Defacto Debarment: Broad Contracting Prohibitions For Many Expatriate Corporations
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.10.09
On July 1st , the FAR Council issued a broad-reaching prohibition on using fiscal year 2006-2009 appropriated funds for contracting with any corporation (or subsidiary of a corporation) that is an inverted domestic for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code (26 USC 7874) or would be considered an inverted domestic under the Code except for the fact that the inversion transactions were completed on or before March 4, 2003. This new rule contains a much broader prohibition on federal contracting than any previous statute or regulation, applying the tax law definition of inverted domestic (and eliminating the 2003 grandfather provision), instead of the ;narrower definition contained in the Department of Homeland Security statute (6 USC 395).
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.07.25
Blocking the Blocked Income Rules? Loper Bright’s influence over the Eighth Circuit’s 3M decision.
On October 1, 2025, the Eighth Circuit decided 3M Co. v. Commissioner in the taxpayer’s favor, based on its application of Loper Bright. The question presented in the case was whether the IRS had the authority to reallocate royalty income to a U.S. parent company that its foreign subsidiary was prohibited from paying under foreign law. The court held that the best interpretation of the governing statute did not permit the IRS’s reallocation.
Client Alert | 12 min read | 10.06.25
California’s Landmark AI Law Demands Transparency From Leading AI Developers
Client Alert | 5 min read | 10.06.25
From Yellow Jackets to Red Flags: DOJ Stings Georgia Tech for Alleged Cybersecurity Noncompliance
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.06.25
How Really Simple Licensing May Change Online Content Licensing
