Getting a cell phone ticket can cost you significant fines and points on your license. It can also make it more difficult for drivers who depend on driving for a living, such as taxi, Lyft, and Uber drivers, to keep their jobs. It can even impact drivers who operate commercial vehicles and hold CDL licenses. The best way to avoid the negative effects of a traffic ticket is by working with an experienced NYC Cell Phone Ticket Lawyer. Cell Phone Ticket Lawyer NYC

As one of the busiest cities in the world, New York City deals with a high volume of traffic tickets. Cellphone tickets in NYC are handled by the Traffic Violations Bureau (TVB). The TVB does not allow plea bargains and requires a higher level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to convict.

Legal Defense for Cell Phone Tickets in NYC

There are many ways that you can fight a NYC Cell Phone Ticket, but it is important to read the ticket thoroughly and consult with a traffic attorney before deciding whether or not to contest the charge. If you choose to do so, you must also attend any required hearings.

New York state law defines what constitutes use of a portable electronic device while driving in two specific laws, VTL 1225-c and VTL 1225-d. These laws cover the classic talking on-the-phone situation as well as holding or looking at devices, such as laptops, tablets, GPS devices, and more. It can be challenging to understand the legal definition of “use” but our NYC cell phone ticket lawyers will take the time to listen closely, determine the facts, and craft a strong legal defense.

Sale Leaseback Transactions

The sale-leaseback strategy provides both tax and financial benefits to both the corporation and the controlling shareholder. The sale and subsequent lease back of an appreciated fixed asset allows the corporation to recognize gains and depreciation deductions, while preserving cash which can be used for operations or invested for higher yields. For the controlling shareholder, IRS Implications on Sale Leaseback Transactions offer an immediate infusion of cash and a reduction of operating debt on the balance sheet. In addition, the lease payments are generally deductible to the extent of business interest.

However, the Internal Revenue Service (Service) will likely scrutinize these transactions to ensure that the taxpayer is not merely using the structure as a disguised loan and that the assets are being used for business purposes. Depending on how the transaction is judged, the taxpayer could be required to pay capital gains taxes, recapture of accelerated depreciation, or have only a portion of the lease payment deductible as investment interest.

IRS Implications on Sale Leaseback Transactions

The Service’s primary focus in making the determination whether to respect a sale-leaseback transaction is its economic substance analysis. This analysis considers three focal points: (1) whether the purported sale and leaseback are multiparty; (2) if the parties’ interests are aligned; and (3) if the interests of the seller/lessee, B Corp, and the buyer/lessor, D Corp, express themselves contractually. Where the interests do not support the form of a sale-leaseback or warrant alternative characterization, such as a section 301(c) distribution and contribution to capital, the Service will not respect the transaction.

A company may need access to the cash tied up in a real estate asset to finance business expansion, reduce debt or return capital to shareholders. A sale leaseback arrangement provides a way to do this while allowing the corporation to continue occupying the asset and deducting rent payments as a business expense.

Sale Leaseback Financing Options are an alternative to traditional debt financing, which can have less lenient loan to value (LTV) and debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) requirements. For example, an LTV and DSCR requirement of 80% or higher may prevent the seller-lessor from obtaining financing for a purchase price that is lower than its carrying amount.

Sale Leaseback Financing Options

In a sale and leaseback arrangement, the seller-lessor retains legal title to the asset. However, the transaction may also contain a right-of-use interest in the underlying asset. It is important to evaluate whether this right-of-use is in place and that control has transferred. See RR 8.7 for guidance on this evaluation.

Some sale and leaseback transactions contain a put option for the buyer-lessor to repurchase the asset at a specified future date. These put options must be evaluated to determine if the transfer is a sale, and thus not reportable as a lease. An analysis should include an assessment of whether the buyer-lessor has a significant economic incentive to exercise the put option, and whether the repurchase price is expected to significantly exceed the market value of the asset at the time of repurchase.