Temperature 64.9 F (18.3 C)
Windchill None
Relative Humidity 75%
Pressure (altimeter) 29.96 in. Hg (1014 hPa)
So we’re 144° F warmer than at the South Pole…
There are lots of foreign countries in the world, but Antarctica is not one of them. It is a continent. The question arose last year on whether you can take the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (§911 of the Tax Code) if you happen to be working in Antarctica; today, the issue reappeared at the Tax Court.
The Foreign Earned Income Exclusion allows a taxpayer who is working abroad to exclude a portion of their earned income. But there are caveats–the income excluded must be earned, and it must be earned in a foreign country (there are other restrictions, too). Last year, in Arnett v. Commissioner (126 T.C. No. 5), the Tax Court ruled that §911 doesn’t apply. Earlier this year, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision. Unsurprisingly, the Tax Court tersely noted, “We follow our analysis and holding in Arnett I and the analysis and holding of the Court of Appeals in Arnett II.”
Deductions and exclusions are narrowly constructed; that’s a basic rule of the US Tax Code. Unfortunately, for today’s petitioner, Antarctica doesn’t fall within the scope of Section 911.
