Sheltering Lawyers: The Organized Tax Bar and the Tax Shelter Industry

IF 1.2 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW Yale Journal on Regulation Pub Date : 2005-04-01 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.696704
Tanina Rostain
{"title":"Sheltering Lawyers: The Organized Tax Bar and the Tax Shelter Industry","authors":"Tanina Rostain","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.696704","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article considers the role of tax lawyers in the corporate tax shelter controversy. In the mid-1990s, a large market emerged in abusive tax shelters, which cost the treasury tens of billions of dollars in lost tax revenue a year. Although individual tax lawyers were deeply involved in abusive tax shelters, the organized tax bar supported law reforms intended to rein in the tax shelter market. The bar's initiatives included due diligence obligations for opinion letters issued in connection with tax shelters and other proposals intended to strengthen practice standards. The tax bar's positions in the tax shelter debate cannot be adequately explained by conventional accounts of the organized bar, which assume that bar groups act to further lawyers' or clients' economic interests or to improve the reputation of the bar. Nor, however, should the bar's positions be taken as pure expressions of public-mindedness. A more nuanced conception of professionalism is required to account for the bar's initiatives. This Article argues that the bar's positions reflect a specific professional ideology of tax practice in which tax lawyers, by virtue of their expertise, serve as gatekeepers for the tax system. While not conferring immediate economic benefits to tax lawyers, the bar's reforms further tax lawyers' long-term reputational and other interests, even as they serve to bind lawyers to higher practice standards and protect the integrity of the tax system.","PeriodicalId":46196,"journal":{"name":"Yale Journal on Regulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2005-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yale Journal on Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.696704","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

This Article considers the role of tax lawyers in the corporate tax shelter controversy. In the mid-1990s, a large market emerged in abusive tax shelters, which cost the treasury tens of billions of dollars in lost tax revenue a year. Although individual tax lawyers were deeply involved in abusive tax shelters, the organized tax bar supported law reforms intended to rein in the tax shelter market. The bar's initiatives included due diligence obligations for opinion letters issued in connection with tax shelters and other proposals intended to strengthen practice standards. The tax bar's positions in the tax shelter debate cannot be adequately explained by conventional accounts of the organized bar, which assume that bar groups act to further lawyers' or clients' economic interests or to improve the reputation of the bar. Nor, however, should the bar's positions be taken as pure expressions of public-mindedness. A more nuanced conception of professionalism is required to account for the bar's initiatives. This Article argues that the bar's positions reflect a specific professional ideology of tax practice in which tax lawyers, by virtue of their expertise, serve as gatekeepers for the tax system. While not conferring immediate economic benefits to tax lawyers, the bar's reforms further tax lawyers' long-term reputational and other interests, even as they serve to bind lawyers to higher practice standards and protect the integrity of the tax system.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
庇护律师:有组织的税务律师和避税行业
本文探讨了税务律师在企业避税争议中的作用。上世纪90年代中期,滥用避税手段形成了一个巨大的市场,导致美国财政部每年损失数百亿美元的税收收入。尽管个别税务律师深深卷入了滥用避税的行为,但有组织的税务律师协会支持旨在控制避税市场的法律改革。律师公会的举措包括对与避税和其他旨在加强执业标准的建议有关的意见书进行尽职调查。税务律师在避税辩论中的立场不能用有组织的律师协会的传统说法来充分解释,这些说法认为律师协会的行为是为了促进律师或客户的经济利益,或提高律师协会的声誉。然而,律师公会的立场也不应被视为纯粹的公众意识的表达。我们需要一个更细致入微的专业概念来解释酒吧的举措。本文认为,律师的立场反映了一种特定的税务实践专业意识形态,在这种意识形态中,税务律师凭借其专业知识,充当了税收系统的守门人。虽然没有给税务律师带来直接的经济利益,但律师协会的改革进一步提高了税务律师的长期声誉和其他利益,甚至可以约束律师遵守更高的执业标准,保护税收制度的完整性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
3.60%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
FOIA’s Common Law Empiricism and Privacy Policies in the Restatement of Consumer Contract Law New Tech v. New Deal: Fintech as a Systemic Phenomenon Presidential Administration in a Regime of Separated Powers: An Analysis of Recent American Experience Eliminating Conflicts of Interests in Banks: The Significance of the Volcker Rule
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1