Suggested approach for judicial interpretation of regulations that grant discretion to taxpayers

Article Abstract:

Judges should interpret tax laws granting taxpayers discretion over such things as how to properly allocate partnership income in taxpayers' favor absent proof that their chosen methods are unreasonable or contravene statutory intent. Taxpayer violations should not be found where the IRS offers better, higher tax-yielding interpretations concerning the requirements of such discretion-standard regulations. Shifting the burden of proof to the IRS to prove unreasonable or inappropriate tax methods is consistent with US Tax Court opinions in Occidental Petroleum Corp v. Commissioner and Shell Oil Co v. Commissioner.

Tax administration and procedure, Tax administration, Tax planning, Public participation, Censorship, Taxpayer compliance

---

Use of industry definitions in interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code: towards a more systematic approach

Article Abstract:

Courts faced with interpreting terms used in the Internal Revenue Code should assume that industry definitions were intended, absent contrary Congressional intent. The Internal Revenue Code should be written to be understood by lay people, not only tax professionals. To the extent a code section is focused on a specific industry, members of the industry can be assumed to be the intended audience. Unless Congress expressly defines a term that also has meaning to an industry, Courts should not deviate from the expected definition that would be assumed by relevant taxpayers.

Tax Law, Public Finance Activities, Interpretation and construction, Law, Terminology, Industry, Industries

---

Senator Moynihan's field of dreams: if you build it, they will come ... but not at the federal taxpayers' expense; a proposal to curb tax-exempt bond financing of sports stadiums

Article Abstract:

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's Stop Tax-Exempt Arena Debt Issuance Act (STADIA) was introduced in the Senate on Jun 14, 1996 in an attempt to minimize the use of federal tax resources to indirectly fund sports stadium construction. Tax-exempt state and local bonds would generally not be available for such funding. The bill has had the effect of encouraging other sources of funding. Reference to a Virginia case study may be useful.

Virginia, Finance, Tax policy, Stadiums, Tax-exempt securities, Moynihan, Daniel Patrick

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Judicial interpretation of state constitutional rights to a healthful environment. The Endangered Species Act: what do we mean by species?
• Abstracts: Guaranteed principal plus interest: the growth of annuity companies
• Abstracts: Seeking a preliminary injunction. Copyright and the franchise. Defeating requests for preliminary injunctive relief in franchise termination cases
• Abstracts: Corporate introspection in the nineties: "to thine own self be true." Personal trading by portfolio managers revisited: the Institute's recommendations a year later
• Abstracts: Eleventh Amendment and Tax Injunction Act preclude court from considering whether ERISA preempts Wisconsin tax law

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.