Recovery of unconstitutional taxes: a new approach
Article Abstract:
The US Supreme Court has recently decided several cases on the retroactivity of decisions involving state and local taxation, but has not articulated a clear standard for determining retroactivity. In general, decisions involving new law are not retroactive. In James B. Beam Distilling Co v. Georgia, the option of selective prospectivity was abandoned. In McKesson Corp v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco, the state was required to provide retroactive relief for unlawful taxes paid under duress. Several state courts have reached opposite conclusions concerning the retroactivity of Davis v. Michigan.
Publication Name: Virginia Tax Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0735-9004
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Section 304 and the limits of statutory law
Article Abstract:
IRC section 304 is needed to preserve the dividend rules when stock distributions do not reduce the proportionate interests of the distributees, but the history of section 304 also demonstrates problems with the way tax laws are interpreted and revised. Courts' treatment of tax provisions related to section 304 in Mead Corp. v. Commissioner and Wanamaker Trust v. Commissioner show that acting in conflict with Congress will not yield good tax law. The courts and Congress have been far more effective when they have worked together to develop laws governing the taxation of stock redemptions.
Publication Name: Virginia Tax Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0735-9004
Year: 1997
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Reexamining continuity of shareholder interest in corporate reorganizations
Article Abstract:
IRS regulations have limited the availability of meeting the continuity of shareholder interest rule for the purpose of receiving tax-free treatment of corporate reorganizations. The regulations support the underlying purposes of relevant IRC provisions and Supreme Court precedent. The regulations which apply to acquisitive reorganizations do not specify whether they will apply to the fundamentally differing transactions of divisive reorganizations.
Publication Name: Virginia Tax Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0735-9004
Year: 1998
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: The unjust enrichment doctrine: an expanded definition threatens the rights of secured lenders
- Abstracts: Practical concerns affecting the arbitration of statutory claims. Labor-management dispute resolution and the media
- Abstracts: The "powers of appreciation": who is the ultimate guardian of UN legality? The emerging right to democratic governance
- Abstracts: People of influence; push is on in Congress to revamp lobbying disclosure laws. In the looking glass; Congress launches intense self-examination effort
- Abstracts: Trade spike spurs tax treaty talks; multinationals press Clinton administration to end double taxation. SEC nominee says he'll study curbs on securities suits