Jade Trading, LLC Ex Rel. Ervin v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a paired option transaction “was virtually guaranteed to be unprofitable” and that “[n]o reasonable investor would engage in such a transaction to earn a profit”
• finding that penalties that do not rely on affected items are appropi'iate for a partnership-level determination
• upholding determination of lower court that paired option transactions “cannot be separated because they were totally dependent on one another from an economic and pragmatic standpoint” (quotation omitted)
• “The penalty ... was imposed ... due to the gross valuation misstatement of the partners’ outside basis in the partnership.”
• “The economic substance doctrine ‘require[s] disregarding, for tax purposes, transactions that comply with the literal terms of the tax code but lack economic reality.’ ”
• “An example of an ‘affected item’ is a partner's tax basis in his partnership interest, which is affected by partnership items such as partnership income or loss.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).