Why has the IRS fought captive insurance for so long?
A long argument about whether a company can insure itself
Queen's answer is a chronology, told by someone who litigates against the tax authority. His position is stated plainly at the top, that the IRS has been a bad faith regulator on this subject, and the rest is the record he rests it on: a series of doctrines advanced against captives, most of which the courts rejected, followed by a run of wins against small captives doing things he agrees were indefensible.
He starts a long way back, with the London coffee houses where underwriters wrote their names beneath a contract, and with the mid century founder who could not buy insurance for a mining operation and built his own company instead. The word captive, he says, came from that company being captive to a larger one.
Key takeaways
Queen frames the history as a series of doctrines advanced against captives, most of which the courts declined to accept.
Moline Properties and the corporate form argument are the foundation he returns to, with the economic family doctrine as the attempt that failed after it.
He does not defend the small captive cases: he agrees the arrangements that lost were indefensible, which is why insurance purpose has to come first.
The dispute begins once captives become common. The tax authority's first position was that a captive is effectively a wallet, so premium paid into it is not deductible. Queen's answer is Moline Properties, the case establishing that the corporate form has to be respected, and he says the point came to a head when that precedent was applied to a captive in the Carnation litigation.
The next attempt was the economic family doctrine, the argument that premium washing between related entities is not really insurance. Queen says the Sixth Circuit rejected it in the Humana litigation, and that a further version failed in the Seventh Circuit when the tax authority questioned whether Allstate was a real insurance company because Sears owned it.
From the conversation
Matt Queen
Captive Insurance Attorney, author of Modern Captive Insurance
“And then they won this enormous case called the Avrahami case.”
This answer begins at 18:50 of the full conversation. Watch or listen to the whole thing.
Citations
Sources
- Avrahami v. Commissioner, 149 T.C. No. 7 (2017), United States Tax Courthttps://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcInOp/OpinionViewer.aspx?ID=11340
- Moline Properties, Inc. v. Commissioner, 319 U.S. 436 (1943)https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/319/436/
The views expressed are those of the featured guest, drawn from a recorded conversation, and reflect their own professional experience. Nothing on this page is insurance, tax, legal, or investment advice. Consult your own advisors about your specific situation.
Corrections or removal requests: contact@captiveip.com