Possible tax law change after being audited

[Jack from Ohio]

Tax year 2013.  Our client is being audited in relation to a court case specifically http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/14-15773/14-15773-2016-05-24.html 

She is a retired National Sales Director and receiving an annual payment from Mary Kay.  These payments will continue for 15 years.  

Here is our question:  The auditor is assessing SE tax on the payments from Mary Kay in compliance with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling.  There is a group of these retired ladies who have enlisted the help of an attorney that thinks he can get it changed.  

Frankly, we don't think it will be changed unless pushed to the Supreme Court and then it is not likely to ever see the light of day there. But I digress. 

Client wants to know if, they sign and agree to the audit changes, then later the law gets overturned (see my previous comment) do they have recourse to file an amended return to recover the payments they will make as a result of the audit?  Does signing off on the audit report forever bar any options to amend in the future?  

What about filing an amended return now (Using the IRS position as beginning then amend to remove SE) as a protective claim, since the statute is about to expire on the 2013 return.

We do not want to give the client any false hope about the future, but if there is any chance, we don't want to miss that either.

This will cost our client approx $13K for each year starting with 2013 and going forward.

Any opinions or suggestions are welcomed.

[ILLMAS]

Wouldn't it be easier to get Mary Kay to issue a corrected 1099's Box 3, instead of Box 7, or could it be it's really a commission for people she brought into Mary Kay and she is getting a cut from the sales?

Found this

http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2016/may/self-employment-tax-for-consultants-201614534.html

MAS

[Jack from Ohio]

25 minutes ago, ILLMAS said:

Wouldn't it be easier to get Mary Kay to issue a corrected 1099's Box 3, instead of Box 7, or could it be it's really a commission for people she brought into Mary Kay and she is getting a cut from the sales?

Found this

http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2016/may/self-employment-tax-for-consultants-201614534.html

MAS

They have refused.  This fact was included in the tax court procedure.  Only box 7.

[Jack from Ohio]

If anyone has insomnia, reading all 87 pages of the original court case will cure it.

My question is not about the tax court ruling being right or wrong.  My question is about possible future changes.

[Lynn EA USTCP in Louisiana]

Is your client in the 11th circuit?

[Jack from Ohio]

2 hours ago, lynn EA in Louisiana said:

Is your client in the 11th circuit?

Yes. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down this judgment.

[ILLMAS]

Your client doesn't have tax attorney?  Hopefully your hourly rate is equal to a tax attorney rate, last time my associated contacted a tax attorney, cost him $150 for a 10 minute question.

[RitaB]

2 minutes ago, ILLMAS said:

Your client doesn't have tax attorney?  Hopefully your hourly rate is equal to a tax attorney rate, last time my associated contacted a tax attorney, cost him $150 for a 10 minute question.

 

21 hours ago, Jack from Ohio said:

There is a group of these retired ladies who have enlisted the help of an attorney that thinks he can get it changed.  

Yeah, they have one.  He's gonna get the law changed.  /s

[ILLMAS]

4 minutes ago, RitaB said:

 

Yeah, they have one.  He's gonna get the law changed.  /s

I missed that but good luck.