Clayton Walker, Alaska Law Offices, Inc.
Anchorage, AK 99518 — 907-230-6988
The annual right of passage for Anchorage property owners is the receipt in the mail of the Anchorage Board of Equalization green property appraisal card. If you do not agree with the property value as assessed you may appeal the valuation. You may appeal on the grounds that the appraisal is “unequal, excessive, improper or under evaluation.” Continue reading “Anchorage Board of Equalization — Property Taxes”
Anchorage, like many other big cities nationwide, has created a whole new field of revenue generation. Traditionally we all just sucked it up that there would be nice parts of town, bad parts of town, and a few parts of town that were truly horrendous. The folks up in the mountain chalets of Hillside or Rabbit Creek would comfortably look down upon the rest of us, knowing and accepting the fact that their hard earned property taxes would go to police responses elsewhere. And, despite a bit of angst over State Trooper versus Anchorage Police response areas, were mostly OK with that.
But with ever increasing budget needs, the seemingly ever decreasing available funds, municipalities like Anchorage are always seeking additional sources of revenue. Heavily taxed home owners are getting sick and tired of having to foot t he bill for that ever increasing police budget. Anchorage, like most cities, also often has problems with a few gregarious hot spots of crime and infamy. Those truly notorious places that seem to warrant their very own police substation. Crack houses, hotels of ill repute, fighting in-laws, you name it. So, in order to kill two birds with stone, Anchorage has adopted Excessive Police Response regulations.
Excessive Police Response regulations allow municipalities and other jurisdictions to set limits upon how many times police may respond to a certain address, and charge fees for each response beyond that number. Seems simple enough. But this does come with questions: what happens in medical emergencies? how about the ol’ man beatin’ his ol’ lady around every Saturday night? How about child abuse calls? Will the number of responses allowed prevent folks from calling when they really need help?
The State of Alaska has statutes that outline what municipalities and others may or may not do in these situations. Fortunately the statutes are pretty specific, and cover everything from the amount allowed per call, notice to the property owner that polices responses are happening, and certain exemptions that do not count toward the excessive number.
What does this mean for you? Well, hopefully nothing. But are you a property owner? Are you a slum lord extraordinaire owning several blocks of housing in the seedier parts of town? Perhaps you have just one problem tenant that enjoys a, shall we say, second income from nocturnal recreational pharmaceutical sales? Anchorage’s Excessive Police Response regulations place the burden not just on the resident of the property being responded to, but to the property owner as well. Considering who is likely to actually have money to pay, I think we all know who it is the Muni would be coming after.
The Excessive Police Response statutes and regulations can be complicated for those not used to reading reg-speak. What does the State require of municipalities? Do the Muni’s regulations follow the requirements of the enabling state statutes. When confronted with notices of pending fines one should look carefully to ensure the statutes and regulations are being followed correctly. But don’t waste time, failure to follow through on any required administrative hearings may waive any claim you have against the Muni. Study the regulations yourself, or call someone who already knows how they work. As in anything, know the law and know your rights.
This was originally written for my EMS friends, but the basic concepts still apply: duty, breech, causation, and damages.
Setting the stage: It’s 3am (of course), and you just laid down after watching a Star Trek – The Next Generation marathon when the tones go off, and the dispatcher announces another of a long line of winter vehicle rollovers. Blah, blah, blah, icy roads and drunk drivers. Wind and snow, minor extrication, neck pain and minor bleeding from the head, the patient intoxicated but friendly. C-collar, the requisite uncomfortable backboard, and couple of big IVs just because, and a quick drop off at the local ER. The next afternoon you hear the patient began seizing shortly after you left the ER, and died a short time later from a massive subdural. Three years later you get the summons and complaint, naming you, your partner, your duty supervisor, your service, the hospital, the ER Doc, the radiologist, and the high school janitor as defendants in a lawsuit claiming negligence.
First, let’s dispense with the Good Samaritan defense. You were on duty and paid a decent hourly wage. Therefore, you’re not covered under the statute.
Negligence in the common parlance simply means you screwed up and you should have known better. However, in legal terms, “negligence” has a very specific meaning, and very specific elements that require evidence to reach the conclusion that someone is “legally” negligent. If the plaintiff is unable to prove each element of negligence, then the defendant cannot be found liable.
