Starr International Company v. USA, et al

Track this case

Case Number:

17-5238

Court:

Appellate - DC Circuit

Nature of Suit:

2870 Tax Suits

  1. May 01, 2019

    Starr Drops $38M Tax Refund Suit Despite Winning Appeal

    Swiss insurer Starr International Co. has quit litigation in a Washington, D.C., federal court that was to have addressed implications of the company's successful appeal in December allowing it to pursue a $38.2 million U.S. tax refund.

  2. December 07, 2018

    DC Circ. Revives Starr's $38M Tax Refund Suit

    Swiss insurer Starr International will get another crack at its bid for a $38.2 million U.S. tax refund after the D.C. Circuit ruled Friday that a lower court wrongly concluded that the case involved a political question outside its reach.

  3. September 13, 2018

    DC Circ. Questions Ability To Grant $38.2M Refund To Starr Int'l

    The insurer Starr International Co. Inc. faces several hurdles in obtaining a $38.2 million U.S. tax refund for 2007 under the Administrative Procedure Act even if the D.C. Circuit rules in its favor, two of the three judges on the appeals court's panel told the insurer's attorney Thursday.

  4. May 22, 2018

    Swiss Insurer Counters IRS Use Of Treaty Test In $38.2M Row

    A Swiss insurer fighting for a $38.2 million tax refund under a treaty with the U.S. told the D.C. Circuit on Monday that the IRS is butchering the meaning of the words in a test used to confer treaty benefits.

  5. April 23, 2018

    US Fights Swiss Co.'s $38.2M Tax Appeal, Drops Its Own

    The U.S. government agreed not to pursue an appeal of issues it lost in a Swiss insurer's lawsuit over tax treaty benefits, while telling the D.C. Circuit on Monday that the insurer's arguments for a $38.2 million tax refund were unpersuasive.

  6. February 27, 2018

    Swiss Insurer Starr Appeals Denial Of $38M Tax Refund

    A Swiss insurer fighting for a $38.2 million tax refund in the U.S. appealed two decisions against it from a D.C. federal court on Monday, saying that the Internal Revenue Service was wrong to deny it preferential tax treatment under a U.S.-Switzerland tax treaty.