§ 1.162-21. Denial of deduction for certain fines, penalties, and other amounts.

¶(i) An amount that is paid or incurred in relation to the violation of any civil or criminal law includes a fine or penalty.

¶(ii) An investigation or inquiry into the potential violation of any law does not include routine investigations or inquiries, such as audits or inspections, of regulated businesses that are not related to any evidence of wrongdoing or suspected wrongdoing, but are conducted to ensure compliance with the rules and regulations applicable to those businesses.

¶(i) In general. A court order (order) or an agreement, as defined in paragraph (e)(5) of this section, identifies a payment by stating the nature of, or purpose for, each payment each taxpayer is obligated to pay and the amount of each payment identified.

¶(ii) Meeting the identification requirement. The identification requirement is met if an order or agreement specifically states the amount of the payment described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section and that the payment constitutes restitution, remediation, or an amount paid to come into compliance with a law. If the order or agreement uses a different form of the required words (such as “remediate” or “comply with a law”) and describes the purpose for which restitution or remediation will be paid or the law with which the taxpayer must comply, the order or agreement will be treated as stating that the payment constitutes restitution, remediation, or an amount paid to come into compliance with a law. Similarly, if an order or agreement specifically describes the damage done, harm suffered, or manner of noncompliance with a law and describes the action required of the taxpayer to provide restitution, remediation, or to come into compliance with any law, as defined in paragraph (e)(4) of this section, the order or agreement will be treated as stating that the payment constitutes restitution, remediation, or an amount paid to come into compliance with any law. Meeting the establishment requirement of paragraph (b)(3) of this section alone is not sufficient to meet the identification requirement of paragraph (b)(2) of this section.

¶(iii) Payment amount not identified.

¶(i) Meeting the establishment requirement. The establishment requirement is met if the taxpayer, using documentary evidence, proves the taxpayer's legal obligation, pursuant to the order or agreement, to pay the amount identified as restitution, remediation, or to come into compliance with a law; the amount paid or incurred; the date the amount was paid or incurred; and that, based on the origin of the liability and the nature and purpose of the amount paid or incurred, the amount the taxpayer paid or incurred was for restitution or remediation, as defined in paragraph (e)(4)(i) of this section or to come into compliance with any law, as defined in paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section. If the amount is paid or incurred to a segregated fund or account, as described in paragraphs (e)(4)(i)(A)(2) and (3), (e)(4)(i)(B), or (e)(4)(i)(C) of this section, the taxpayer may meet the establishment requirement even if each ultimate recipient, or each ultimate use, of the payment is not designated or is unknown. A taxpayer will not meet the establishment requirement if the taxpayer fails to prove that the taxpayer paid or incurred the amount identified as restitution, remediation, or to come into compliance with a law; the amount paid; the date the amount was paid or incurred; or that the amount the taxpayer paid or incurred was for the nature and purpose identified in the order or agreement as required by paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, or was made for the damage done, harm suffered, noncompliance, or to provide property or services as described in (b)(2)(iii) of this section. Meeting the identification requirement of paragraph (b)(2) of this section is not sufficient to meet the establishment requirement of paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

¶(ii) Substantiating the establishment requirement. The documentary evidence described in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section includes, but is not limited to, receipts; the legal or regulatory provision related to the violation or potential violation of any law; documents issued by the government or governmental entity relating to the investigation or inquiry, including court pleadings filed by the government or governmental entity requesting restitution, remediation, or demanding that defendant take action to come into compliance with the law; judgment; decree; documents describing how the amount to be paid was determined; and correspondence exchanged between the taxpayer and the government or governmental entity before the order or agreement became binding under applicable law, determined without regard to whether all appeals have been exhausted or the time for filing an appeal has expired.

¶(i) A tax benefit to the taxpayer includes a reduction in the taxpayer's tax liability for a prior taxable year or the creation of a net operating loss carryback or carryover.

¶(ii) A taxpayer's recovery of any amount deducted in a prior taxable year includes, but is not limited to—

¶(i) The government of the United States, a State, or the District of Columbia;

¶(ii) The government of a territory of the United States, including American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands;

¶(iii) The government of a foreign country;

¶(iv) An Indian tribal government, as defined in section 7701(a)(40), or a subdivision of an Indian tribal government, as determined in accordance with section 7871(d); or

¶(v) A political subdivision (such as a local government unit) of a government described in paragraph (e)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section.

