|
Myron focuses his practice on resolving income and property tax disputes, including tax examinations, administrative appeals, and litigation. Where feasible and when in the client’s best interest, Myron has negotiated numerous settlements with the IRS and Minnesota Department of Revenue. These settlements have occurred during the examination process and the administrative appeals procedures available with the IRS and the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Myron has also helped firm clients reduce their property taxes in Minnesota. Upon the filing of a property tax appeal, Myron works with the client to prepare for a trial when necessary but also to seek settlement when in the best interest of the client. In addition, Myron provides legal advice to clients on how to protect their confidential property data from disclosure to competitors. In those situations where settlement was not in the best interest of his clients, Myron has represented clients in both federal and state courts, including: Representation of property owners seeking property tax relief in various Minnesota counties, Representation of downtown Minneapolis office building owners in successful effort to protect confidential lease data from discovery by unrelated third party in Minnesota Tax Court, Representation of Honeywell Inc. in the U.S. Tax Court which involved the Court’s decision that Honeywell’s tax treatment was proper when it treated its spare parts used for computers as depreciable assets rather than inventory; and affirmed by the Eighth Circuit Representation of Network Systems Company in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota which involved a successful summary judgment motion on behalf of Network that application of the accumulated earnings tax against a publicly held company like Network was improper as argued by the IRS Representation of Honeywell Inc. in the U.S. Tax Court and before the Eighth Circuit Court which involved a successful summary judgment that Honeywell’s tax classification of its assets for depreciation under class life asset depreciation range regulations was proper, Representation of Wells Fargo & Co. in the U.S. Tax Court and before the District of Columbia Circuit Court in a case involving a computer sale-leaseback transaction, Representation of Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Co. in the U.S. Tax Court and before the Eighth Circuit Court in a case involving loss reserves,Representation of Wagner Construction, Inc. in the U.S. Tax Court in a case involving reasonable compensation, Representation of shareholders of Dart Transit Co. in the U.S. Tax Court and before the Eighth Circuit Court in a case involving shareholder basis and at-risk rules for leasing activity,Representation of computer industry companies to seek background documents under FOIA from the Service which proved that the Service changed its position on the proper tax treatment of computer spare parts. These FOIA requests were denied by the Service and the companies were successful in federal district court in seeking the documents,Representation of numerous clients to plan, implement, modify and defend their treatment of certain workers as independent contractors under federal and state law.Representative Clients: 3M Alliant Techsystems Inc. American Crystal Sugar Co. Apple ComputerBull Information Systems CSM Corporation Dart Transit Co. Hines Honeywell Inc. JostensMinnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company National Council on Compensation Insurance Network Systems Company Ryan Companies US, Inc. State Fund Mutual Insurance Company. Tandem Computers Inc. Wells Fargo & Co. | 