Business Organizations Law Commons^™

Ancillary Joint Ventures And The Unanswered Questions After Revenue Ruling 2004-51, Gabriel O. Aitsebaomo

ExpressO

Ever since the Internal Revenue Service (the "Service") issued Revenue Ruling 98-15… in which it emphasized "control" as a critical factor in determining whether a tax-exempt hospital that enters into a whole-hospital joint venture with a for-profit entity would continue to maintain its tax-exemption, practitioners and scholars alike have sought guidance from the Service regarding whether such "control" would also be required of an exempt organization that enters into an "ancillary joint venture" with a for-profit entity. In response, the Service issued Revenue Ruling 2004-51 on May 6, 2004.

… In Revenue Ruling 2004-51, the Service enunciated that a tax-exempt …

Fishing For Rainbows, The Fsc Repeal And Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act, Stuart Smith

San Diego International Law Journal

On August 30, 2002, the final decision was released in the case of United States-Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations". The World Trade Organization arbitration panel report authorizes the European Communities to levy $4.043 billion in annual trade sanctions against imports from the United States because of a provision in the U.S. tax code. "The FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000", the most recent of 40 years worth of half-hearted attempts by the United States to comply with world trading body regulations, is the current offender. According to the arbitration panel, the act subsidizes foreign sales by …

Charging Orders And The New Uniform Limited Partnership Act: Dispelling The Rumors Of Disaster, Daniel S. Kleinberger, Carter G. Bishop, Thomas Geu

Faculty Scholarship

Last year, an article published in this magazine focused on the charging order as "the Exclusive Remedy Against a Partnership Interest" and announced the "[s]hocking [r]evelation" that ULPA (2001)--the new Uniform Limited Partnership Act--undermines the "exclusive remedy" limitation on charging orders. The authors asserted categorically that, "from an asset protection perspective, the 2001 Act is considerably less protective of a partner's partnership interest than the 1976 Act." Elizabeth M. Schurig & Amy P. Jetel, A Charging Order Is the Exclusive Remedy Against a Partnership Interest: Fact or Fiction?, Prob. & Prop. 57, 58 (Nov./Dec. 2003).

As this article will show, …

A Broader View Of Corporate Inversions: The Interplay Of Tax, Corporate And Economic Implications, Orsolya Kun

ExpressO

Multinational corporations have, in substantial numbers, moved their corporate residence from the U.S. to Bermuda, for the purpuse of minimizing U.S. taxation on their worldwide income. This study reviews the forms of these "corporate inversion transactions," and explores their tax implications, as well as their corporate governance implications and motivations. It is the first scholarly study to examine the corporate governance implications of inversions, and it concludes that previously unexplored aspects of the change of corporate domicile result in substantial reduction of accountability of directors and officers and significant impediments to enforcement of shareholder rights.

Why We Need The Independent Sector: The Behavior, Law, And Ethics Of Not-For-Profit Hospitals, Jill R. Horwitz

Articles

Among the major forms of corporate ownership, the not-for-profit ownership form is distinct in its behavior, legal constraints, and moral obligations. A new empirical analysis of the American hospital industry, using eleven years of data for all urban general hospitals in the country, shows that corporate form accounts for large differences in the provision of specific medical services. Not-for-profit hospitals systematically provide both private and public goods that are in the public interest, and that other forms fail to provide. Two hypotheses are proposed to account for the findings, one legal and one moral. While no causal claims are made, …

Choosing A Business Entity For The 21st Century, Samuel P. Starr, Thomas P. Rohman, L. Michael Gracik Jr.

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

A Populist Political Perspective Of The Business Tax Entities Universe: Hey The Stars Might Lie, But The Numbers Never Do, John W. Lee

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Taxation Of U.S. Llc With Foreign Participation, Victor Ianovitch

LLM Theses and Essays

The instant thesis is organized in three main parts. The first contains an overview of U.S. law including constitutional issues of the topic focusing on the separation of tax powers between federal and state authorities with special attention to the basis and extent to which a State is entitled to impose levies on business organizations; a brief analysis of federal legislation allowing the pass-through regime; and summary concerning LLC legislation in the States. The second analyzes the application of the main, basic principles of international taxation (such as residence, source rules, application of international treaties, and connected with it the …

