Paul L. Caron
Dean
Pepperdine Caruso
School of Law
New Cases
-
Clarke: Four More Takeaways From Moore
TaxProf Blog Op-Ed: Four More Takeaways From Moore, by Conor Clarke (Washington University; Google Scholar): Like everyone in the tax world, I read Thursday’s Moore opinion with great interest. The result was both predictable and startling: The government won on a narrow theory that many saw coming—but that win may be dulled by some mildly Pyrrhic elements
-
Clarke: Four More Takeaways From Moore
TaxProf Blog Op-Ed: Four More Takeaways From Moore, by Conor Clarke (Washington University; Google Scholar): Like everyone in the tax world, I read Thursday’s Moore opinion with great interest. The result was both predictable and startling: The government won on a narrow theory that many saw coming—but that win may be dulled by some mildly Pyrrhic elements
-
Zelenak: Moore Thoughts
TaxProf Blog Op-Ed: Moore Thoughts, by Lawrence Zelenak (Duke; Google Scholar): In terms of its bottom line, the Supreme Court's Moore decision is no surprise to anyone who listened to (or read the transcript of) the oral argument last December. It seemed then nearly certain that the Court would uphold the mandatory repatriation tax (MRT) as
-
Zelenak: Moore Thoughts
TaxProf Blog Op-Ed: Moore Thoughts, by Lawrence Zelenak (Duke; Google Scholar): In terms of its bottom line, the Supreme Court's Moore decision is no surprise to anyone who listened to (or read the transcript of) the oral argument last December. It seemed then nearly certain that the Court would uphold the mandatory repatriation tax (MRT) as
-
7-2 Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Repatriation Tax In Moore
Moore v. United States, No. 22–800 (June 20, 2024): The [Mandatory Repatriation Tax] —which attributes the realized and undistributed income of an American-controlled foreign corporation to the entity’s American shareholders, and then taxes the American shareholders on their portions of that income—does not exceed Congress’s constitutional authority. … KAVANAUGH, J., delivered the opinion of the
-
7-2 Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Repatriation Tax In Moore
Moore v. United States, No. 22–800 (June 20, 2024): The [Mandatory Repatriation Tax] —which attributes the realized and undistributed income of an American-controlled foreign corporation to the entity’s American shareholders, and then taxes the American shareholders on their portions of that income—does not exceed Congress’s constitutional authority. … KAVANAUGH, J., delivered the opinion of the
-
Todd: While Tax World Waits For Moore, Supreme Court Decides Important Connelly Estate Tax Case
TaxProf Blog op-ed: While Tax World Waits For Moore, Supreme Court Decides Important Connelly Estate Tax Case, by Timothy M. Todd (Interim Dean, Liberty; Google Scholar): Although the eyes of the tax world have been focused on the pending decision in Moore v. United States—a case that challenges the one-time “mandatory repatriation tax,” and depending
-
Todd: While Tax World Waits For Moore, Supreme Court Decides Important Connelly Estate Tax Case
TaxProf Blog op-ed: While Tax World Waits For Moore, Supreme Court Decides Important Connelly Estate Tax Case, by Timothy M. Todd (Interim Dean, Liberty; Google Scholar): Although the eyes of the tax world have been focused on the pending decision in Moore v. United States—a case that challenges the one-time “mandatory repatriation tax,” and depending
-
Unanimous Supreme Court Affirms IRS’s Position On Life Insurance Proceeds Used To Fund A Stock Redemption
Connelly v. United States, No. 23–146 (June 6, 2024): SyllabusMichael and Thomas Connelly were the sole shareholders in Crown C Supply, a small building supply corporation. The brothers entered into an agreement to ensure that Crown would stay in the family if either brother died. Under that agreement, the surviving brother would have the option
-
Unanimous Supreme Court Affirms IRS’s Position On Life Insurance Proceeds Used To Fund A Stock Redemption
Connelly v. United States, No. 23–146 (June 6, 2024): SyllabusMichael and Thomas Connelly were the sole shareholders in Crown C Supply, a small building supply corporation. The brothers entered into an agreement to ensure that Crown would stay in the family if either brother died. Under that agreement, the surviving brother would have the option
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: Proving Last Known Address
Many statutes require the IRS to send taxpayers notices. What confuses my students (and many taxpayers) is that the statutes rarely require that the taxpayer actually receive a particular notice; they just require the IRS to properly send the notice. And the IRS will always meet the statutory requirement if the IRS sends the notice
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: Proving Last Known Address
Many statutes require the IRS to send taxpayers notices. What confuses my students (and many taxpayers) is that the statutes rarely require that the taxpayer actually receive a particular notice; they just require the IRS to properly send the notice. And the IRS will always meet the statutory requirement if the IRS sends the notice
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: When Is An Excise Tax Really A Penalty?
