Paul H. Frankel

Senior Partner

New York, (212) 468-8034

Download vCard

Education

Dartmouth College (B.A., 1958)
;
University of Virginia School of Law (J.D., 1961)
;
New York University School of Law (LL.M., 1965)

Practices

State + Local Tax

Federal Tax Controversy

Appellate + Supreme Court

Bar Admissions

Virginia
New Jersey
New York

Paul Frankel is a partner in the firm's Tax Department and State and Local Tax Group. He has represented taxpayers in major tax controversies in nearly all of the 50 states. He has negotiated settlements in hundreds of cases and won significant state Supreme Court cases in Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, and North Carolina. At lower levels he has won dozens of cases, including public record victories with important issues. He has continually fought for due process for industry, particularly for the replacement of internal hearing officer systems with independent, prepayment state tax court.

Mr. Frankel is recommended by Chambers USA 2011 in Tax Controversy, and is described by clients as "very sharp; definitely one of the top state and local tax attorneys." He was also recommended as a "leading lawyer" by Legal 500 US 2011.

Mr. Frankel has served as National Chairman of Tax Executive Institute's (TEI) State and Local Steering Committee, Chairman of the Council on State Taxation (COST) Lawyer's Coordinating Subcommittee and Chairman of the National Foreign Trade Council's Worldwide Unitary Task Force. He is currently Chairman of Tax Management Inc.'s State Tax Advisory Board; a member of the New York City Tax Appeals Tribunal Advisory Committee, the CCH State Tax Advisory Board and the NYU Institute's State and Local Advisory Board; and co-chair of the NYU State Tax Forum. He is has authored many articles and is an editorial board member of the Multistate Tax Analyst and the Interstate Tax Insight.

Prior to joining Morrison & Foerster, Mr. Frankel was Senior Tax Counsel at W.R. Grace & Co. and a senior trial attorney for the IRS Regional Counsel's Office.

General Mills v. Franchise Tax Board

Represent General Mills in a closely watched case involving the calculation of the sales factor for apportioning interstate income for a company involved in hedging operations. On April 15, 2009, the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, decided General Mills v. Franchise Tax Board. The decision became final on July 30, 2009, following the California Supreme Court's denial of the Franchise Tax Board's petition for review. The court agreed with General Mills in holding that “[the full sales price of General Mills’ hedging futures sales contracts are ‘gross receipts’ to be included in the calculation of the UDITPA sales factor.” The Court of Appeal, therefore, reversed the trial court’s conclusion to the contrary, and remanded the case to the trial court for a ruling on “whether the Franchise Tax Board met its burden of proving that the apportionment formula does not ‘fairly represent’ General Mills’ business activity within California, thus warranting imposition of an alternative formula pursuant to section 25137.”

ABB C-E Nuclear Power, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, SC87811

(State Supreme Court, Missouri). We demonstrated to the Missouri Supreme Court that the gain recognized by a corporation from the sale of a subsidiary in an IRC Section 338(h)(10) transaction constituted non-business income for Missouri tax purposes.

Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Commissioner of Revenue, 778 N.E.2d 504

(State Supreme Court, Massachusetts). Won a favorable outcome for Sherwin-Williams Co. The highest court in Massachusetts held that companies may legally reorganize themselves and, as long as the reorganization has economic substance, it must be respected for tax purposes even if the new structure also provides tax benefits.

State Tax Settlement for Major Chemical Company.

Favorably settled a major state tax case in a Midwestern state for a national chemical company, resulting in complete elimination of the asserted deficiency.

Kroger Co. v. Fisher

(District Court, City and County of Denver). Successfully rebutted the Department of Revenue's attempt to forcibly combine The Kroger Co. with certain affiliated companies in a case of first impression in the Colorado courts.

Osram Sylvania, Inc. v. Pennsylvania

(Pennsylvania Supreme Court). Won affirmation from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on the decision of the Commonwealth Court, which held that the gain from a Section 338(h)(10) election constituted non-business income for Pennsylvania corporate net income tax purposes.