Toward A Practical Estate-Tax Exclusion For Family-Run Businesses: Analysis Of Section 2033a And Proposal For Reform, Eric D. Chason, Robert T. Danforth

Faculty Publications

In a previous work appearing in this Journal, the authors proposed an approach to estate and gift taxation that encourages productive behavior by the recipients of wealth. In this Article, the authors analyze, in the context of their earlier work, the new estate-tax exclusion for closely held businesses (section 2033A) created by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. The authors describe the features of a practical family-run business exclusion and conclude that section 2033A, in its present form, fails as a practical exclusion. The authors catalogue those elements of section 2033A that should be retained and propose reforms of those …

Getting Out Of Business: Tax Costs And Opportunities In Exiting A Closely Held Business, Denise D. J. Roy

Faculty Scholarship

The primary purpose of this article is to encourage closely held business owners and their lawyers to consider exit costs, opportunities and strategies when making the initial choice-of-entity decision. A secondary purpose is to provide information about tax consequences and exit strategies useful to owners of businesses that are already up and running, whether in drafting a buy-sell agreement or planning for a specific transaction. Therefore, the article begins by comparing the major tax consequences of exiting the alternative entity types available to closely held businesses for tax purposes--C corporations, S corporations and partnerships. Part II of this article provides …

The Merger Puzzle, John A. Miller

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Art Of Regulation Drafting: Structured Discretionary Justice Under Section 355, John W. Lee

Faculty Publications

This article analyzes the 35-year evolution of the section 355 regulations from the perspectives of the jurisprudential dichotomy between general principles and detailed rules and administrative law theory as to agency discretion.

Taxing Corporate Acquisitions: A Proposal For Mandatory Uniform Rules, Glenn E. Coven

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments In, The Taxation Of Corporations And Shareholders, Peter P. Weidenbruch Jr.

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

Entity Classification And Integration: Publicly Traded Partnerships, Personal Service Corporations And The Tax Legislative Process, John W. Lee

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Closely Held Corporation: Its Capital Structure And The Federal Tax Laws, William J. Rands

West Virginia Law Review

The labyrinthine provisions of the Internal Revenue Code make a decision on whether or not to incorporate a closely-held business astoundingly complex. To decide properly, one must understand the terms "C corporations," "S corporations," a partner's "distributive share," and a host of other cryptic concepts.' Even those initiated into the inner sanctums of Subchapters C2, K3 and S4 must advise their clients that their counsel.is based on the enterprise's projected revenues and expenses, estimates that may prove to be far off the mark. Moreover, changes in the Internal Revenue Code have been so constant that no one can feel confident …

Business Activities Of Tax-Exempts And Affiliates, Jo Ann Blair

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

Passive Activity Loss Limitations, Allan G. Donn

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

Choice Of Entity: Pass Through Entities, John W. Lee

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

The Due Process Clause And The Commerce Clause: Two New And Easy Tests For Nexus In Tax Cases, Thomas E. Mchugh, R. Michael Reed

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Subchapter S Distributions And Pseudo Distributions: Proposals For Revising The Defective Blend Of Entity And Conduit Concepts, Glenn E. Coven

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Start-Up Costs, Section 195 And Clear Reflection Of Income: A Tale Of Talismans, Tacked-On Tax Reform And A Touch Of Basics, John W. Lee

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Limiting Losses Attributable To Nonrecourse Debt: A Defense Of The Traditional System Against The At-Risk Concept, Glenn E. Coven

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

0401: Anonymous Memoranda Book, 1913, Marshall University Special Collections

Guides to Manuscript Collections

Pocahontas county, W.Va. lists of jurors, tax notations, expenses, and memoranda concerning legal matters.

The Relevance Of Fresh Investment To The Characterization Of Corporate Distributions And Adjustments, Glenn E. Coven

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Future Of Personal Service Corporations, Howard S. Chapman

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Capital Expenditures: A Result In Search Of A Rationale, John W. Lee, Nina R. Murphy

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Professional Corporations - Practical Problems And Solutions, K. Maxwell Dale

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

Equipment Leasing, Robert S. Parker Jr.

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.

Partnerships And At Risk Problems, Stefan F. Tucker

William & Mary Annual Tax Conference

No abstract provided.