TiNY Report for May 9, 2019 (covering cases issued April 25 and 29 and May 2)

Today’s cases offer four (!) Tribunal decisions, one of which is on a case litigated by our shop.  SPOILER ALERT! It did not go well (see the details below). Indeed, taxpayers were pretty much 0-9 for the week, so at least we had company.  If you know math, you’ve probably already guessed that there are also a handful of ALJ Determinations, most of which address (gag) timeliness issues. This week, in our continuing effort to educate our readers (and entertain ourselves) on both New York tax developments and pop culture references, each of our entries concludes with a quote from the American Film Institute’s “AFI’s 100 Years…100 Movie Quotes.”  Enjoy!

Comment

TiNY Report for April 18, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued April 11)

Only one decision today, but it is a good one.

Comment

TiNY Report for April 4, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued March 28)

There are three determinations this week.  One is the obligatory timeliness case, but the other two delve into taxes we don’t get to read about too often:  The Article 9-A Franchise Tax and the Real Property Transfer Tax.  Good times!

Comment

TiNY EXTRA for April 3, 2019

The Tribunal posted its March 22^nd decision in Matter of Moody’s Corp. and Subsidiaries (Division’s Rep: Jennifer Baldwin; Taxpayer’s Rep: Marc Simonetti and Evan Hamme; Article 9-A),  after last Thursday’s TiNY was published.  The decision is important enough to cover in a supplementary edition.

Comment

TiNY Report for March 21, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued March 14)

This week reinforces Doyle’s Second Corollary to Murphy’s Law*:  “There won’t be any timeliness cases the week you are on vacation, but there will be at least one the week you get back.”  We have two ALJ determinations to report on this week.  And, as you might have guessed, one determination considers the timeliness of a request for conciliation conference.

Comment

TiNY Report for March 7, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued February 28)

They say “March comes in like a lion and goes out like a lamb.”  But the DTA’s first-week-in-March, one-determination/two-decision output looks a lot like the lion Dorothy Gale befriends on her Oz-trek: one better suited to mint jelly than the stalk-and-kill.  The sole determination this week is on a license suspension issue, and the two Tribunal decisions are on timeliness issues (yay…growl…roar…).

Comment

TiNY Report for February 28, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued February 14 and 21)

Don’t shoot the messenger.

The DTA didn’t post any of its February 14 output until today. We called last week to inquire if any decisions, determinations or orders were going to be posted and were told that the person responsible for posting such decisions was out. I guess that person was way, way out. In any case, ALJ orders were issued on February 14^th and 21^st. One determination was issued on the 14^th and two determinations were issued on the 21^st.  Consistent with our mission, we’re reporting them within one of the date they were posted.

Comment

TiNY Report for Thursday, February 14, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued February 7)

This Valentine’s Day saw the DTA post four ALJ Determinations.  Nothing says “I love you” like four ALJ Determinations when not a single one involves timeliness!

Comment

TiNY Report for February 7, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued January 31)

Despite the cold weather last week, we had four ALJ Determinations and one ALJ Order to review this week. Four of the five are on dull-as-dishwater timeliness issues.  Which is why last Friday, in an effort to make it more fun to review/edit the summaries before posting them, TiNY’s senior editor created the “timeliness game” in which he did a shot of Jack Daniels every time any word with “timely” as its base (e.g. untimely, timeliness, timely) appeared in a summary.

And that is why this wasn’t posted until Monday.

Comment

TiNY Report for January 10, 2019 (covering DTA cases issued January 3)

Just two ALJ determinations this week.  But no timeliness issues.  So, “yay” for that, I guess.  But as you’ll see, the cases are less interesting than they could have been.

Comment