“The power to tax involves the power to destroy.” Justice John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 431 (1819). “Sometimes a tax is…just a tax.” — Sigmund Freud’s Tax Advisor. Today’s lesson is about how to tell when an excise tax is really a penalty. The answer I learn is: “why do you
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: When Is An Excise Tax Really A Penalty?
“The power to tax involves the power to destroy.” Justice John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 431 (1819). “Sometimes a tax is…just a tax.” — Sigmund Freud’s Tax Advisor. Today’s lesson is about how to tell when an excise tax is really a penalty. The answer I learn is: “why do you
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: The Interplay Of SSDI Benefits And The §104(a)(1) Exclusion
When Congress giveth a tax benefit with one hand, it sometimes taketh the other hand and slaps the taxpayer silly, eliminating the benefit the taxpayer thought they had. Today’s lesson is an example of that phenomenon. It’s kind of like a bad joke, an appropriate lesson for April 1st. Specifically, the one hand is found
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: Choose Your Return Preparer Carefully
In Stephanie Murrin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2024-10 (Jan. 26, 2024), Judge Urda decided that the fraudulent acts of a return preparer starting in 1993, made an honest taxpayer liable for some $65,000 in deficiencies resulting from the 30-year old fraud of someone else, plus some $15k in §6662 penalties. That is, the return preparer’s
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: Choose Your Return Preparer Carefully
In Stephanie Murrin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2024-10 (Jan. 26, 2024), Judge Urda decided that the fraudulent acts of a return preparer starting in 1993, made an honest taxpayer liable for some $65,000 in deficiencies resulting from the 30-year old fraud of someone else, plus some $15k in §6662 penalties. That is, the return preparer’s
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: For Whom The SOL Tolls
A recent Tax Court precedential decision raises a really interesting question about the application of §7451’s tolling provision to seemingly late-filed Tax Court Petitions. In Madiodio Sall v. Commissioner, 161 T.C. 13 (Nov. 30, 2023) (Judge Buch), the deadline for the taxpayer to file his Petition fell on Thanksgiving Day. We all know that means
-
Lesson From The Tax Court: For Whom The SOL Tolls
A recent Tax Court precedential decision raises a really interesting question about the application of §7451’s tolling provision to seemingly late-filed Tax Court Petitions. In Madiodio Sall v. Commissioner, 161 T.C. 13 (Nov. 30, 2023) (Judge Buch), the deadline for the taxpayer to file his Petition fell on Thanksgiving Day. We all know that means
-
Moore v. United States: Avoiding A Damaging Limiting Principle In The 16th Amendment
Ari Glogower (Northwestern; Google Scholar), David Kamin (NYU), Rebecca Kysar (Fordham; Google Scholar), Darien Shanske (UC-Davis; Google Scholar), & Thalia T. Spinrad (NYU), Moore v. United States: Avoiding a Damaging Limiting Principle in the Sixteenth Amendment, 41 Yale J. on Reg.: Notice & Comment (Jan. 12, 2024): The Supreme Court heard argument last month in
-
Moore v. United States: Avoiding A Damaging Limiting Principle In The 16th Amendment
Ari Glogower (Northwestern; Google Scholar), David Kamin (NYU), Rebecca Kysar (Fordham; Google Scholar), Darien Shanske (UC-Davis; Google Scholar), & Thalia T. Spinrad (NYU), Moore v. United States: Avoiding a Damaging Limiting Principle in the Sixteenth Amendment, 41 Yale J. on Reg.: Notice & Comment (Jan. 12, 2024): The Supreme Court heard argument last month in
-
Cardozo Tax Prof Appeals Decision Subjecting Him To New York Teleworker Tax On Days He Works From His Connecticut Home
Following up on my previous post, Tax Prof Must Pay New York Non-Resident Income Tax On Days He Taught Law Students On Zoom From His Connecticut Home When Cardozo Was Closed During Covid: Law360, Professor In Connecticut Asks NY Tribunal To Nix Teleworker Tax: An administrative law judge created two undefined legal tests regarding virtual
-
Cardozo Tax Prof Appeals Decision Subjecting Him To New York Teleworker Tax On Days He Works From His Connecticut Home
Following up on my previous post, Tax Prof Must Pay New York Non-Resident Income Tax On Days He Taught Law Students On Zoom From His Connecticut Home When Cardozo Was Closed During Covid: Law360, Professor In Connecticut Asks NY Tribunal To Nix Teleworker Tax: An administrative law judge created two undefined legal tests regarding virtual
-
Harvard Law Review: ‘[This] Is A Tax Case. Fear Not. Keep Reading.’
Legal Case, Polselli v. IRS, 137 Harv. L. Rev. 430 (2023): Internal Revenue Code § 7609 — Unnoticed Summons — Tax Exceptionalism — Surplusage Canon — Polselli v. IRS: Polselli v. IRS1 is a tax case.2 Fear not, keep reading.3