Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Accrual Of Gambling Debts Under Internal Revenue Code Section 451, Michigan Law Review
Accrual Of Gambling Debts Under Internal Revenue Code Section 451, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note examines whether an accrual-basis taxpayer must include a legally unenforceable claim in taxable income when it is executed or satisfied. Section I of the Note interprets the "all events test" to require measurement of the likelihood of payment of a debt at the time it is executed: If payment is sufficiently certain, the debt must be accrued. The section concludes that the casinos must include the outstanding markers as income in the year of their execution, and cannot postpone their inclusion until the debts are repaid. Section II argues that accrual-method taxpayers are entitled to use a "bad …
The Decline And Fall Of Taxable Income, Glenn E. Coven
The Decline And Fall Of Taxable Income, Glenn E. Coven
Michigan Law Review
After first exploring the intellectual climate that has facilitated the congressional disregard of taxable income, this Article will examine three areas in which taxable income is no longer the exclusive mechanism for allocating the burden of taxation. That examination will outline the undesirable consequences of the decline of taxable income, and demonstrate that Congress need not have disregarded taxable income to secure the desired pattern of taxation. Because the use of multiple rate schedules constitutes the most significant deviation from the concept of taxable income in terms of the number of taxpayers that it affects and the popular resentment against …
Home Office Deductions: May A Taxpayer Have More Than One Principal Place Of Business?, Michigan Law Review
Home Office Deductions: May A Taxpayer Have More Than One Principal Place Of Business?, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that the Tax Court's more liberal interpretation is correct because it more nearly reflects Congress's intent. Part I seeks a basis for preferring one of the competing interpretations in the text of section 280A and in the section's legislative history, but finds none. Looking, of necessity, to the purposes that Congress sought to advance with section 280A, Part II argues that those purposes do not demand a restrictive reading of "principal place of business." Such a reading, moreover, would undermine fundamental and longstanding congressional tax policies. In the absence of a more explicit statement of congressional intent, …