Law Commons^™

Revisiting The Taxation Of Punitive Damages, Gregg D. Polsky, Dan Markel

Scholarly Works

In our recent article, Taxing Punitive Damages, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1421879, we argued (1) that plaintiffs in punitive damages cases should be allowed to introduce to the jury evidence regarding the deductibility of those damages by defendants, and (2) that this jury tax-awareness approach is better than the Obama Administration’s suggested alternative of disallowing those deductions.

To our delight, Professor Larry Zelenak and Paul Mogin have each provided published comments to our piece on Virginia Law Review's In Brief companion website. Professor Zelenak’s thoughtful response focuses on our prescriptive claim that jury tax-awareness is better than nondeductibility, while Mr. Mogin disputes …

The Proposed Domestic Reverse Hybrid Entity Regulations: Can The Treasury Department Override Treaties?, Anthony C. Infanti

Articles

This article first describes the proposed regulations issued under section 894 addressing the ability of domestic reverse hybrid entities to claim treaty benefits with respect to payments made to their interest holders (the proposed DRH regulations). After describing the proposed DRH regulations, the article next explores the potential that these regulations have to override existing U.S. treaty obligations. After concluding that the proposed DRH regulations are inconsistent with at least one existing treaty, the article concludes by questioning the power of the Treasury Department to promulgate regulations (such as the proposed DRH regulations) that override treaties.

Note: This is a …

Crumbs For Oliver Twist: Resolving The Conflict Between Tax And Support Claims In Bankruptcy, Michelle A. Cecil

Faculty Publications

This article is premised on the assumption that the congressional goal of preferring support claims over federal income tax claims is indeed a laudable one, based on three interrelated policy justifications. First, support claimants are unable to spread their risk of loss like the government is able to do by raising tax rates or increasing tax revenue from other sources. As three prominent bankruptcy scholars noted in their recent study of consumer bankruptcy entitled The Fragile Middle Class: Americans in Debt:

Tax Expenditures, Social Justice And Civil Rights: Expanding The Scope Of Civil Rights Laws To Apply To Tax-Exempt Charities, David A. Brennen

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In recent years, courts have decided a number of cases in which private organizations discriminated against people based solely on their race, gender, sexual orientation, or other immutable traits. For example, in 2000, the Boy Scouts of America revoked a New Jersey man's membership in the Boy Scouts because he was gay. New Jersey's supreme court held that the Boy Scouts' action violated New Jersey's anti-discrimination law. Notwithstanding the state court's holding, the United States Supreme Court concluded that the First Amendment prevented any court from forcing the Boy Scouts to keep a gay man as a member of its …

First Bite And The Private Benefit Doctrine: A Comment On Temporary And Proposed Regulation 53.4958-4t(A)(3), Darryll K. Jones

Journal Publications

The purpose of this article, then, is first to show how the Service's concession to the first bite rule, without a corresponding restatement of the private benefit doctrine, renders the public powerless to prevent a charity's distribution of profit in certain significant circumstances. In the absence of corrective action, the more aggressive and savvy charities will quickly recognize and exploit the loophole. Second, the article discusses and refines a proposal I have previously made concerning a restatement of the private benefit doctrine in a manner that would close the loophole. Since the private benefit doctrine is very closely related to …

The Use And Misuse Of Antiabuse Rules: Lessons From The Partnership Antiabuse Regulations, Alan Gunn

Journal Articles

Subchapter K of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code was designed to achieve simplicity and flexibility in taxing partners. To limit this flexibility the regulations under subchapter K contain "antiabuse rules", aimed at insuring that subchapter K rules are applied consistently, with the "intent" of those rules in mind and allowing the Commissioner to treat a partnership as an aggregate of its partners in applying any Internal Revenue Code provision. Though antiabuse rules have received harsh criticism for being badly written, they are valuable in many ways. Such rules define abuse as something distinct in principle from substance-over-form and business purpose …