- 6 -
resulting in petitioners’ AMT liability in that amount. Unless
application of the AMT-foreign-tax-credit limitation of section
59(a)(2)(A) would violate the U.S.-Czech treaty, petitioners are
liable for the $2,136 AMT.
In cases involving other treaties with operative language
similar to the language of the U.S.-Czech treaty involved herein,
courts have held that the section 59(a)(2)(A) AMT-foreign-tax-
credit limitation does not violate general treaty provisions
intended to avoid double taxation. More specifically, courts
have interpreted the same general treaty language at issue herein
(namely, “In accordance with the provisions and subject to the
limitations of the law of the United States”) to allow
application of the section 59(a)(2)(A) AMT-foreign-tax-credit
limitation. See Kappus v. Commissioner, 337 F.3d 1053, 1054
(D.C. Cir. 2003) (relating to U.S.-Canada treaty), affg. T.C.
Memo. 2002-36; Pekar v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 158, 160 (1999)
(relating to U.S.-Germany treaty); Brooke v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2000-194, affd. per curiam 13 Fed. Appx. 7 (D.C. Cir.
2001).
Interpreting the same language in the context of article
23(1) in the U.S.-Germany treaty,2 in Pekar v. Commissioner,
supra at 163, we upheld the AMT-foreign-tax-credit limitation of
2 Convention for the Avoidance of Double Taxation, Aug. 28,
1989, U.S.-Germany, 30 ILM 1778, 1779.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011