ABA Section of Taxation Report of the Task Force on Judicial Deference

Recognizing the need for clearer standards regarding the degree of deference that the federal courts should confer on guidance issued by the Department of Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, the Tax Section, under the direction of former ABA Section of Taxation Chair Pamela F. Olson, created a Task Force on Judicial Deference in 2000. It was charged with the mission of not only examining the state of the law pertaining to judicial deference across the broad range of administrative pronouncements issued by the Treasury and the IRS, but also sharing its conclusions and possible solutions with the Section of Taxation and the profession at large. Based on the agency-by-agency approach required by the Supreme Court in United States v. Mead Corporation, 533 U.S. 218(2001), the Task Force analyzed the differences in the degree of authority and degree of deliberation underlying the various forms of such guidance and the impact of those differences on whether, and to what degree, judicial deference is appropriate. Recognizing the need for clearer standards regarding the degree of deference that the federal courts should confer on guidance issued by the Department of Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, the Tax Section, under the direction of former ABA Section of Taxation Chair Pamela F. Olson, created a Task Force on Judicial Deference in 2000. It was charged with the mission of not only examining the state of the law pertaining to judicial deference across the broad range of administrative pronouncements issued by the Treasury and the IRS, but also sharing its conclusions and possible solutions with the Section of Taxation and the profession at large. Based on the agency-by-agency approach required by the Supreme Court in United States v. Mead Corporation, 533 U.S. 218 (2001), the Task Force analyzed the differences in the degree of authority and degree of deliberation underlying the various forms of such guidance and the impact of those differences on whether, and to what degree, judicial deference is appropriate