In order to be legally negligent, the plaintiff must show that the defendant had a duty to act (duty), that the defendant failed to follow the standard of required conduct (breach), that the failure was the cause of harm to the victim (causation), and that actual harm resulted (damages.) These four elements: duty, breach, causation, and damages, must all be proven in order to prevail. The Good Samaritan statute, which all EMTs seem to consider when thinking of negligence, speaks to two levels of negligence – simple negligence and gross negligence. Outside of this narrow statute, however, the level of egregiousness is relevant only in the amount of punishment given.
Let’s flesh out this discussion a bit. “Duty” is the easy one – did you have a duty to provide care to the patient. Yes or no. In the above case, for example, you were on duty and being paid to respond. Therefore, yes, you had a duty. This is the easiest of the four elements to prove, or to defend. You’re off duty and drive past an accident scene which already has numerous responders present. No duty, no negligence claim. Volunteers can sometime have a bit more difficult time, but the standard becomes whether you in any way held yourself out at the time of the event to be available to respond. If you were “on call,” duty attaches, if not, duty likely does not attach.
“Breach” is slightly more difficult to prove, but still often relatively easy. Did you do (or not do) something beyond or outside the industry standard? In other words, did you breach your duty to treat a particular illness or injury in an appropriate manner? This is gross simplification, of course, because evidence would be required at trial about what, exactly, was the “standard of care” required in the given circumstance. This makes this particular element the most wishy-washy, as dueling experts vie for the attention of the judge or jury.
“Causation” is the often missed elements by the lay public. This means that your actions, or inactions, actually caused the harm being alleged. If your patient was hit in the head by a pipe wrench, and you later drop him injuring his knee, you’re only responsible for the knee injury, not the whole shebang. This can often be difficult to determine. For example, a COPD patient presents with severe respiratory distress. You provide high flow oxygen, but not CPAP; when the patient continues to deteriorate you elect to sedate and intubate, causing dental trauma, increased swelling to the throat and worsening of the distress. The patient eventually arrests due to extreme hypoxemia. How much was your fault, if any? Would she have continued to deteriorate regardless of your actions?
“Damages” is reasonably straight forward, if the above elements have been met and determined. First, were there actual injuries that caused harm to the patient? It’s the “no harm, no foul” rule of negligence. You should have given Amiodarone, not lidocaine, for an SVT according to your medical standing orders. But the patient persevered and lived despite your best efforts. You had a duty to act, you breached that duty, but you did not cause compensable harm. While you may be on the soup line because you dangerously violated your standing orders, at least you won’t end up in court. However, if actual harm was caused by you, then you are responsible for those damages.
One can be negligent in the common sense but not be legally negligent. While this may be of little real comfort, EMTs should have a basic understanding of the general concepts of legal negligence. As for the scenario mentioned above? A good attorney will bring in a lot of questions. Was the alcohol masking signs and symptoms of head trauma the EMTs and hospital should have recognized earlier? Should the patient have been taken to a trauma center rather than just the local ER? Did the EMTs adequately describe for the ER staff the circumstances surrounding the crash such that the physician and staff could better assess the totality of the patient’s potential injuries? Obviously there aren’t enough details to make any reasoned response, and in the end it may take a judge or jury to flesh out all the answers. Such is the nature of the legal world.
Do you laugh at the home and garden shows on cable TV? Do you snort in derision watching those folks spend tens of thousands of dollars on contractors? Do you smirk to yourself because you know you can do the same thing better, faster, and cheaper? Well of course you do, you’re an Alaskan. Even before Home Depot and Lowes came to town we had Spenard Builder’s Supply, Eagle Hardware, and you could quote the price of a spanner wrench at your local ACE store. When it comes to adding on or building from scratch, no one beats an Alaskan at getting things done. And not just with Visqueen, blue tarps, and duct tape, either.
On a normal day you could sheetrock a hanger holding Alaska Airlines’ latest 737-stretch in an easy day’s work. But what happens when you only have a morning? Perhaps your spouse has lined you up for a snowshoe softball game this evening, or some fish is running in some creek somewhere. Unfortunately your best bud is rough-necking on the Slope this week, and your brother is sleeping off a 4-pack of wine coolers on a beach in Hawaii. What now?
