Polarons in Anisotropic Energy Bands

Calculation of polaron properties in anisotropic energy bands, and results for electron on spheroidal energy surface interacting with optical phonon

The Inappropriateness of the Bad Checks Penalty

In this article, the authors argue that the penalty for sending a bad check to the IRS is excessive and that the reasonable cause exception should apply to any honest factual error

Free Rider: A Justification for Mandatory Medical Insurance Under Health Care Reform?

Section 1501 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act added section 5000A to the Internal Revenue Code to require most individuals in the United States, beginning in the year 2014, to purchase an established minimum level of medical insurance. This requirement, which is enforced by a penalty imposed on those who fail to comply, is sometimes referred to as the “individual mandate.” The individual mandate is one element of a vast change to the provision of medical care that Congress implemented in 2010. The individual mandate has proved to be controversial and has been the subject of a number of lawsuits contending that it is unconstitutional. It is not our purpose in this article to discuss its constitutionality. Rather, this piece focuses on the viability of one of the justifications that often is put forth for the adoption of the individual mandate: the “free-rider” problem

Free Rider: A Justification for Mandatory Medical Insurance Under Health Care Reform?

Section 1501 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act added section 5000A to the Internal Revenue Code to require most individuals in the United States, beginning in the year 2014, to purchase an established minimum level of medical insurance. This requirement, which is enforced by a penalty imposed on those who fail to comply, is sometimes referred to as the “individual mandate.” The individual mandate is one element of a vast change to the provision of medical care that Congress implemented in 2010. The individual mandate has proved to be controversial and has been the subject of a number of lawsuits contending that it is unconstitutional. It is not our purpose in this article to discuss its constitutionality. Rather, this piece focuses on the viability of one of the justifications that often is put forth for the adoption of the individual mandate: the “free-rider” problem

Recovery for Causing Tax Overpayment - Lyeth v. Hoey and Clark Revisited

The question has arisen in numerous cases as to the extent to which a settlement between arms’ length parties is dispositive in tax cases of the claims on which the settlement is based. Another issue that often arises is whether the receipt of compensation for a tax payment that was incurred because of the negligence of the payor is excluded from gross income. While those two issues were central to the proper resolution of a recent case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, McKenny v. United States, the court failed even to note one of those issues and did not resolve the other. The court’s failure to deal with those two issues led it to reach an incorrect result. The two landmark cases establishing the doctrines that should have been applied in McKenny are the Supreme Court’s decision in Lyeth v, Hoey and the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals (now known as the Tax Court) in Clark v. Commissioner. Using McKenny as a springboard, this article reviews the continued misapplication and sometimes disparagement of the Lyeth v. Hoey and Clark v. Commissioner reasonings. Clark, in particular, has been criticized by both academics and the Service. The article reviews those criticisms and argues that they are unpersuasive. The article concludes that both doctrines are valid and should have applied to find for the taxpayer in the McKenny case

Tax Consequences When a New Employer Bears the Cost of the Employee\u27s Terminating a Prior Employment Relationship

The next few months will be busy ones for moving companies that have NCAA basketball coaches as customers. In the past few months, several men\u27s college basketball coaches have accepted jobs at different schools. Several of those coaches, who were still under contract at their former institution, had buy out provisions that allowed them to terminate their relationship for a set price. John Beilein is a prominent example of this since his buy out price was so high. Last season, Beilein was the head basketball coach at West Virginia University where he was under contract with the school until 2012. On April 3 of this year, the University of Michigan hired Beilein to become the head coach of its men\u27s basketball team. Under his contract with West Virginia University, if Beilein left that position before the contract term expired, he was required to pay a specified amount to the university. Initially, it was reported that the amount to be paid was in the vicinity of $2,000,000 to$2,500,000. Subsequently, it was reported that West Virginia and Beilein agreed that Beilein would pay the university $1,500,000 over a five-year period in full settlement of his obligation. Prior to Beilein\u27s hiring, there was speculation in the media that the University of Michigan would pay West Virginia University the amount owed under Beilein\u27s contract. The question then arose as to the tax consequences to Beilein that such a payment would engender

Tax and Cross-Collateralized Nonrecourse Liability

This Article explores the tax treatment of cross-collateral nonrecourse debt. When using the term cross-collateral debt, we are referring to non¬recourse debt that is connected with more than one piece of property. While tax issues concerning cross-collateralized properties can arise in several circumstances, the focus of this Article is on the tax treatment of a transfer of property subject to a cross-collateralized nonrecourse lia¬bility to a controlled corporation in exchange for stock that qualifies for some or all nonrecognition under § 351. The Article also discusses two other tax issues involving cross-collateralized nonrecourse liability—namely, cancellation of debt and determination of basis issues