Facebook Linkedin Twitter
CALL US AT (904) 223-0510
Contact Us

Deferring Tax on Large Contingency Fees: Why the Offshore Annuity Era Is Over

Two ways to defer tax on a big legal fee and why only one of them still
makes sense.

When a contingency case resolves, the attorney’s fee can be the largest single income event of the year — often 33% to 40% of a seven- or eight-figure recovery. Because most firms are cash-method taxpayers, that entire fee is generally taxable the year it’s received, frequently at the 37% top federal rate plus state tax. The instinct to defer is sound. The only real question is how. For years the answer was an offshore annuity. Today that answer is wrong, and there’s a cleaner one.

icon About

A well-structured individual deferred compensation plan can achieve the same tax-deferral goals as an offshore annuity — without the risk, the complexity, or the regulatory scrutiny

The Problem: A Career-Sized Fee, Taxed All at Once

Contingency practice is feast or famine. A firm carries case costs for years, then books an enormous fee in a single twelve-month window. A $3 million fee can mean more than $1.1 million in federal tax alone — and closer to half the fee once a high-tax state is added. None of the usual smoothing tools make a meaningful dent against a number that size.

The fee is firmly ordinary income to the attorney; under Commissioner v. Banks, 543 U.S. 426 (2005), the plaintiff includes the full recovery and the lawyer is taxed on the fee on top of that. So the goal isn’t to escape the tax — it’s to control when it’s paid, spreading the fee, and the tax on it, across future years while the deferred balance keeps working.

There are two well-known ways to do that. They are not equivalent.

Solution One: The Offshore Annuity — Risky and No Longer Appropriate

The old playbook routed the fee into an offshore insurance product — typically domiciled somewhere like the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, or Liechtenstein — structured to push U.S. income recognition into the future. It worked on paper, and it was aggressively marketed. It is no longer a defensible choice, for several reasons:

  • The IRS is actively hunting these. In December 2024 the IRS launched a national enforcement campaign on deferred legal fees (FS-2024-32), stating that its goal is to require contingency fees to be included in income in the year the funds move to the third party. The arrangements it describes — unrelated offshore third parties, payouts pushed decades out — are exactly the offshore profile.
  • Recharacterization risk. A successful IRS challenge collapses the deferral, pulling the entire fee into income now, with accuracy-related penalties and, under a § 409A failure, an additional 20% tax plus interest that has no reasonable-cause defense.
  • A reporting minefield. Offshore structures trigger FBAR, FATCA, and potentially Form 3520, with non-compliance penalties that can equal or exceed the tax savings sought.
  • Opacity and irreversibility. These arrangements are often deliberately hard to read and difficult or impossible to unwind, leaving the attorney exposed for years.
  • Reputational cost. No reputable advisor or firm should be comfortable facilitating an offshore deferral scheme today.

 

In short: the offshore annuity buys deferral by buying risk — legal, financial, and reputational — at a moment when the IRS has put this exact transaction on its target list.

Solution Two: A § 409A Deferred Compensation Plan Through an Independent Entity

The better path keeps everything onshore, transparent, and grounded in settled law. Instead of an offshore obligor, the fee is deferred through a nonqualified deferred compensation arrangement in which an independent domestic entity serves as the obligor:

  • Set it up before the fee right vests. The contingency-fee agreement must permit structuring, and the deferral terms must be in place before the attorney has a fixed, unconditional right to the fee — generally before the settlement is executed. Miss that window and the option disappears.
  • The fee never touches the attorney’s hands. It’s paid directly from the defendant or insurer to the independent entity, which contractually promises to pay the attorney on a defined future schedule.
  • The attorney holds only an unsecured promise. No funded account, no access, no loans, no control. That is what keeps the constructive-receipt and economic-benefit doctrines satisfied rather than circumvented — the same logic the Tax Court blessed in Childs v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 634 (1994), aff’d, 89 F.3d 856 (11th Cir. 1996), which validated deferring contingent fees and has never been overturned.
  • It is built to satisfy § 409A. A valid initial deferral election, permissible distribution events, and no impermissible acceleration. (And because most contingency-fee attorneys serve multiple unrelated clients, many fall within § 409A’s independent-contractor exception in the first place.)
  • Distributions are sequenced for tax efficiency. Payments can be scheduled into lower-income or lower-bracket years — slower stretches in the docket, a move toward retirement, or a relocation to a lower-tax state.

 

Because the obligor is a domestic, identifiable entity and the plan is documented in plain terms, there are no foreign-reporting obligations, nothing opaque for a future advisor or examiner to untangle, and a clear precedential anchor behind the position.

This is not a do-it-yourself exercise, and that is where a qualified financial advisor earns their place. An advisor experienced in fee deferral coordinates the moving parts that have to align before the settlement is signed: vetting the independent obligor’s financial strength behind an unsecured promise, designing a distribution schedule around the attorney’s actual cash-flow and bracket picture, selecting the funding approach — from a fixed structure to market-based growth — that fits the attorney’s risk tolerance, and working alongside tax counsel to keep the arrangement squarely within § 409A. Just as important, the advisor folds the deferred fee into the attorney’s broader retirement, estate, and practice planning, turning a one-time tax decision into a durable part of the financial plan — and flagging large-fee cases early enough that the deferral can still be built into the documents.

The Contrast, Plainly

Both approaches defer the tax. Only one is defensible today.

 

Offshore Annuity

§ 409A Plan / Independent Entity

Legal footing

Positions the IRS is now examining

Grounded in Childs, never overturned

IRS posture

A named enforcement target (FS-2024-32)

Compliant structures are not the campaign’s focus

Reporting

FBAR / FATCA / Form 3520 exposure

No foreign-reporting burden

Transparency

Often deliberately opaque

Plain documents any tax advisor can review

Reversibility

Hard or impossible to unwind

Documented, conventional, reviewable

Reputation

A liability to be associated with

A long-established planning technique

The offshore annuity asks an attorney to accept open-ended legal, reporting, and reputational risk in exchange for deferral. The domestic § 409A plan through an independent entity delivers the same deferral — without any of it.

Conclusion

The era of recommending offshore annuities to defer tax on legal fees is over. The IRS has put the transaction on its enforcement agenda, the reporting obligations are punishing, and the reputational downside is real. A properly structured § 409A deferred compensation plan, with an independent domestic entity as obligor and the fee assigned before the right to it vests, achieves the same goal on solid ground. When both options reach the same destination and only one carries the risk, the choice makes itself.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURE

This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal, tax, or financial advice. Deferred compensation and fee-deferral arrangements involve complex and evolving tax rules, including an active IRS enforcement campaign. Attorneys should consult qualified, independent tax counsel — and consider a Circular 230–compliant opinion — before implementing any fee-deferral strategy. Outcomes vary with individual circumstances, applicable state law, the financial strength of the obligor, and the specific terms of the settlement and deferral documents.

You don’t have to navigate tax strategy alone.

Whether you're years away or ready to make the transition soon, we can help you build a plan tailored to your life.

Get started