Tiger Schulmann Karate KO’d by NJ Division of Taxation

Save as PDF

New Jersey’s gross income tax system is unique because (1) it allows few deductions (that’s what they mean by “gross income”) and (2) income is separated into different categories or baskets (such as partnership income, interest income, etc.). Allowable deductions in one basket cannot offset income in another basket. This system can create mismatches with a taxpayer’s federal income tax liability and traps for the unwary.

Danny “Tiger” Schulmann is a successful karate practitioner, instructor and franchiser of karate schools, with over 40 schools in the New York metropolitan area, but he was recently KO’d by New Jersey’s Division of Taxation due to such a mismatch between his income and deductions.

Schulmann created an S corporation management company which provided management services to each karate school. Each karate school in turn was structured as a separate corporation co-owned between Schulmann and the instructor who would run the school. Each instructor also could receive up to 20% commissions when one of his or her students opened a new school.

Schulmann paid the 20% commission from a personal account rather than a business account. He testified that he did this to guarantee the instructors that there would be cash available for the payments, which totaled $863,000 – $1.025 million for the years in question. This was a mistake, however, for New Jersey gross income tax purposes.

The Division of Taxation denied the deductions, taking the position that the commission payments were personal expenses, not S corporation expenses (even though they were obligations of the business). In a January, 2011 opinion, the New Jersey Tax Court agreed, holding fast to the concept that expenses in one category cannot offset income in another category. Having chosen to make the commission payments personally rather than through the business, Schulmann could not avoid the structure when it resulted in unfavorable tax consequences.

Tax advisors, as senseis to their clients, should guide them with care through the challenging tests of New Jersey’s income tax system.

As the law continues to evolve on these matters, please note that this article is current as of date and time of publication and may not reflect subsequent developments. The content and interpretation of the issues addressed herein is subject to change. Cole Schotz P.C. disclaims any and all liability with respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the contents of this publication to the fullest extent permitted by law. This is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. Do not act or refrain from acting upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining legal, financial and tax advice. For further information, please do not hesitate to reach out to your firm contact or to any of the attorneys listed in this publication.

Join Our Mailing List

Stay up to date with the latest insights, events, and more

Check all areas of law you are interested in receiving e-newsletters and alerts about:(Required)
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Our Practices



Our Industries