翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ Uniform Vehicle Code
・ Uniform woodcreeper
・ UNIFORM-1
・ Uniformat
・ Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
・ Uniformed Fire Officers Association
・ Uniformed Firefighters Association
・ Uniformed services
・ Uniformed Services Benefit Association
・ Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
・ Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act
・ Uniformed services of the United States
・ Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
・ Uniformitarianism
・ Uniformity
Uniformity and jurisdiction in U.S. federal court tax decisions
・ Uniformity of content
・ Uniformity of motive
・ Uniformity policy
・ Uniformity tape
・ Uniformizable space
・ Uniformization
・ Uniformization (probability theory)
・ Uniformization (set theory)
・ Uniformization theorem
・ Uniformly bounded representation
・ Uniformly Cauchy sequence
・ Uniformly connected space
・ Uniformly convex space
・ Uniformly distributed measure


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

Uniformity and jurisdiction in U.S. federal court tax decisions : ウィキペディア英語版
Uniformity and jurisdiction in U.S. federal court tax decisions
Uniformity and jurisdiction in the tax decisions of the United States federal courts. is the ongoing debate spanning many decades about achievement of uniformity and decisionmaking by federal courts when addressing tax controversies against the backdrop of multiple, regionally diverse courts with federal tax jurisdiction.
As a general matter, suits involving most federal laws are tried in one of the courts of regional-based federal courts of general jurisdiction - first in the 94 United States district courts, which are trial courts, with appeals made to the 14 United States courts of appeals ("circuit courts"), which are the intermediate appellate courts. Circuit court decisions are binding on the district courts within their jurisdiction, imposing some degree of uniformity. When an appeal from a decision of a court of appeals is taken to the federal high court, the Supreme Court of the United States, further uniformity is imposed, because the Supreme Court's decisions are binding on all lower federal courts.
If there are no applicable appellate decisions by the United States Supreme Court or by the court of appeals in the relevant district court jurisdiction, however, there may be a diversity of outcomes at the district court level. Similarly, there can be varying interpretations of law among the courts of appeals. Even if one or more of the decisions are appealed to the Supreme Court, a final interpretation resolving divergent viewpoints from the lower courts may not be rendered; the Supreme Court has discretionary jurisdiction, meaning it can choose which cases it wishes to hear.
Professor Steve R. Johnson, in part quoting Professor David F. Shores, characterizes the diversity as follows: "'It is difficult to imagine an adjudication system less conducive to uniform decisionmaking than the current fragmented system of federal tax trials and appeals."〔Steve R. Johnson, "The Phoenix and the Perils of the Second Best: Why Heightened Appellate Deference to Tax Court Decisions is Undesirable," 77 Oregon Law Review, 235, 238 (Spring 1998), in part quoting David F. Shores, "Deferential Review of Tax Court Decisions: ''Dobson'' Revisited," 49 Tax Lawyer, 629 (Spring 1996)(hereinafter, Shores '96)〕
==Federal court jurisdiction for tax issues==
The debate over appellate jurisdiction on federal tax matters has been focused primarily on two issues: how best to achieve greater uniformity in federal tax decisions and whether the diversity in tax jurisdiction compromises the quality of decisions resolving tax disputes or is a strength of the system.〔For a robust discussion of these issues and the debate on how to address the issue of diversity of jurisdiction by experts on the issues, see Johnson, Shores '96 ''op. cit.''; David F. Shores, "Rethinking Deferential Review of Tax Court Decisions," 53 Tax Lawyer 35 (Fall 1999)(hereinafter, Shores '99); David F. Shores, "Deferential Review of Tax Court Decisions: Taking Institutional Choice Seriously," 55 Tax Lawyer 667 (Spring 2002)(hereinafter, Shores '02); Andre Smith, "Deferential Review of Tax Court Decisions of Law: Promoting Expertise, Uniformity, and Impartiality," 58 Tax Lawyer 361 (2005); and Gary W. Carter, "The Commissioner's Nonacquiescence: A Case for a National Court of Tax Appeals," 59 Temple Law Quarterly 879 (Fall, 1986), for useful presentations of divergent viewpoints by experts on the subject.〕 The backdrop for this debate is the fact that four separate sets of federal courts have original jurisdiction over tax cases and appeals from original jurisdiction courts are taken to the thirteen federal courts of appeals. The four sets of courts with original jurisdiction to hear cases brought by taxpayers against the government when they disagree with a final tax deficiency notice issued by the Internal Revenue Service are:
* The United States Tax Court. The Tax Court hears about 80% of the cases brought by taxpayers disputing IRS notices of deficiency. As is typical of an Article I court, the judges are appointed for 15-year terms rather than for life; their expertise in federal tax law is an important ingredient in their selection, and they gain further expertise through their long tenure dealing only with tax controversies.〔Smith, ''op. cit.'', 389.〕 From the taxpayer's standpoint, the advantage of bringing a dispute to the Tax Court is that payment of the deficiencies is stayed until the case is decided.〔Johnson, ''op. cit.,'' 239.〕 While the Tax Court is headquartered in Washington, D.C., its 19 judges hear cases in about 80 cities throughout the U.S. (See also Article I and Article III tribunals). Appeals from the Tax Court are taken to whichever of the United States courts of appeals has geographical jurisdiction over the claimant.
* The United States District Courts. There are 94 U.S. district courts with broad discretion to hear cases involving federal criminal and civil law as well authority to apply state law in cases arising between citizens of different states. These Article III courts are generally considered to have great experience in factfinding through both jury and bench trials, as well as experience in the operation of state laws, the common law and constitutional law.〔Smith, ''op. cit.'', 389.〕 Included within the jurisdiction of these courts is the authority to hear cases involving federal tax law.〔.〕 The taxpayer bringing the claim must have first paid the deficiency determined by the IRS.〔.〕 Appeals from the district courts are taken to whichever of the United States courts of appeals has geographical jurisdiction over that district court.
* The United States Court of Federal Claims. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims is also an Article I court with judges appointed for 15-year terms. It is centered in Washington, D.C., but can hold trials in other courts around the country. Its jurisdiction is limited to hearing claims for money that arise from the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, executive regulations, or federal contracts.〔see http://www.uscourts.gov.〕 Included in this jurisdiction is the express authority to hear claims by taxpayers for refunds of federal taxes paid.〔.〕 As with the district courts, the taxpayer bringing the claim must have first paid the deficiency determined by the IRS.〔.〕 Appeals from the Court of Federal Claims are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
* The United States bankruptcy court. Each of the 94 federal judicial districts also has an Article I bankruptcy court which operates under the supervision of the district courts. The bankruptcy courts are broadly empowered to hear any issue arising under the Bankruptcy Code, including federal tax issues arising in bankruptcy proceedings.〔; see, also, Johnson, ''op. cit.'', 239-242 for a good, short review of bankruptcy court jurisdiction over tax matters.〕 Professor Johnson reports a growing trend for important questions of substantive tax liability to be decided in bankruptcy proceedings, and since the overwhelming majority of bankruptcy proceedings are voluntary, there is a significant element of taxpayer choice in bringing the tax issues to the bankruptcy courts. Johnson also reports that the bankruptcy courts are seen as “pro-debtor,” and have procedural rules that favor litigation of tax issues. Bankruptcy Court appeals are taken to the U.S. District Court before they can be heard by the circuit courts.〔Johnson, 242.〕

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「Uniformity and jurisdiction in U.S. federal court tax decisions」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.