One observation from practitioners advising clients on OZ investment structures: the permanence question directly impacts the viability of multi-year development plans. Clear guidelines on zone reselection cycles—as you mention for 10-year intervals—would help stakeholders model returns with greater certainty, particularly in secondary and tertiary markets where the risk-adjusted calculations are tighter.

For entrepreneurs and small business owners exploring OZ opportunities for the first time, understanding the legal entity structure requirements (including Wyoming LLC strategies) alongside the tax benefits is crucial. Resources focused on Wyoming LLC formation can help business owners optimize their entity structure before committing capital to QOF investments.

Looking forward to seeing how the renewed policy framework addresses rural zones and the basis step-up incentives introduced in recent legislation.”

First, I very much appreciate the Galle and Shay article. Lots of food for thought by scholars who have thought about the issues.

One thing I quibble about (as you know I am a quibbler) in your discussion is the following: “On the other hand, it’s hard to think of cases where Treasury or the IRS has deviated from the statute at taxpayers’ expense.”

The relatively recent and persistent taxpayer attacks on IRS statatutory interpretations (setting aside the legislative v interpretive issue) suggests that taxpayers at least think the IRS deviates often from the statute at taxpayers’ expense.

Even when the attack on the interpretation is a procedural one (such as failure to properly promulgate a notice and comment regulation), the attack will do no good if the interpretation is the best reading of the statute. The IRS validity of the N&C regulation (or even subregulatory guidance) doesn’t make any difference if the interpretation is the best reading of the statute. And if the interpretation qualifies for Chevron deference (meaning at a minimum that, if a regulation, it was validly promulgated), the IRS interpretation can still prevail with Chevron deference (that at least theoretical (more imagined than real) band of Chevron applications where a court defers to an agency interpretation that is less persuasive than the court’s real or imagined best interpretation).

My point, though, addressing your claim that Treasury and the IRS does not deviate from the statute at taxpayer’s expense is belied by the prolific and increasing claims for the invalidity of IRS interpretations that taxpayers think are at taxpayers’ expense..

Keep up the good work.

Jack Townsend