¶(i) A corporation or other entity serving as an agency or instrumentality of a government (as defined in paragraph (e)(1) of this section), or

¶(ii) A nongovernmental entity treated as a governmental entity as described in paragraph (e)(3) of this section.

¶(i) Exercises self-regulatory powers (including imposing sanctions) in connection with a qualified board or exchange, as defined in section 1256(g)(7); or

¶(ii) Exercises self-regulatory powers, including adopting, administering, or enforcing rules and imposing sanctions, as part of performing an essential governmental function.

¶(i) Amounts for restitution or remediation. An amount is paid or incurred for restitution or remediation pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section if it is paid or incurred to restore, in whole or in part, the person, as defined in section 7701(a)(1); government; governmental entity; property; environment; wildlife; or natural resources harmed, injured, or damaged by the violation or potential violation of any law described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section to the same or substantially similar position or condition as existed prior to such harm, injury or damage.

¶(ii) Amounts to come into compliance with a law. An amount is paid or incurred to come into compliance with a law that the taxpayer has violated, or is alleged to have violated, by performing services; taking action, such as modifying equipment; providing property; or doing any combination thereof to come into compliance with that law.

¶(iii) Amounts not included. Regardless of whether the order or agreement identifies them as such, restitution, remediation, and amounts paid to come into compliance with a law do not include any amount paid or incurred—

¶(i) Facts. Corp. A enters into an agreement with State Y's environmental enforcement agency (Agency) for violating state environmental laws. Pursuant to the agreement, Corp. A pays $40X to the Agency in civil penalties, $80X in restitution for the environmental harm that the taxpayer has caused, $50X for remediation of contaminated sites, and $60X to conduct comprehensive upgrades to Corp. A's operations to come into compliance with the state environmental laws.

¶(ii) Analysis. The identification requirement is satisfied for those amounts the agreement identifies as restitution, remediation, or to come into compliance with a law. If Corp. A meets the establishment requirement, as provided in paragraph (b)(3), paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. A's deduction for $80X in restitution and $50X for remediation. Under paragraph (a) of this section, Corp. A may not deduct the $40X in civil penalties. Paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. A's deduction for the $60X paid to come into compliance with the state environmental laws. See section 161, concerning items allowed as deductions, and section 261, concerning items for which no deduction is allowed, and the regulations related to sections 161 and 261.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. A enters into an agreement with State T's securities agency (Agency) for violating a securities law by inducing B to make a $100X investment in Corp. C stock, which B lost when the Corp. C stock became worthless. As part of the agreement, Corp. A agrees to pay $100X to B as restitution for B's investment loss, incurred as a result of Corp. A's actions. The agreement specifically states that the $100X payment by Corp. A to B is restitution. The agreement also requires Corp. A to pay a $40X penalty for violating Agency law. Corp. A pays the $140X.

¶(ii) Analysis. Corp. A's $100X payment to B is identified in the agreement as restitution. If Corp. A establishes, as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, that the amount paid was for that purpose, paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. A's deduction for the $100X payment. Under paragraph (a) of this section, Corp. A may not deduct its $40X payment to the Agency because it was paid for Corp. A's violation of Agency law.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. B is under investigation by State X's environmental enforcement agency for a potential violation of State X's law governing emissions standards. Corp. B enters into an agreement with State X under which it agrees to upgrade the engines in a fleet of vehicles that Corp. B operates to come into compliance with State X's law. Although the agreement does not provide the specific amount Corp. B will incur to upgrade the engines to come into compliance with State X's law, it identifies that Corp. B must upgrade existing engines to lower certain emissions. Under the agreement, Corp. B also agrees to construct a nature center in a local park for the benefit of the community. Instead of paying $12X, to come into compliance with State X's law, Corp. B pays $15X to upgrade the engines to a standard higher than that which the law requires. Corp. B presents evidence to establish that it would cost $12X to upgrade the engines to come into compliance with State X's law.

