Americans\u27 Unwillingness to Pay Taxes Before the American Revolution: An Uncomfortable Legacy

When one reflects on the sorry condition of America’s finances one has to wonder why there is such resistance to fiscal discipline. Is it merely because there is an obstreperous group in the US Congress who cannot abide any tax? Has the public been subtly lobbied into believing that American taxes are high, pointless and intolerable or is there some gene in the America’s body politic that has always been there that expresses itself from time to time in a pernicious cheapness? Perhaps all those things are true, or perhaps none. Nevertheless, a glance backward at Colonial days can stimulate a sense of déjà-vu. This article explores the history of America’s relationship to taxes prior to the American Revolution

Dubious Interpretative Rules for Construing Federal Taxing Statutes

Knowing even a substantial portion of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 is a major achievement. Divining how the courts might react to a complex tax transaction is also terribly difficult, but for this ability lawyers are often well-rewarded on earth. The tools of this esoteric trade include a mass of interpretative rules of a most uncertain nature, as sophisticated tax advisors are well aware. This article discusses the application and limits of a litany of the interpretative rules. The rules are frequently applicable outside the tax field, but the following study is confined to their application to tax decisions. If the tone of the article seems mocking or irreverent, that tone is ultimately unintended. Judges, including those on our United States Supreme Court, face a dismal flood of overwhelmingly complex tax cases which must in fact be decided; and the decisions frequently require makeweights or ready-made rationales for reaching a particular result. The major villain in this story is Congress, with its specialized committees which fail to consider fully or explain the purposes of complicated legislation. Lesser villains might include those members of the legal and accounting professions who structure transactions laden with doubt but know that there is a slight chance of prevailing or of forcing the government to accept an economically sound settlement. Furthermore, there is always the possibility that the Internal Revenue Service\u27s audit personnel may not discover the issue in the first place. The rules discussed in this article were selected either because they are particularly pervasive (reenactment, traps for the unwary, and the presumptive correctness of regulations) or because they reflect curious judicial attitudes towards the treatment of complex tax matters (respect for legislated conditions, placement of the burden on the draftsman, and symmetry). As a final matter, the article suggests several proposals for reforming some or all of the interpretative rules

The Relationship of Federal Income Taxes to Toxic Wastes: A Selective Study

More demanding federal regulation, universal local opposition to waste treatment and disposal facilities, and increased long-term liabilities for waste sites have substantially restricted the supply of licensed waste handlers and have sharply increased the costs of waste disposal. As a result of increased costs and downstream liabilities for cleanup, industrial generators have begun to examine more closely their waste management practices and opportunities they may have to reduce the amount of hazardous waste they generate. The urgent need to marshal the full range of industrial strategies to achieve significant reduction in the amount and toxicity of hazardous waste and the environmentally sound treatment of residual wastes suggests the need to investigate whether the economic incentives embodied in the tax code harmonize with the national hazardous waste management policy or set up dissonances with the policy that discourage private cooperation. This Article probes the extent to which federal taxes, as reflected in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and elsewhere, are compatible or incompatible with federal environmental policies with respect to hazardous wastes. After a brief discussion in Part II of the lack of specific environmental policy input into the drafting of tax legislation, this Article proceeds in Part III to the analysis of the Code provisions affecting firms\u27 management of wastes and their associated risks. This analysis is organized according to the general character of the industrial activity affected. Section A deals with the general policy underlying tax deductions. Section B deals with the specifics of industrial operations, including the tax treatment of raw materials, or feedstocks, that are introduced into the production process and tax incentives related to changes in industrial processes and new production technologies. Section C discusses the tax treatment of waste disposal, including both pollution control equipment to treat waste before release to the environment, as well as ultimate waste disposal. Finally, Section D considers tax effects on the expenses and insurance or capital accumulations to cover liabilities that may accrue to firms after disposal of waste

The Need for Prompt Action to Revise American Law Schools

American law students are in a crisis. The ghost fishing crisis was cured when the law required that the lobster trap’s door eventually open, thanks to biodegradable metal hinges or gates. Unfortunately, there is no such relief for the glut of law students. The ABA Journal reports that 85% of graduates from accredited law schools in 2010 were burdened with debts averaging $98,500, but they are graduating into a weak economy where their prospects for employment have narrowed greatly. Students in previous classes have far from been absorbed into the legal industry and classes behind them promise a continuing flow of competitors....What follows is an attempt to lay out the problem and propose some serious changes promptly in order to make law school more humane and economically efficient before the opportunity for taking advantage of faculty attrition for restructuring the law school system has faded

A double-blind randomized trial of nicotine nasal spray as an aid in smoking cessation

To access publisher full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links fieldThe objective of the study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of nicotine nasal solution (NNS) for smoking cessation from the stopping day up to 3 months. We also followed the participants for 2 yrs after ceasing smoking to assess what happens after stopping using NNS. In a placebo-controlled, double-blind, 2 yr prospective study, 157 smokers were given either NNS, one dose containing 1 mg of nicotine per 100 microL (n=79), or placebo (n=78). Treatment was continued for up to 1 yr. One day after quitting smoking, the average number of daily doses was 11 in the group assigned NNS and 14 in the group assigned the placebo, and after 6 weeks, 14 and 6 doses, respectively, among abstinent participants still using spray. After 3 months, 65% of the abstainers in the nicotine group were still using the NNS. The abstinence rates were 51, 39 and 29% after 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months, respectively, as compared to 24, 19 and 18% in the placebo group (p=0.0003; p=0.003; p=0.050). The proportion abstinent at the 1 yr (25 vs 17%) and 2 yr follow-ups (19 vs 14%) was higher among those assigned to the nicotine than to the placebo group, but not significantly so for the numbers used in the study. In conclusion, the use of nicotine nasal spray significantly increased the abstinence rate during the first 6 months following the quitting day