Kevin Stults concentrates his practice on federal tax controversy and litigation. He represents large financial institutions, multinational corporations and individuals at various stages of federal income tax controversies, including audits, administrative appeals and judicial proceedings. His substantive experience encompasses a variety of complex tax issues, including foreign tax credits, economic substance/business purpose, corporate restructurings, life insurance, various partnership issues, IRS promoter examinations, pre-filing agreements, and the TEFRA partnership audit and litigation procedures.
Mr. Stults is vice-chair of the American Bar Association Section of Taxation’s Committee on
Administrative Practice, and past chair of the Tax Audits and Litigation Committee of the
D.C. Bar Taxation Section. He also provides pro bono representation to low-income taxpayers,
successfully settling matters with the IRS. Prior to law school, Mr. Stults held various
positions at Capital One Financial Corporation (1999-2004).
Mr. Stults’ representative cases include:
- Athene USA Corp. v. United States (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa). Refund
case involving the IRS’ disallowance of a change in method of accounting relating to Athene’s
treatment of the cost of options purchased to hedge its fixed indexed annuity products.
- Eaton v. Commissioner (U.S. Tax Court). First case involving a court’s review of an IRS decision to retroactively cancel an Advance Pricing Agreement.
Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp. & Subsidiaries v. The Government of the United States Virgin Islands and The Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; U.S. District Court, S.D.N.Y.; U.S. District Court, Virgin Islands). Multiple-year income tax refund and deficiency actions brought in 2014 and 2015 relating to the operations of the Hess refinery on St. Croix, involving nearly $3 billion. Involved tax accounting issues and questions about the available jurisdiction(s) in which refund litigation could be brought.
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. v. United States (U.S. District Court, S.D.N.Y.). Case involving cross-border financing, treaty interpretation and economic substance challenge.