7184 research outputs found
Sort by
Recent Developments in Federal Income Taxation: The Year 2023
No full textThis Article summarizes and provides context to understand the most important developments in federal income taxation for 2023. The items discussed primarily consist of the following: (i) significant amendments to the Internal Revenue Code; (ii) important judicial decisions; and (iii) noteworthy administrative rulings and regulations promulgated by the Treasury Department and the Service. This Article primarily focuses on subjects of broad general interest - tax accounting rules, determination of gross income, allowable deductions, treatment of capital gains and losses, corporate and partnership taxation, exempt organizations, and procedure and penalties. This Article provides only limited discussion of federal estate and gift taxation and the income taxation of trusts and estates and generally does not address items relating to qualified pension and profit-sharing plans, international taxation, or specialized industries such as banking, insurance, and financial services
Did January 6 Defendants (Including Donald Trump) “Otherwise Obstruct an Official Proceeding”? Linguistic Analysis for the \u3ci\u3eFischer\u3c/i\u3e Case Before the Supreme Court
Get PDFWhen judges, skilled and sophisticated users of the English language, come to opposing conclusions about the “plain” or “ordinary” meaning of a phrase, how can such a conflict be resolved in an objective way? Traditionally courts have resorted to citing dictionary definitions, but in recent years an alternative approach has been gaining attention and respect: the use of corpus linguistics. The supreme courts of Michigan, Idaho, Utah, Vermont have used made use of corpus-based research in their decisions as has the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Both the Sixth Circuit and the Ninth Circuit have requested that parties submit briefs using corpus-based research. More than 20 law review articles have been published in the past five years discussing the application of corpus linguistics to legal interpretation.
The case of Fischer v. United States, now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, offers a clear example of the need for an objective, empirically based method for determining the “ordinary meaning” of a statute. The outcome of the Fischer case will not only potentially affect hundreds of persons indicted for their alleged direct involvement in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, but also former president Donald Trump, whose four-count indictment in a case pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia includes two counts based on the statute at issue in Fischer. The four judges who have already written opinions in the Fischer case all agree on the legal standard to be applied: “words [in a statute] generally should be interpreted as taking their ordinary, contemporary, common meaning at the time Congress enacted the statute.” However these four judges come to three different, inconsistent conclusions about what that ordinary meaning is.
The authors – a law professor and a linguistics professor – report in this paper the results of using linguistic analysis to investigate what the ordinary meaning of the contested statutory provision was at the time of enactment using the empirical methods of corpus linguistics. They are also filing a neutral amicus brief – in support of neither party – in the Supreme Court in the Fischer case reporting the results of the research described in this paper
A Case for the Ages: Thompson and Preserving the ADEA Statutory Time to File
Get PDFThis Note analyzes the contractual shortening of the ADEA’s filing period, contrasting it with Title VII’s requirements and advocating for legislative or judicial clarification
The Georgian Case for Harmless Constitutional Error Reform
Get PDFThis Note examines Georgia’s application of harmless error review to constitutional errors and proposes a new standard to remedy deficiencies