District court finds that insurance premium excise tax does not apply to retrocession transactions
By Bruce J Wein, Gerald Rokoff, David D Luce and Michael Greenberg
On 5 February 2014, the US District Court for the District of Columbia held that the federal excise tax (FET) on insurance and reinsurance premiums does not apply to retrocession insurance transactions.
Under a plain reading of the statute, the court reasoned, premiums with respect to such retrocession policies are not subject to the FET. Of note, the court specifically declined to rule on whether the FET could be applied with respect to foreign-to-foreign reinsurance transactions (as opposed to retrocession transactions) for US-situs risks.
Retrocession agreements are essentially reinsurance agreements between reinsurers. Clients who have paid such amounts on (or had such amounts deducted or withheld from) retrocession premiums are urged to file refund claims in order to preserve their right to such refunds…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the DLA Piper briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from DLA Piper
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from DLA Piper
The Trust Deficit: After the Crash report suggests that trust between business, politics and the media has broken down completely.
This update contains a summary of news and legal developments that have affected the banking and finance industry over the last month.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The fragile refinance market is back in rude health and US-style alternative lenders are stepping up with innovative structures to sustain the recovery
The Lawyer’s latest Top 50 litigation firms list shows that business for dispute specialists is roaring along while new in-depth detail reveals the winning strategies