Medtronic, Inc. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

I concur in full with Judge Wollman's opinion. As it recounts, when selecting the Pacesetter-Medtronic US agreement as a comparable uncontrolled transaction ("CUT"), the tax court did not sufficiently address: (1) the fact it arose out of litigation; (2) the lump sum payment that was a part of it; (3) the cross-licenses that were a part of it; and (4) certain intangibles that *616were not part of it.3 I write separately to make two additional points. First , not only are those factors important to ensure adequate appellate review, but the applicable Treasury Guidelines mandate that they be…