Workshop MM Alternative to Resolving Tax Disputes What Has Worked - PDF document

28th Annual Tuesday & Wednesday, January 29‐30, 2019 Hya� Regency Columbus, Columbus, Ohio Workshop MM Alternative to Resolving Tax Disputes … What Has Worked in Other States Wednesday, January 30, 2019 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Biographical Information Amy Thomas Laub - Technical Director, Tax, Nationwide Insurance Company 1 W. Nationwide Blvd, Columbus, OH 43215 614-249-7070 thoma30@nationwide.com Amy Thomas Laub works for Nationwide Insurance Company, which is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. As Tax Director, she is primarily responsible for state income and sales & use tax areas. Prior to joining Nationwide, she worked in the Tax departments for Tempur Sealy International, Inc., located in Lexington, Kentucky, and Federal Express, located in Memphis, Tennessee. Amy has experience with multiple areas of state taxation including compliance, audits, planning, policy and incentives & credits. Amy currently serves as the Immediate Past Chair and Member of the Board of Directors for the Council on State Taxation (COST) after chairing COST until 2019 as only the third woman to chair COST over the past 49 years. She participates in numerous conferences and schools as a speaker and a facilitator. Amy is a licensed CPA and received her B.B.A. degree in accounting from the University of Cincinnati. Christine T. Mesirow, Section Chief, Taxation, Ohio Attorney General 30 E. Broad St.; 25 th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215 614-995-3753 Fax: 866-459-6679 Christine.mesirow@ohioattorneygeneral.gov Christine has practiced in the area of state and local taxation for more than 25 years, in both the private and public sectors. She began her career in state & local tax as an assistant attorney general in the Taxation Section. Christine then moved to Dallas, where she gained experience in multistate tax issues affecting technology service providers as the state tax counsel for Electronic Data Systems Corp., representing the company in state tax controversies throughout the country. She later was a state & local tax consultant with PricewaterhouseCoopers and was of counsel with Bricker & Eckler LLP. Prior to her current appointment as chief of the tax section, she served as the Chief Legal Counsel for the Ohio Department of Taxation. Christine’s broad range of experience in both tax controversy and tax administration issues provides her with an understanding of many issues confronted by those who must navigate the sometimes complex legal, policy and business issues challenging government and industry in the administration of and compliance with state tax law. Christine is a graduate of the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. Fredrick J. Nicely, Senior Tax Counsel, Council On State Taxation (COST) 122 C Street, NW, Suite 330, Washington, DC 20001-2109 202.484.5213 fnicely@statetax.org Fred Nicely is Senior Tax Counsel for the Council On State Taxation. Fred’s role as Senior Tax Counsel at COST extends to all aspects of the COST mission statement: “to preserve and promote equitable and nondiscriminatory state and local taxation of multijurisdictional business entities.” Before joining COST, Fred served in the Ohio Department of Taxation for four years as Deputy Tax Commissioner over Legal and for the prior seven years as the Department’s Chief Counsel. Fred’s responsibilities at the Department included testifying before legislative committees, participating as an alternative delegate for Ohio at Streamlined Sales Tax Project meetings, and reviewing legal documents issued by the Department, including deciding the merits of filing an appeal. He is a frequent speaker and author on Ohio’s tax system and on multistate tax issues generally. Fred also has extensive experience in public utility tax law, having served as an administrator of the Department’s public utility tax division. Fred’s undergraduate degree in psychology (with a concentration in accounting) is from the Ohio State University. He obtained his MBA and JD from Capital University in Columbus, Ohio.

