SHARE

October 04, 2022

Jarrett Leaves Unanswered Questions on Taxation of Staking Rewards

You've Reached Your
Free Article Limit This Month
Register for free to get unlimited access to all Law.com OnPractice content.
Register Now

In the latest turn of events for the closely followed Jarrett case concerning the taxation of staking rewards, on September 30, 2022, the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee granted the United States' motion to dismiss. The question before the district court was whether the receipt of staking rewards generates taxable income at the date the rewards are received.

IN DEPTH


JARRETT V. UNITED STATES

In Jarrett v. United States, No. 3:21-cv-00419 (M.D. Tenn.), Joshua Jarrett engaged in staking activities where he posted Tezos tokens to contribute to the creation of new blocks of the Tezos public blockchain and, in turn, received new Tezos tokens. Despite not selling or exchanging any of the newly created Tezos tokens during the year of receipt, Jarrett reported such tokens as "other income" and then filed an amended return requesting a refund on the claim that staking income is not taxable.

Jarrett filed a complaint in Tennessee district court seeking a refund because he did not receive a timely response from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). He argued that the newly created Tezos tokens were only taxable at the time of sale, not at the time of receipt, and asserted that the foundational basis of US tax law is that newly created property (such as creating a cake or a book) is not an accession to wealth that is "clearly realized." Under US federal income tax principles, an accession to wealth is a requirement that is necessary for an item to be included as income.

Thereafter, the US Department of Justice Tax Division informed Jarrett that a full refund had been approved and issued a refund check that included interest. In response, Jarrett refused to accept the refund because it did not provide any assurance with respect to whether tokens created through staking activities constitute taxable income at the time of creation. On the basis that Jarrett's claim is moot because the United States has fully refunded the federal income taxes and statutory interest demanded in the complaint, the district court granted the United States' motion to dismiss.

THE NEED FOR IMMEDIATE GUIDANCE

With the recent upgrade of Ethereum to proof of stake and the exponential growth of digital assets involving staking rewards, taxpayers engaging in staking activities were hopeful that the Jarrett case would provide much-needed clarity on how staking rewards should be taxed. Presently, stakers are taking a wide range of positions with respect to the tax character and tax timing of staking rewards. For example, some stakers take the position that the receipt of staking rewards results in taxable income from the performance of services, while others assert that staking rewards are not taxable until they sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of the rewards.

With Jarrett's dismissal, taxpayers continue to operate in uncharted tax waters. While recent legislative proposals have tried to bridge the gap between taxation and digital assets, including the Responsible Financial Innovation Act introduced in June 2022, which permitted cryptocurrency stakers to defer taxes with respect to such activities (including the receipt of staking rewards) until those assets were disposed of, such legislative proposals have not yet gained any traction in the US Congress. Meanwhile, the IRS continues to remain silent on the issue with the only analogous guidance (involving mining activities) implying that staking awards should be taxed as ordinary income upon receipt. As a result, taxpayers should continue to proceed with caution.

For a detailed discussion of staking and US federal income tax considerations, please see "Taxation of Virtual Currency Staking Activities."

If you have questions about the tax implications of staking activities, please do not hesitate to contact the authors of this article or your regular McDermott contact(s).

ALM expressly disclaims any express or implied warranty regarding the OnPractice Content, including any implied warranty that the OnPractice Content is accurate, has been corrected or is otherwise free from errors.

More From McDermott Will & Emery

Oil License Corruption Charges Don't Stick In Milan Court Of Appeal

By McDermott Will & Emery attorneys McDermott Will & Emery January 27 , 2023

In 2011, global oil company Shell and Italian state-owned oil company ENI struck a deal with the Nigerian government to jointly acquire the license to one of the most valuable oil blocks in Nigeria, known as Oil Prospecting License 245 (OPL 245).

This Week in 340B: January 17 - 23, 2023

By Emily Jane Cook McDermott Will & Emery January 26 , 2023

This weekly series provides brief summaries to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country.

IRS Releases Memorandum on Deducting Cryptocurrency Losses

By Andrew M. Granek McDermott Will & Emery January 26 , 2023

On January 13, 2023, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released a Chief Counsel Advice Memorandum (CCA 202302011) concluding that taxpayers cannot claim a deduction for cryptocurrency losses that have, absent a sale or other taxable disposition, substantially declined in value if such cryptocurrency continues to trade on at least one cryptocurrency exchange and has a value that is greater than zero.

More From Tax

IRS Releases Memorandum on Deducting Cryptocurrency Losses

By Andrew M. Granek McDermott Will & Emery January 26 , 2023

On January 13, 2023, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released a Chief Counsel Advice Memorandum (CCA 202302011) concluding that taxpayers cannot claim a deduction for cryptocurrency losses that have, absent a sale or other taxable disposition, substantially declined in value if such cryptocurrency continues to trade on at least one cryptocurrency exchange and has a value that is greater than zero.

FINRA Files Amendments to Proposed Rule Change That Will Allow Remote Inspections

By William B. Mack Greenberg Traurig January 25 , 2023

Last summer, the Financial Regulatory Authority (FINRA) proposed a rule change to its supervision rule (FINRA Rule 3110) to allow member firms to conduct remote inspections of some or all branch offices and locations.

FCPA Year in Review 2022

By Cuneyt A. Akay Greenberg Traurig January 25 , 2023

In 2022, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) obtained nearly $1 billion in total fines and penalties related to Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations, making 2022 one of the top 10 highest grossing years with regard to enforcement penalties in the 45-year history of the FCPA.

Featured Stories
Closeclose
Search
Menu

Working...