General Body Meeting

General Body Meeting for the Cardozo Tax Law Societyhttps://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2017-2018/1005/thumbnail.jp

The Value of a Tax LL.M.

https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2016-2017/1059/thumbnail.jp

Essential aspects of China’s Tax Law

China fundamentally reformed its tax law in 1993. Currently, the most important types of taxes in China are income tax, valued-added tax (VAT), and business tax

Does the Tax Code Favor Robots?

In recent months, a number of scholars and commentators have articulated versions of the following argument: (1) U.S. tax law favors capital over labor;1 (2) Robots are capital; 2 (3) Therefore, U.S. tax law favors robots over labor. 3 Three implications tend to be drawn from this syllogism: (a) that U.S. tax law leads to inefficient investments in automation;4 (b) that automation—because it is capital-intensive and capital is tax-favored—will result in a reduction in tax revenues;5 and (c) that policymakers should respond to the automation trend either by imposing explicit taxes on robots or by raising taxes on all capital.6 This short essay seeks to illustrate why the line of argument above is misguided. First, the claim that U.S. tax law is biased toward capital rests entirely on an unstated (and uncertain) normative premise: that the United States should tax income rather than consumption. If an income tax is the baseline, then U.S. tax law exhibits a pro-capital bias; if a consumption tax is the baseline, then U.S. tax law exhibits an anti-capital bias. Which baseline we choose depends on normative choices that claims of capital-favoritism tend to occlude. Second, robots do not only (or even primarily) represent “capital”; they also embed the labor of engineers and others. The labor of robot makers is often taxed at unfavorable rates relative to the labor of the workers whom automation threatens to displace. Third, the idea that U.S. tax law incentivizes firms to replace human workers with robots rests on doubtful logic, and the claim that automation will erode the tax base finds little support either. This essay is not an argument against capital income taxation or a defense of the current Code, which does tax capital income but not all that much. I believe, though, that the case for capital income taxation will be stronger if it is based on firm foundations rather than on dubious claims of robot favoritism. The essay also is not a full treatment of the arguments for and against taxing capital. Its objective is to evaluate one such argument and to show why it is unpersuasive. Part I of the essay examines the claim that the U.S. tax system favors capital over labor. Part II turns to the question of whether robots represent capital or embedded labor. Part III considers the case for explicit taxation of robots or broader taxation of capital once illusions about the tax code’s pro-robot bias are cleared away

Tax law: rules or principles?

This is the year of simplification of tax legislation and I should like to add my thoughts to the debate. There is nothing new in complaining about the complexity of tax legislation. Every generation does it. To give two examples, the Codification Committee in 1936 looked back longingly to the early days of income tax: ‘... the Statutes of 1842 and 1853 were relatively simple. The growth of legislation since 1907 and its increasing complexity have been in large measure due to the high rates of tax in operation ... The space occupied by the provisions relating to such reliefs and exemptions is now prodigious, and contrasts with the comparative brevity of the earlier code.... Unhappily the actual language in which many of the statutory provisions are framed is so intricate and obscure as to be frankly unintelligible’. In 1955, the Royal Commission said much the same: ‘... the law on the subject of income tax remains voluminous, complicated and obscure.... The history of earlier attempts [to simplify it], however, suggests that the problem may be in fact an intractable one, beyond the reach of recommendations’.

Granite Staters Skeptical Tax Law Will Benefit Them; Cite Health As Most Important Problem For Family 3/1/18

New Hampshire residents are divided in their opinion of the recently passed tax law. Despite some predictions that most Americans will see at least a short-term reduction in the taxes they pay, only one-third believe their taxes will decrease or that they will be better off. Republicans are far more likely than Democrats and Independents to favor the tax law and believe they will be better off and see their taxes decrease. When asked about the most important problem facing themselves and their family, respondents most frequently mention health/healthcare or income/finances

Criminal Tax Law in the U.S. – A Model for Improving German Criminal Tax Law Enforcement?

Steuerkriminalität, Steuerrecht, Strafrecht, Strafe, Vereinigte Staaten, Deutschland, Tax fraud, Tax law, Criminal law, Penalty, United States, Germany

Words, Words, Words!!! Teaching the Language of Tax

The basic course in federal income tax is usually a challenge for both teacher and student because so many different and difficult things are being taught at once: a prolix and opaque statute; complex financial transactions; and economic, political, and social analysis of the effects of the tax law. In addition, I believe that a teacher of tax must be a teacher of language, focusing explicitly and self-consciously on the ambiguous, imprecise, and confusing words that are embedded in tax law and discourse and that constitute a significant obstacle for students taking the basic course in federal income taxation