Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Saving Seaborn: Ownership Not Marriage As The Basis Of Family Taxation, Dennis J. Ventry Jr Oct 2011

Saving Seaborn: Ownership Not Marriage As The Basis Of Family Taxation, Dennis J. Ventry Jr

Indiana Law Journal

One of the most famous Supreme Court tax cases celebrated its eightieth birthday last year. In Poe v. Seaborn, the Court reified two principles of the federal income tax: ownership determines tax liability and state law determines ownership. This Article affirms that family taxation continues to follow ownership, not marriage, despite the federal government’s position that the “ownership equals taxability” rule applies almost exclusively to heterosexual spouses. Verifying the vitality of this principle carries significant implications for all families, particularly nontraditional families. Under the aegis of Seaborn, the principle authorizes certain members of state-recognized relationships—marriages, domestic partnerships, civil unions—to file …


When Should Asset Appreciation Be Taxed?: The Case For A Disposition Standard Of Realization, Jeffrey L. Kwall Jan 2011

When Should Asset Appreciation Be Taxed?: The Case For A Disposition Standard Of Realization, Jeffrey L. Kwall

Indiana Law Journal

The realization requirement is one of the most basic elements of the United States income tax. Due to this requirement, any increase in the value of a person’s property is not taxed when it occurs. Rather, the tax on asset appreciation is deferred until the occurrence of a realization event; that is, until the property is transferred in exchange for money or other consideration. By contrast, all other forms of income (e.g., salary, rents) are taxed immediately.

The realization requirement is one of the most basic elements of the United States income tax. Due to this requirement, any increase in …


Retroactivity And The Fraud Enforcement And Recovery Act Of 2009, Matthew Titolo Jan 2011

Retroactivity And The Fraud Enforcement And Recovery Act Of 2009, Matthew Titolo

Indiana Law Journal

This Article resolves confusion over the scope of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (FERA), which amends the False Claims Act (FCA), to clarify that it covers fraud against the taxpayers even where committed by and against other government contractors and subcontractors. I focus on a controversial retroactivity clause applying FERA’s expanded liability language to pre-enactment conduct. Ambiguity has led to inconsistent outcomes: some courts have ruled that FERA’s new language applies to pre-enactment conduct while others have reached the opposite result. Much of practical consequence rides on how we resolve this ambiguity—the Department of Justice is currently investigating over …