Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Deferential Review Of The U.S. Tax Court, After Mayo Foundation V. United States (2011), Andre L. Smith
Deferential Review Of The U.S. Tax Court, After Mayo Foundation V. United States (2011), Andre L. Smith
Andre L. Smith
Deferential Review of the U.S. Tax Court, After Mayo examines whether the Chevron doctrine requires federal circuit courts of appeal to deferentially review the U.S. Tax Court decisions of law. Mayo Foundation v. US (2011) rejects tax exceptionalism and requires the U.S. Tax Court to defer to Treasury regulations carrying the force of law. But Mayo avoids dealing with whether Chevron applies to appellate review of the Tax Court. In “The Fight Over ‘Fighting Regs’ and Judicial Deference in Tax Litigation”, 92 B.U. L. Rev. 643 (2012), Professor Leandra Lederman (Indiana) contends that deference belongs to the agency and not …
Formulaically Describing 21st Century Supreme Court Tax Jurisprudence Ii, 2001-2010., Andre L. Smith
Formulaically Describing 21st Century Supreme Court Tax Jurisprudence Ii, 2001-2010., Andre L. Smith
Andre L. Smith
Abstract This article attempts to discover a deliberative formula in matters of taxation by culling the Supreme Court’s 14 federal tax opinions from 2001 to 2010 (Gitlitz v. Commissioner, Cleveland Indians Baseball v. United States, United Dominion Industries v. United States, United States v. Craft, United States v. Fior D’Italia, Boeing v. United States, United States v. Galletti, Banks v. Commissioner, Ballard v. Commissioner, EC Term of Years v. United States, Hinck v. United States, Clintwood Elkhorn v. United States, Knight v. United States, and Boulware v. United States). It continues the project Formulaically Expressing 21st Century Supreme Court Tax …