The Court of Federal Claims issued partial summary judgement in Bruyea v. United States (No. 23-766T) on Dec. 5, 2024, holding that a dual Canadian-US citizen is entitled to a treaty-based foreign tax credit (FTC) applied against the Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT).
The NIIT under Section 1411 applies once adjusted gross income exceeds $200,000 (single) or $250,000 (joint). It generally imposes a 3.8% tax on investment income such as capital gains, dividends, interest, rents and royalties, as well as income from a trade or business in which the taxpayer is passive. The tax was created by the Affordable Care Act under a new chapter in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and was designed to be equivalent to employment and self-employment taxes imposed on earned income.
The court found that the U.S.-Canada tax treaty requires the United States to allow a credit against United States taxes for income taxes paid or accrued to Canada and defines "United States tax" in a manner that includes the NIIT. The court further held that the treaty is self-executing, meaning the IRC does not need to explicitly implement a treaty-based tax credit for it to exist.
The court rejected the government’s "last-in-time" argument, emphasizing that it is required to harmonize the treaty and the IRC where possible. The court found that the NIIT contains no language expressly inconsistent with the treaty. Additionally, the court observed that the government inconsistently applied the "last-in-time" argument, as it did not invoke it to preclude some provisions in Article XXIV that are incompatible with the IRC. The court further held that interpreting the treaty to allow the credit aligns with its purpose of eliminating or avoiding double taxation.
This ruling aligns with the court’s previous decision in Christensen v. United States, (168 Fed. Cl. 263, 297) in 2023, which held that U.S. citizens living abroad can claim an FTC against their NIIT under the U.S.-France tax treaty. However, in Toulouse v. Commissioner(157 T.C. 49) in 2011, the Tax Court reached the opposite conclusion. For further details on Christensen, refer to our prior article, Court allows FTCs for NII tax under US-France treaty.
Grant Thornton Insight:
The split on the issue between Tax Court and the Court of Federal Claims remain unresolved. The IRS could appeal the decision to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals and may also continue to deny FTCs against NIITs on originally filed returns under Toulouse, which falls under the Tax Court’s jurisdiction. In response, taxpayers may be able to pursue refund claims in the Court of Federal Claims under Chistensen and Bruyea. Taxpayers can generally file suit in the Court of Federal Claims or district court within two years after a refund claim is denied.
Contacts:
Content disclaimer
This content provides information and comments on current issues and developments from Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and Grant Thornton LLP. It is not a comprehensive analysis of the subject matter covered. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal, tax, or professional advice provided by Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and Grant Thornton LLP. All relevant facts and circumstances, including the pertinent authoritative literature, need to be considered to arrive at conclusions that comply with matters addressed in this content.
For additional information on topics covered in this content, contact a Grant Thornton professional.
Grant Thornton LLP and Grant Thornton Advisors LLC (and their respective subsidiary entities) practice as an alternative practice structure in accordance with the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct and applicable law, regulations and professional standards. Grant Thornton LLP is a licensed independent CPA firm that provides attest services to its clients, and Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and its subsidiary entities provide tax and business consulting services to their clients. Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and its subsidiary entities are not licensed CPA firms.
Tax professional standards statement
This content supports Grant Thornton Advisors LLC’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal, tax, or professional advice provided by Grant Thornton Advisors LLC. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact a Grant Thornton Advisors LLC tax professional. Nothing herein shall be construed as imposing a limitation on any person from disclosing the tax treatment or tax structure of any matter addressed herein.
The information contained herein is general in nature and is based on authorities that are subject to change. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal, tax, or professional advice provided by Grant Thornton Advisors LLC. This material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader’s specific circumstances or needs and may require consideration of tax and nontax factors not described herein. Contact a Grant Thornton Advisors LLC tax professional prior to taking any action based upon this information. Changes in tax laws or other factors could affect, on a prospective or retroactive basis, the information contained herein; Grant Thornton Advisors LLC assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any such changes. All references to “Section,” “Sec.,” or “§” refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and its subsidiary entities are not licensed CPA firms.
More tax hot topics
No Results Found. Please search again using different keywords and/or filters.
Share with your network
Share