In Tax Notes, Charlene Luke (Florida) critiques the dissenting opinion in the recent Tenth Circuit decision, Liberty Global Inc. v. United States, in which the majority ruled in favor of the government on the economic substance doctrine. From the piece:

Much has already been written about Liberty Global, which involved a complex transaction called Project Soy that took advantage of an effective-date mismatch to boost a section 245A dividends received deduction. The scope of the codified economic substance doctrine seems destined, however, to continue generating conflicting judicial decisions and ultimately reach the Supreme Court. This article critiques the Liberty Global dissenting opinion on its own textualist terms and offers an alternative reading of the statutory text that this article argues provides a meaningful interpretation of the term “relevant” while better upholding the statute as a whole.

For previous TaxProf Blog coverage of Liberty Global, see below:

• Avi-Yonah: Liberty Global and the Revival of Economic Substance (May 20, 2026)
• Liberty Global and the Economic Substance Problem (Apr. 29, 2026)