« Measuring Scholarly Impact of Faculty | Main | Why Do Students Go to Law School? Money, Politics »
February 25, 2008
ABA Tax Section Publishes Winter 2008 Issue of News Quarterly
The ABA Tax Section has published 27 News Quarterly No. 2 (Winter 2008):
- From the Chair (Stanley L. Blend) (pp. 3, 18)
- Interview with Karen Gilbreath-Sowell (Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy) (pp. 4-7)
- News Briefs (pp. 7, 23)
- Points to Remember:
- Are Type III Supporting Organizations the New Private Foundations?, by Jocelyne C. Miller (Grant Thornton, McLean, VA) (pp. 1, 8-9)
- Facade Easements Get a Facelift, by Monica D. Armstrong (Mercer Law School) (pp. 9-10)
- Proposed Regulations Regarding Property Distributions Following Assets-Over Partnership Mergers, by Joseph Vetting, Matthew Belcher & Glenn E. Mincey (all of Deloitte Tax National Office, Washington, D.C.) (pp. 11-13)
- The Selective Enforcement Defense in Civil and Criminal Tax Cases, by Steve R. Johnson (UNLV Law School) (pp. 14-15)
- Notice 2007-69 Grants Temporary Relief for Plans Needing to Amend Definition of Normal Retirement Age, by Barbara E. Ruiz-Gonzalez (Aballi, Milne, Kalil & Escagedo (Miami, FL) (pp. 16-18)
- Join a Tax Section Committee (p. 19)
- Government Submissions Boxscore (p. 20)
- CLE Calendar (p. 21)
- Section Meeting Calendar (p. 21)
- Tax Bites: An "Ernest" Approach to Federal Income Taxation, by Anthony E. Rebollo (Richardson Plowden & Robinson, Columbia, SC) (p. 22)
- 2008-2009 Nominees (p. 23)
February 25, 2008 in ABA Tax Section | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef00e55071a9768833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ABA Tax Section Publishes Winter 2008 Issue of News Quarterly:
Comments
Here's the note I sent Karen after reading the interview with her:
Dear Karen,
Your interview in the ABA Tax Section News Quarterly raised a question in my mind. If the mechanical, 40 percent equity rule were replaced with a more principles-based rule, would that change require the creation and adoption of one or more meta-standards to govern the acceptable interpretation of those principles? Without some guide for taxpayers, you might be inviting overreaching.
Four meta-standards that could be used are plain meaning, with recourse to context and, if necessary, object and purpose, all under the umbrella of good faith. These meta-standards are drawn from Art. 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and as such, they have been interpreted and applied over the past 28 years by international judicial authorities, including (since 1995) the panels and Appellate Body of the WTO.
Incorporation of those meta-standard interpretations into U.S. regulations or statutes might be accomplished by generalization or by framing examples that encapsulate specific fact patterns and outcomes.
Regards,
Martin
Posted by: Martin B. Tittle | Feb 25, 2008 3:42:59 PM