Well, normally if you needed a little extra help you’d head on down to Beans Café where there are plenty of folks looking for honest work. The modern version is to check on Craig’s List from your smartphone while driving to the local man store. Either way you’ll find some chap willing to hammer, screw, lay tile, hang ‘rock, or just generally clean up your mess when you’re done. For a hundred bucks or a promise of fresh salmon, Alaskan men will do most anything.
Unfortunately, you have now begun to tread upon the realm of The Man. The Government. The State. The usurious villainy of a democratic republic. A homeowner, or anyone else for that matter, who chooses to hire someone to do something, must comply with all the rules and regulations just like those fancy contractors who have websites and their names on their pickups. This can be a rude awakening for many. You just needed someone to haul Trex around the house while you’re putting on the hot tub deck, or perhaps someone to mix and pour concrete on the motorhome pad next to the garage. But if you’re paying them, you’re an employer in the eyes of the state.
Fortunately this probably doesn’t mean you’ll have to read up on Obamacare. But you do have certain responsibilities. Perhaps the foremost of real concern is workman’s compensation. Didn’t come to mind? Paying insurance for just hiring some dude off the internet now and again? Actually, yes, you are responsible. If that poor fella trips over the water hose, bangs his thumb with a hammer, or slips and cracks his head while shoveling your driveway, he is a worker by Alaska standards and you are his employer. It is necessary to report to the state that you have worker’s compensation insurance, and of course pay necessary premiums.
There are other requirements, too, such as keeping records of your employees, tax records, immigration forms, minimum wage laws, etc. etc. etc. If nothing ever goes wrong one never has to worry, right? More or less. Of course our laws aren’t written for when things go right, but for when the unexpected happens. Let’s say that poor fella really does get hurt. There he is banging away with the nail gun and the compressor hose bursts. Safety glasses are for wimps, so naturally splinters and other debris fly straight to his face blinding him for all eternity. Or at least until the trial is over. The State will try to hold you responsible for the entirety of his medical care and later disability, and will be knocking on your door grinning from ear to ear. Actually you’ll get a nasty little letter letting you know that a worker’s comp claim has been filed, the State presumes you are responsible for the costs, and, by the way, there will be fines galore for not having the proper insurance in place and on file.
So what does this all actually mean? The average Joe Alaska isn’t going to run out and get worker’s compensation insurance. He’s also not going to be checking the bonafides of his day help. He may not be keeping records or reporting employment taxes to the IRS. This is Alaska, free man’s country, where we take care of things up front and don’t need nor want the government standing around looking over our shoulder making sure the paint is the proper color, consistency, and lead-free. This ain’t Bolder or San Francisco, it’s Willow, or Tok, or Aleknagik. What it means is that we need to carefully consider what we’re doing, how we’re doing it, and who’s doing it. We need to remain aware that we are responsible if something untoward happens. After an accident you’ll probably think hiring that licensed small business contractor who already has the proper employment credentials and insurance would have been faster and cheaper. He hires the fella from Beans or off Craigslist and actually insures them.
Will anything change after reading this little blerb? Likely not, but us attorneys are around when the unthinkable or the unknowable happens. So if your brother is snoring away on a tropical isle and your high school buddy is raking in big coin in the oil patch and you still need help slinging mud, keep in mind you are an employer, and subject to the crushing wheels of justice.
A federal tax lien is the government’s legal claim against your property when you neglect or fail to pay a tax debt. The lien protects the government’s interest in all your property, including real estate, personal property and financial assets. A federal tax lien exists after the IRS:
The IRS files a public document, the Notice of Federal Tax Lien, to alert creditors that the government has a legal right to your property.
Paying your tax debt – in full – is the best way to get rid of a federal tax lien. The IRS releases your lien within 30 days after you have paid your tax debt.
Options: When conditions are in the best interest of both the government and the taxpayer, other options for reducing the impact of a lien exist.
You can avoid a federal tax lien by simply filing and paying all your taxes in full and on time. If you can’t file or pay on time, don’t ignore the letters or correspondence you get from the IRS. If you can’t pay the full amount you owe, payment options are available to help you settle your tax debt over time.
A lien is not a levy. A lien secures the government’s interest in your property when you don’t pay your tax debt. A levy actually takes the property to pay the tax debt. If you don’t pay or make arrangements to settle your tax debt, the IRS can levy, seize and sell any type of real or personal property that you own or have an interest in.
A. Corporation Has Not Issued Stock or Commenced Business.
1. If the corporation has not issued stock and has not commenced business, a voluntary dissolution may be authorized by a majority of the incorporators.
