Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Admissions (1)
- Affirmative action (1)
- African Americans (1)
- Classifications (1)
- Constitution (1)
-
- Constitutional amendments (1)
- Corporate tax (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Democracy (1)
- Diversity (1)
- Equal protection clause (1)
- Equality (1)
- Freedom (1)
- Income tax (1)
- Individuals (1)
- Internal Revenue Code (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Justice (1)
- Law schools (1)
- Legislative History (1)
- Legislative purpose (1)
- Minorities (1)
- Preferences (1)
- Race (1)
- Race and law (1)
- Racial classifications (1)
- Smith v. Cahoon (1)
- Tax consequences (1)
- Tax liability (1)
- Transfers (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Definition Of "Liabilities" In Code Sections 357 And 358(D), Douglas A. Kahn, Dale A. Oesterle
A Definition Of "Liabilities" In Code Sections 357 And 358(D), Douglas A. Kahn, Dale A. Oesterle
Articles
Internal Revenue Code section 351(a) provides that no gain or loss shall be recognized if property is transferred to a corporation solely in exchange for its stock or securities and the transferors control the corporation immediately after the exchange. If, in addition to receiving stock or securities in an exchange that would otherwise qualify for section 351 treatment, a transferor receives other property or money -- "boot" -- any realized gain is recognized up to the amount of the money and the fair market value of the other property received. The transferee corporation's assumption of the transferor's liabilities or its …
Racial Preferences In Higher Education: Political Responsibility And The Judicial Role, Terrance Sandalow
Racial Preferences In Higher Education: Political Responsibility And The Judicial Role, Terrance Sandalow
Articles
Controversy continues unabated over the question left unresolved by DeFunis v. Odegaard: whether in its admissions process a state law school may accord preferential treatment to certain racial and ethnic minorities. In the pages of two journals published by the University of Chicago, Professors John Hart Ely and Richard Posner have established diametrically opposed positions in the debate. Their contributions are of special interest because each undertakes to answer the question within the framework of a theory concerning the proper distribution of authority between the judiciary and the other institutions of government. Neither position, in my judgment, adequately confronts the …