Law Commons^™

Thoughts Regarding The Application Of The Step Transaction Doctrine To The Section 351 Control Requirement And Complex Media, Inc. V. Commissioner, Philip G. Cohen

William & Mary Business Law Review

Over thirty years ago, Professor Ronald H. Jensen authored an article in the Virginia Tax Review, titled “Of Form and Substance: Tax Free Incorporations and Other Transactions Under Section 351.” Professor Jensen asserted that it was inappropriate to utilize the step transaction doctrine to determine whether the control requirement was met in a purported section 351 transaction, involving a disposition of some, or all, of the transferor’s shares even if effected by a binding contract made prior to the contribution.

Professor Jensen concluded that the courts and the Internal Revenue Service (Service) have produced a hodgepodge of intellectually inconsistent decisions …

Why The Congressional Review Act Should Be Repealed, Alex Lipow

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

The Congressional Review Act (“CRA”) is a procedure that allows the political branches to quickly repeal certain regulations promulgated by administrative agencies without going through the arduous rule-making process traditionally required. Although it had been successfully used only once before 2017, President Trump and Republicans in Congress used the CRA to repeal sixteen regulations in 2017 and 2018 while President Biden and Democrats in Congress used the CRA three times in 2021. Because the CRA has been used rarely, and its central provisions are barely adjudicated in the judiciary, there are interesting legal questions about how expansively the law may …

Blurred Lines: Disparate Impact And Disparate Treatment Challenges To Subjective Decisions-- The Case Of Reductions In Force, Allan King, Alexandra Hemenway

William & Mary Business Law Review

Subjective employment decisions may be challenged under disparate treatment (intentional discrimination) and/or disparate impact (the discriminatory consequences of a neutral policy) theories of discrimination. However, these theories and supporting evidence often are conflated when the criteria for selecting employees are ill-defined or unrecorded. In those instances, the process by which employees are selected merges with the selections themselves, these legal theories converge as well. This Article critically discusses how courts have struggled to distinguish these theories in cases alleging a discriminatory reduction in force. It suggests how these cases should be submitted to juries, to preserve the liability and remedies …