¶(ii) Analysis. Because the agreement describes the specific action Corp. B must take to come into compliance with State X's law, and Corp. B provides evidence, as described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, to establish that the agreement obligates it to incur costs to come into compliance with a law, paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. B's deduction for the $12X Corp. B incurs to come into compliance. Corp. B may also deduct the $3X if it is otherwise deductible under chapter 1 of the Code. However, Corp. B may not deduct the amounts paid to construct the nature center because no facts exist to establish that the amount was paid either to come into compliance with a law or as restitution or remediation.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. D enters into an agreement with governmental entity, Trade Agency, for engaging in unfair trade practices in violation of Trade Agency laws. The agreement requires Corp. D to pay $80X to a Trade Agency fund, through disgorgement of net profits, to be used exclusively to pay restitution to the consumers harmed by Corp. D's violation of Trade Agency law. Corp. D pays $80X to Trade Agency fund and Trade Agency disburses all amounts in the restitution fund to the harmed consumers.

¶(ii) Analysis. The agreement identifies the $80X payment to the fund as restitution. Trade Agency uses the funds exclusively to provide restitution to the harmed consumers and does not use it for discretionary or general enforcement purposes. If Corp. D establishes, as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, that the $80X constitutes restitution under paragraph (e)(4)(i)(B) of this section, paragraph (a) of this section does not apply.

¶(i) Facts. B, a regulated banking institution, is subject to the supervision of, and annual examinations by governmental entity, R. In the ordinary course of its business, B is required to pay annual assessment fees to R, which fees are used to support R in supervising and examining banking institutions to ensure a safe and sound banking system. Following an annual examination conducted in the ordinary course of B's business, R issues a letter to B identifying concerns with B's internal compliance functions. B takes corrective action to address R's concerns by investing in its internal compliance functions. R does not conduct an investigation or inquiry into B's potential violation of any law.

¶(ii) Analysis. The payment of annual assessment fees by B to R in the ordinary course of business is not related to the violation of any law or the investigation or inquiry into the potential violation of any law. In addition, B's costs of taking the corrective action are not related to the violation of any law or the investigation or inquiry into the potential violation of any law as described in section 162(f)(1). Paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow the deduction of the annual assessment fees and the cost of the corrective actions.

¶(i) Facts. B, a regulated banking institution, is subject to the supervision of, and annual examinations by governmental entity, R. Following an annual examination conducted in the ordinary course of B's business, R pursues an enforcement action against B for violation of banking laws. B and R enter a settlement agreement, pursuant to which B agrees to undertake certain improvements to come into compliance with banking laws and to pay R $20X for violation of banking laws. B pays the $20X.

¶(ii) Analysis. If the agreement meets the identification requirement of paragraph (b)(2) of this section and B meets the establishment requirement of paragraph (b)(3) of this section, paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow the deduction of the costs of the corrective actions to come into compliance with banking laws. However, B may not deduct the $20X paid to R because the amount was not paid to come into compliance with a law or as restitution or remediation.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. C contracts with governmental entity, Q, to design and build a rail project within five years. Corp. C does not complete the project. Q sues Corp. C for breach of contract and damages of $10X. A jury finds Corp. C breached the contract and Corp. C pays $10X to Q.

¶(ii) Analysis. The suit arose out of a proprietary contract, wherein Q enforced its rights as a private party. Paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. C's deduction of the payment of $10X pursuant to this suit.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. C contracts with governmental entity, Q, to design and build a rail project within five years. Site conditions cause construction delays and Corp. C asks Q to pay $50X in excess of the contracted amount to complete the project. After Q pays for the work, it learns that, at the time it entered the contract with Corp. C, Corp. C knew that certain conditions at the project site would make it challenging to complete the project within five years. Q sues Corp. C for withholding critical information during contract negotiations in violation of the False Claims Act (FCA). The court enters a judgment in favor of Q pursuant to which Corp. C will pay Q $50X in restitution and $150X in treble damages. Corp. C pays the $200X.

¶(ii) Analysis. The suit pertains to Corp. C's violation of the FCA. The order identifies the $50X Corp. C is required to pay as restitution, as described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. If Corp. C establishes, as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, that the amount paid was for restitution, paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. C's deduction for the $50X payment. Under paragraph (a) of this section, Corp. C may not deduct the $150X paid for the treble damages imposed for violation of the FCA because the order did not identify all or part of the payment as restitution.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. T operates a truck fleet company incorporated in State A. State A requires that all vehicles registered in State A have a vehicle emissions test every two years. Corp. T's 40 trucks take the emissions test on March 1 for which it pays the $15 per vehicle. Under State A law, if a vehicle fails the emissions test, the vehicle owner has 30 days to certify to State A that the vehicle has been repaired and has passed the emissions test. State A imposes a $1X penalty per vehicle for failure to comply with this 30-day rule. Twenty trucks pass; twenty trucks fail. Corp. T does not submit the required certification to State A for the twenty trucks that failed the emissions test. State A imposes a $40X penalty against Corp. T. Corp. T pays the $40X.