B. Corporation has issued stock or has commenced business.
1. If the corporation has issued stock and has commenced business, the approval of the shareholders is required for voluntary dissolution of the corporation.
2. Shareholder approval is obtained as follows:
a. The board of directors of the corporation adopts a plan of liquidation and refers the plan to the shareholders for action.
b. A majority of shareholders, and a majority of the holders of each class of shares entitled to vote as a class, approve the plan of liquidation.
II. Filings and Notice.
A. Filings.
1. Under the Alaska Business Corporation Act, a Certificate of Election to dissolve is filed initially with the Alaska Corporations Commissioner. Articles of dissolution are filed after the completion of the winding up and liquidation of the corporation. A.S. 10.06.608.
2. Articles of dissolution stating compliance with A.S. 10.06.620. A.S. 10.06.623.
B. Revocation.
1. The dissolution may be revoked prior to any actual distributions to shareholders under A.S. 10.06.610.
2. Revocation of dissolution is effective on filing.
C. Notice.
1. The corporation must give notice of the dissolution to holders of known claims against the corporation. The notice must provide for a procedure and deadline for filing claims against the corporation. See, A.S. 10.06.615 and .620
2. In order to notify holders of unknown claims, notice of the dissolution is published by the corporation in a newspaper. See, A.S. 10.06.653 (The heading discusses publication issues in the context of court and non-court directed winding up of the enterprise. However, the actual provisions only discuss court winding up.) This notice must also provide for a procedure for filing claims against the corporation.
D. Effect. The effect of dissolution is to cease the existence of the enterprise for all purposes other than suits, legal proceedings and actions by shareholders, directors and officers. A.S. 10.06.625.
III. Winding Up and Liquidation.
A. Cessation of Business.
1. The operation of the business of the corporation must cease on or before the filing of certificate of intent to terminate, except as necessary to wind up the business operations and preserve good will. A.S. 10.06.615.
2. The only continuing activity of the corporation should be that necessary to wind up its affairs and distribute its assets in liquidation.
B. Assemble Assets.
1. The corporation must assemble its assets and sell or otherwise dispose of those assets that will not be distributed to shareholders or to claimants.
2. Particular care should be given to identifying assets such as prepaid items and contingent claims that might otherwise be overlooked.
C. Satisfy Obligations and Liabilities.
1. The corporation must pay or provide for payment of all corporate obligations and liabilities and all claims against the corporation.
2. In the case of disputed or contingent claims, provision may be made for payment by depositing funds into an escrow or liquidating trust.
D. Distribution to Shareholders.
1. The assets of the corporation remaining after payment of or providing for claims should be distributed to the shareholders.
2. All known assets should be transferred with appropriate forms of transfer or conveyance, such as deeds, bills of sale, or assignments.
3. Unknown assets can be transferred to shareholders by an assignment specifically covering such assets.
4. A statement of the fair market value of all assets transferred should be provided by the corporation to each shareholder. This statement will be required for the shareholders’ income tax returns.
E. Stock Certificates.
1. All stock certificates of the corporation should be collected and canceled.
2. Stock certificates should be collected from shareholders in exchange for the assets distributed to them.
F. Timing.
1. If installment obligations of the corporation will be distributed in the liquidation, the liquidation should be completed within 12 months following the adoption of the plan of liquidation to enable noncorporate shareholders to report gain attributable to the installment obligations on the installment basis.
2. In other cases, the liquidation should proceed as quickly as possible. A protracted liquidation may result in the corporation’s being subjected to personal holding company or accumulated earnings taxes.
IV. Tax Filings.
A. Corporation.
1. Form 966 must be filed by the corporation with the Internal Revenue Service within 30 days after adoption of the plan of complete liquidation.
2. Forms 1099-DIV must be issued to all shareholders who have received $600 or more in the liquidation by January 31 of the year following the liquidation, and copies of these forms must be filed with the Internal Revenue Service, accompanied by Form 1096.
3. The corporation’s final income tax return must be filed by the 15th day of the third month following the close of its final tax year, which will generally be the date on which its assets are distributed to shareholders.
B. Shareholders.
1. Shareholders must report any gain or loss on the liquidation on their income tax returns for the year in which the liquidation occurs. If the shareholders have a loss, it may qualify as an ordinary loss under IRC §1244.
