法院之友克里斯汀·e·希克曼支持上诉人,CIC服务有限责任公司诉美国国税局等人案摘要,第19-930号(美国最高法院)

Kristin E. Hickman
{"title":"法院之友克里斯汀·e·希克曼支持上诉人,CIC服务有限责任公司诉美国国税局等人案摘要,第19-930号(美国最高法院)","authors":"Kristin E. Hickman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3658611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 19-930, supporting the petitioners on the merits. The issue in the case is whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a), precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges against Treasury and IRS rules and regulations -- specifically in this case, IRS Notice 2016-66. Building on previous scholarship, the brief argues that statutory text, history, and purpose support a narrow interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act that harmonizes with the Administrative Procedure Act and allows pre-enforcement judicial review.","PeriodicalId":330166,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brief of Amicus Curiae Kristin E. Hickman In Support of Petitioners, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, et al., No. 19-930 (U.S. Supreme Court)\",\"authors\":\"Kristin E. Hickman\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3658611\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 19-930, supporting the petitioners on the merits. The issue in the case is whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a), precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges against Treasury and IRS rules and regulations -- specifically in this case, IRS Notice 2016-66. Building on previous scholarship, the brief argues that statutory text, history, and purpose support a narrow interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act that harmonizes with the Administrative Procedure Act and allows pre-enforcement judicial review.\",\"PeriodicalId\":330166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3658611\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3658611","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本“法庭之友摘要”已提交美国最高法院,在CIC服务有限责任公司诉美国国税局案(第19-930号)中支持上诉人的案情。本案的问题在于,《反禁令法》(26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a))是否排除了对《行政程序法》针对财政部和国税局规章制度的挑战的执行前司法审查——特别是在本案中,国税局通知2016-66。摘要在以往学术研究的基础上,认为法定文本、历史和目的支持对《反禁令法》的狭义解释,使之与《行政程序法》相协调,并允许执行前司法审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Brief of Amicus Curiae Kristin E. Hickman In Support of Petitioners, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, et al., No. 19-930 (U.S. Supreme Court)
This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 19-930, supporting the petitioners on the merits. The issue in the case is whether the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. s. 7421(a), precludes pre-enforcement judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act challenges against Treasury and IRS rules and regulations -- specifically in this case, IRS Notice 2016-66. Building on previous scholarship, the brief argues that statutory text, history, and purpose support a narrow interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act that harmonizes with the Administrative Procedure Act and allows pre-enforcement judicial review.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Misdirected Recipients of Tax Reform: Section 199A, its True Beneficiaries, and Application to Low- and Middle- Income Residents Consistent Taxation in a Cashless Society Is It Time to Eliminate Federal Corporate Income Taxes? Brief of Amici Curiae Former Government Officials in Support of Respondents, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service Allocating COVID-19 State Aid Equitably – The Case of Denmark
×
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