Kenneth Boiarsky
Senior Tax Counsel

E-Mail
ken@hoban.law
Office(s)

Ken Boiarsky is an AV® (highest) rated attorney specializing in Federal tax matters, with an emphasis on audit, controversy, and litigation aspects. For nearly 15 years he served as a twice-decorated Outstanding Trial Attorney with the Tax Division of the US Department of Justice in DC, where he dealt with IRS matters at just about every level and developed an intimate knowledge of the internal thinking. Thereafter he became a partner in a Houston law firm, followed by the formation of his own firm, representing a broad range of individual, partnership, trust, and corporate clients, including his recent retentions as an expert tax consultant for 7 years by the international accounting firm, KPMG, and as lead trial counsel representing over 100 former partners of another international accounting firm, Ernst & Young, in tax litigation spanning 9 years. Ken has handled 300+ matters before the IRS involving collection, audit, and controversy, and has litigated 50+ cases with an aggregate amount in issue exceeding $200 million.

Ken is a proud father of 3 with 4 grandchildren. His wife Ava, a former journalist, is a serial entrepreneur and venture capitalist.

Ken holds an LL.M. in Tax from New York University, and a J. D. and B.Sc. in Accounting (and a member of Beta Alpha Psi, the accounting honorary) from Ohio State University, is a member of the Texas, Ohio, and DC bars, and the bars of the US Supreme Court, US Courts of Appeal for the Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits, US Court of Federal Claims, US Tax Court, and US District Courts for the Southern and Western Districts of Texas.  Besides his legal education, he also holds a B.A. in music (pipe organ) from George Washington University, which he earned while in DC at DOJ.

Ken has a particular interest in the planning and litigating aspects of IRC §280E, which for good reason occupy a central position in cannabusiness consideration. Because of the potentially draconian impact of this provision, he has devoted special attention to the relevant structuring and substantive business planning considerations that will maximize the client position and minimize negative impact.

A few exemplary cases:

  • Cancino v. US, 451 F. 2d 1028 (Fed. Cir. 1971), involving the Marijuana Tax Act.
  • Gillum v. Comm'r, 100 T.C.M. 562 (2010), 676 F.3d 633 (8th Cir. 2012), involving a Collection Due Process matter.
  • Hartman v. U.S., 99 Fed. Cl. 168 (2011), 694 F.3d 96 (Fed.Cir., 2012), involving a "constructive receipt" issue