2. Shareholders must file certain information regarding the liquidation with those returns.
The following is my Outline for Corporate Dissolution.
A. Corporation Has Not Issued Stock or Commenced Business.
1. If the corporation has not issued stock and has not commenced business, a voluntary dissolution may be authorized by a majority of the incorporators under the Model Business Corporation Act.
2. If the corporation has not issued stock or has not commenced business, a voluntary dissolution may be authorized by a majority of the incorporators or by a majority of the members of the initial board of directors under the Revised Model Business Corporation Act.
B. Corporation has issued stock or has commenced business.
1. If the corporation has issued stock and has commenced business, the approval of the shareholders is required for voluntary dissolution of the corporation. Under the Model Business Corporation Act, shareholder approval is required if the corporation has either issued stock or commenced business.
2. Shareholder approval is obtained as follows:
a. The board of directors of the corporation adopts a plan of liquidation and refers the plan to the shareholders for action.
b. A majority of shareholders, and a majority of the holders of each class of shares entitled to vote as a class, approve the plan of liquidation.
II. Filings and Notice.
A. Filings.
1. Under the Alaska Business Corporation Act, a Certificate of Election to dissolve is filed initially with the Alaska Corporations Commissioner. Articles of dissolution are filed after the completion of the winding up and liquidation of the corporation. A.S. 10.06.608.
2. Articles of dissolution stating compliance with A.S. 10.06.620. A.S. 10.06.623.
B. Revocation.
1. The dissolution may be revoked prior to any actual distributions to shareholders under A.S. 10.06.610.
2. Revocation of dissolution is effective on filing.
C. Notice.
1. The corporation must give notice of the dissolution to holders of known claims against the corporation. The notice must provide for a procedure and deadline for filing claims against the corporation. See, A.S. 10.06.615 and .620
2. In order to notify holders of unknown claims, notice of the dissolution is published by the corporation in a newspaper. See, A.S. 10.06.653 (The heading discusses publication issues in the context of court and non-court directed winding up of the enterprise. However, the actual provisions only discuss court winding up.) This notice must also provide for a procedure for filing claims against the corporation.
D. Effect. The effect of dissolution is to cease the existence of the enterprise for all purposes other than suits, legal proceedings and actions by shareholders, directors and officers. A.S. 10.06.625.
III. Winding Up and Liquidation.
A. Cessation of Business.
1. The operation of the business of the corporation must cease on or before the filing of certificate of intent to terminate, except as necessary to wind up the business operations and preserve good will. A.S. 10.06.615.
2. The only continuing activity of the corporation should be that necessary to wind up its affairs and distribute its assets in liquidation.
B. Assemble Assets.
1. The corporation must assemble its assets and sell or otherwise dispose of those assets that will not be distributed to shareholders or to claimants.
2. Particular care should be given to identifying assets such as prepaid items and contingent claims that might otherwise be overlooked.
C. Satisfy Obligations and Liabilities.
1. The corporation must pay or provide for payment of all corporate obligations and liabilities and all claims against the corporation.
2. In the case of disputed or contingent claims, provision may be made for payment by depositing funds into an escrow or liquidating trust.
D. Distribution to Shareholders.
1. The assets of the corporation remaining after payment of or providing for claims should be distributed to the shareholders.
2. All known assets should be transferred with appropriate forms of transfer or conveyance, such as deeds, bills of sale, or assignments.
3. Unknown assets can be transferred to shareholders by an assignment specifically covering such assets.
4. A statement of the fair market value of all assets transferred should be provided by the corporation to each shareholder. This statement will be required for the shareholders’ income tax returns.
E. Stock Certificates.
1. All stock certificates of the corporation should be collected and canceled.
2. Stock certificates should be collected from shareholders in exchange for the assets distributed to them.
F. Timing.
1. If installment obligations of the corporation will be distributed in the liquidation, the liquidation should be completed within 12 months following the adoption of the plan of liquidation to enable noncorporate shareholders to report gain attributable to the installment obligations on the installment basis.
2. In other cases, the liquidation should proceed as quickly as possible. A protracted liquidation may result in the corporation’s being subjected to personal holding company or accumulated earnings taxes.
IV. Tax Filings.
A. Corporation.
1. Form 966 must be filed by the corporation with the Internal Revenue Service within 30 days after adoption of the plan of complete liquidation.
