Am I My Brother’s Keeper? A Tax Law Perspective on the Challenge of Balancing Gatekeeping Obligations and Zealous Advocacy in the Legal Profession

In recent years the question of whether lawyers have a general ethical obligation to serve a gatekeeping function has been raised in a number of legal contexts. The reaction of the practicing bar generally has been unenthusiastic. While asserting that a gatekeeping function should be generally applicable to all attorneys is a relatively recent stance, such an obligation historically has been acknowledged to various degrees in several specific practice areas, including particularly in the field of federal income taxation. This piece examines the gatekeeping question, and how the practicing bar should react to it, through an examination of the gatekeeping role historically asserted as applicable to tax lawyers, including how modern pressures (e.g., literalist statutory interpretation, profit maximization law firm models, changing business and societal ethical norms, etc.) have altered that historically asserted ethical norm. The article then suggests avenues for combating these modern trends in the tax arena in order to strengthen and reestablish the historic balance in a tax lawyer’s planning role (e.g., by creating intentional conflicts of interest to create a “divide and conquer” dynamic between clients and attorneys in aggressive transactions, emphasizing the ethical training of tax attorneys, clarifying the proper approach for statutory interpretation in the tax context, creating disincentives for a legal race to the bottom among attorneys competing for business, highlighting the importance of individual trend setters, channeling the competitive pressures in the legal marketplace in the government’s favor, etc.). The piece concludes with some closing thoughts regarding the lessons that the practicing bar might take from the tax gatekeeping example in their future reactions to gatekeeping initiatives in other areas of the law and accepting gatekeeping as a generally applicable ethical norm

Analyzing the Schizoid Agency: Achieving the Proper Balance in Enforcing the Internal Revenue Code

The purpose of this article is to examine the considerations that should influence the development of appropriate controversy position standards for the Service. In this regard it is crucial to understand the inherent duality in the Service\u27s role. On one hand it is charged with enforcing the Internal Revenue Code (the Code ), and as a result it attempts to maximize the collection of all legally owed taxes. On the other, the Service is charged with maintaining the efficient and fair operation of the tax system as a whole. The United States federal income tax system is premised on voluntary taxpayer compliance with the Code. Taxpayer compliance is linked to perceptions regarding the overall fairness of the tax system. When taxpayers perceive the Service as overreaching, they lose faith in the system and voluntary compliance is harmed. For instance, when the Service publishes one-sided guidance it undercuts its important taxpayer education efforts because taxpayers learn that the tax law will be interpreted in a biased manner. To avoid these pitfalls, it is necessary for the Service to strike an appropriate balance in taking positions to mitigate the tensions inherent in its dual role of facilitating voluntary compliance and policing against non-compliance. Part II of this article reviews the current position standards that apply to taxpayers and the Service. Part III examines the key considerations which should be taken into account in developing controversy position standards for the Service. Part IV makes an initial attempt at developing a set of controversy guidelines for the Service and analyzes some possible critiques of the proposed guidelines. Part V concludes that in order to protect the integrity of the self-assessment tax system the Service must articulate clear and administrable position standards for use by Service employees that take a balanced view of the tax law and prevent overreaching by the government

Inflammatory Airway Disease of Horses - Revised Consensus Statement

The purpose of this manuscript is to revise and update the previous consensus statement on inflammatory airway disease (IAD) in horses. Since 2007, a large number of scientific articles have been published on the topic and these new findings have led to a significant evolution of our understanding of IAD

Equine asthma: current understanding and future directions

The 2019 Havemeyer Workshop brought together researchers and clinicians to discuss the latest information on Equine Asthma and provide future research directions. Current clinical and molecular asthma phenotypes and endotypes in humans were discussed and compared to asthma phenotypes in horses. The role of infectious and non-infectious causes of equine asthma, genetic factors and proposed disease pathophysiology were reviewed. Diagnostic limitations were evident by the limited number of tests and biomarkers available to field practitioners. The participants emphasized the need for more accessible, standardized diagnostics that would help identify specific phenotypes and endotypes in order to create more targeted treatments or management strategies. One important outcome of the workshop was the creation of the Equine Asthma Group that will facilitate communication between veterinary practice and research communities through published and easily accessible guidelines and foster research collaboration