Biographical Information Adam J. Krupp, Commissioner Indiana Department of Revenue Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, N248 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Adam J. Krupp was appointed commissioner of Indiana’s Department of Revenue (DOR) by Governor Eric Holcomb in January 2017. Before joining DOR, Krupp served as general counsel for Indiana’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles, where he played an integral role in the 2016 legislative overhaul of Indiana’s motor vehicle laws found in Title 9 of the Indiana Code. Additionally, Krupp served the citizens of Indiana as special counsel to former Governor Mike Pence, where he focused on agency compliance with Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act, and as Deputy Director and Counsel for Indiana’s Division of Family Resources, where he oversaw litigation and played a key role in the modernization of Indiana’s Medicaid eligibility program. Krupp also clerked for the Honorable Paul D. Mathias of Indiana’s Court of Appeals. Krupp has extensive experience as a litigator in the private sector, where he practiced law in New York with Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, after starting his career with White & Case, LLP. During his career in the private sector, Krupp represented clients in federal and state court actions in a broad range of complex commercial litigation matters, including securities, intellectual property, class action defense, antitrust, regulatory investigations, breach of contract, fraud, products liability, RICO, and white-collar crime. He is licensed to practice law in Indiana, Georgia, New York, and Texas. A native of Rockledge, Florida, Krupp grew up in Plymouth, Indiana and graduated from Plymouth High School before attending Purdue University, where he was Phi Beta Kappa with a degree in secondary education specializing in speech communications, theatre, and English. He taught high school before attending Indiana University’s Robert H. McKinney School of Law. During the course of his career, Krupp taught courses in contract drafting and legal writing as an adjunct professor of law. Outside his duties as Commissioner, Krupp volunteers with Special Olympics Indiana and Make- A-Wish, and serves as Vice-President of the Boys & Girls Club of Boone County. In 2018, he was honored by the Indianapolis Business Journal as a “Forty Under 40” selection. Currently, Krupp resides in Zionsville with his wife and two sons.

 Staff Reductions—Ohio Department of Taxation has reduced its staffing by one- third over past 8 years  Fewer employees means that staff must focus on core administration functions, such as processing returns  Working appeals from assessments and refund denials draws from limited resources, and may result in backlogs of pending appeals

 Process takes too long to get a final decision  Issues settled in the past continue to arise on current audit  Expense involved especially to hire outside legal counsel  Process is cumbersome or difficult to understand

 Mediation  Offer in Compromise  Independent Audit Review  Arbitration  Settlement Conferences

 Audit  Administrative review  Administrative appeal

 Mediation—an impartial “third-party” helps the parties try to reach a resolution  Arbitration—a neutral person hears arguments and reviews evidence and decides the outcome. May be binding or nonbinding  Neutral Evaluation—each party presents its case to a neutral person called an evaluator. The evaluator opines on strengths and weaknesses of each case and recommends a resolution. Nonbinding  Settlement Conferences—parties meet with neutral person to discuss strengths and weaknesses and possible settlement

 May be helpful :  Parties value their relationship  Emotions are clouding parties’ perspectives  May not be helpful :  One party not willing to compromise  One party has significant advantage over the other  Issue is continuing, and one of policy to government, or at heart of taxpayer’s business model

 May be helpful :  Parties want a decision without the expense of a trial  Subject matter is complex and parties want an expert in the field to decide the dispute  May not be helpful :  If a party wants to retain control over how the case is resolved  If significant discovery is necessary to present the case  Issue is continuing, and one of policy to government, or at heart of taxpayer’s business model

 May be helpful :  Parties want a decision without the expense of a trial  Subject matter is complex and parties want an expert in the field to decide the dispute  May not be helpful :  If a party wants to retain control over how the case is resolved  If significant discovery is necessary to present the case  Issue is continuing, and one of policy to government, or at heart of taxpayer’s business model

 May be helpful :  Issues do not require a change in policy or business model  Better understanding of business and transactions assessed may change positions taken on audit  May not be helpful :  If constitutional issues are involved  Issue is continuing, and one of policy to government, or at heart of taxpayer’s business model

What type of ADR process do you find most helpful? 1. Mediation 2. Offer in Compromise 3. Independent Audit Review 4. Arbitration 5. Settlement Conferences

Polling Question Link