2. Forms 1099-DIV must be issued to all shareholders who have received $600 or more in the liquidation by January 31 of the year following the liquidation, and copies of these forms must be filed with the Internal Revenue Service, accompanied by Form 1096.
3. The corporation’s final income tax return must be filed by the 15th day of the third month following the close of its final tax year, which will generally be the date on which its assets are distributed to shareholders.
B. Shareholders.
1. Shareholders must report any gain or loss on the liquidation on their income tax returns for the year in which the liquidation occurs. If the shareholders have a loss, it may qualify as an ordinary loss under IRC §1244. Shareholders must file certain information regarding the liquidation with those returns.
“Unless you have fun, you can’t truly bring your intellect, your skills, and your deep knowledge to push the boundaries of the unknown, to invent and create.” Vandebroek
Alaska Statutes address Eminent Domain at 09.55.240 through .460. When a governmental entity makes a taking, there are actually two portions to the valuation process. First, the taken parcel’s value and the remaining parcel’s diminished value. The government will focus the target’s attention solely on parcel taken. Typically people will forget to consider the affect to the remaining parcel.
Government offers frequently select valuation methods that support low prices. For example they will suggest that vacant land value should be measured by a gross proportion of the whole. By measuring the property as a percentage of gross they pay the lowest cost on the valuation.
I advise against providing the entity with a right of entry on the premises prior to resolving the property valuation and damages issues. Absent a project deadline the entity has no pressure related to making a full and fair offer on the property. You will generally fair better by withholding the right of entry permit. The following provides a summary of a few of the important provisions in Alaska.
Valuation Date
Hearings
Damages
To establish the individual components of each of these elements of damages you will need to have admissible evidence. The evidence will need to be reasonably certain in the measurement of the damages. You typically will need to enlist the services of not only counsel but, appraisers, site analysts and engineers to evaluate and present evidence supporting the value of these damages.
Valuation
Attorney’s fees and experts
You are not entitled to be compensated for your experts or your counsel unless the fact finder determines that the value the government offered you was more than 10% less than the value they should have offered to you. This rule pretty much guarantees that the government is always going to take your property at a discount to the actual full and fair value.
Q. IS THE AHFC HOME ENERGY REBATE TAXABLE INCOME? I HEARD THAT I WILL RECEIVE A 1099 FORM FROM AHFC. AHFC has received a legal opinion from the State of Alaska Department of Law that requires AHFC to issue a 1099-G to individuals who receive payments under this program. It is up to the recipient to contact their tax advisor about any possible tax consequences. – See more at: . Indeed AHFC reports the amount in block 6 and reports the amount as a “taxable grant.”
(a) Exclusion
(A) Dwelling unit
Utility customers participating in test of “smart grid” technology utilizing new solar photovoltaic system to be installed in homes by taxpayer utility were not required to include value thereof in income per IRC § 61 because same was excludable as IRC § 136 “energy conservation measure;” nor was IRC § 6041 information reporting required. Private Letter Ruling 201046013, 2010 PLR LEXIS 2352.
As IRC § 136 did not apply to homeowner who received one-time renewable energy credit from utility upon installation of residential renewable energy system, homeowner was required to include gain from sale of associated environmental credits and benefits triggered by resulting electricity generation in income and to credit for 30% of expenditure. Private Letter Ruling 201035003, 2010 PLR LEXIS 1080.
Payments to residential customers by exempt entity to promote energy efficiency through state program were not income to recipients under I.R.C. § 61 but were energy conservation subsidies excluded under section 136; because payments were not income to customers, entity did not have to report payments under section 6041. Private Letter Ruling 200717010, 2007 PLR LEXIS 93.
It would be nice if AHFC would obtain a private letter ruling establishing that Alaska homeowners are not liable for taxes on the AHFC Energy rebate. The cost of the letter agreement exceeds the benefit to any single homeowner. But, AHFC would establish a lot of good will and keep more money in Alaska instead of shipping it off to DC. Instead, they issue the 1099 and give you the following advice. The IRS also provides advice here.
The U.S. Treasury Department requires us to advise you that this written advice is not intended or written by our firm to be used, and cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code. Written advice from our firm relating to Federal tax matters may not, without our express written consent, be used in promoting, marketing or recommending any entity, investment plan or arrangement to any taxpayer, other than the recipient of the written advice.