¶(ii) Analysis. Emissions tests are conducted in the ordinary course of operating a truck fleet company and, therefore, paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to the $600 Corp. T pays for the emissions tests. However, Corp. T may not deduct the $40X penalty for failure to comply with State A requirements because the amount is required to be paid to a government in relation to the violation of a law.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. G operates a chain of 20 grocery stores in County X. Under County X health and food safety code and regulations, Corp. G is subject to annual inspections for which Corp. G is required to pay an inspection fee of $40 per store. Pursuant to the annual inspection, the County X health inspector finds violations of County X's health and food safety code and regulations in three of Corp. G's 20 stores. County X bills Corp. G $800 for the annual inspection fees for the 20 stores and a $1,000 fine for each of the three stores, for a total fine of $3,000, for violations of the health and food safety code. Corp. G pays the fees and fines.

¶(ii) Analysis. Paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. G's deduction for the $800 inspection fees paid in the ordinary course of a regulated business. Under paragraph (a) of this section, Corp. G may not deduct the $3,000 fine for violation of the County X health code and food safety ordinances because it was paid to a government in relation to the violation of a law.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. G operates a chain of grocery stores in County X. Under County X health and food safety code and regulations, Corp. G is subject to annual inspections. Pursuant to an annual inspection, the County X health inspector finds that the refrigeration system in one of Corp. G's stores does not keep food at the temperature required by the health and food safety code and regulations. The County X health inspector issues a warning letter instructing Corp. G to correct the violation and bring the refrigeration system into compliance with the law before a reinspection in 60 days or face the imposition of fines if it fails to comply. Corp. G pays $10,000 to bring its refrigeration system into compliance with the law.

¶(ii) Analysis. Provided the identification and establishment requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3), respectively, of this section are met, paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Corp. G's deduction for the $10,000 it pays to bring its refrigeration system into compliance with the law.

¶(i) Facts. Corp. G operates a chain of grocery stores in County X. Under County X health and food safety code and regulations, Corp. G is subject to annual inspections. Pursuant to an annual inspection, the County X health inspector finds that the refrigeration system in one of Corp. G's stores does not keep food at the temperature required by the health and food safety code and regulations. The County X health inspector issues a warning letter instructing Corp. G to correct the violation and bring the refrigeration system into compliance with the law before a reinspection in 60 days or face the imposition of fines if it fails to comply. The County X health inspector later reinspects the refrigeration system. Corp. G pays a reinspection fee of $80. During the reinspection, the health inspector finds that Corp. G did not bring its refrigeration system into compliance with the law. The health inspector issues a citation imposing a $250 fine on Corp. G. Corp. G pays the $250 fine.

¶(ii) Analysis. Paragraph (a) of this section will disallow Corp. G's deduction for the $80 inspection fee because it is paid in relation to the investigation or inquiry by County X into the potential violation of a law. Paragraph (a) of this section will also disallow Corp. G's deduction for the $250 fine paid for violation of the law.

¶(i) Facts. Accounting Firm was convicted of embezzling $500X from Bank in violation of State X law. The court issued an order requiring Accounting Firm to pay $100X in restitution to Bank. The court also issued an order of forfeiture and restitution for $400X, which was seized by the State X officials. Accounting Firm paid $100X to Bank. The $400X seized was deposited with Fund within the State X treasury and, at the discretion of the State X Attorney General, was used to support law enforcement programs.

¶(ii) Analysis. Although the order identified the amount forfeited as restitution, paragraph (a) of this section will disallow Accounting Firm's deduction for the $400X forfeited because, under paragraph (e)(4)(i)(B)(I) of this section, it does not constitute restitution. If Accounting Firm establishes, as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, that the $100X constitutes restitution under paragraph (e)(4)(i), paragraph (a) of this section will not disallow Accounting Firm's deduction for the $100X paid, provided the $100X is otherwise deductible under chapter 1.