MENU

Tax Law

"Tax Expenditures": The Wisdom and Efficacy of Using the Tax Code to Implement Social Policy - Event Audio/Video

Administrative Law Practice Group
Lily Batchelder, Leonard E. Burman, Stephen J. Entin, Eileen O'Connor May 12, 2008

The Federalist Society's 2008 Tax Policy Conference titled "Our Nation's Founding Principles and Our Tax Code - Consistent or In Conflict?" was held at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on May 7, 2008. This panel featured Prof. Lily Batchelder of the NYU School of Law, Mr. Leonard E. Burman, Director of the Tax Policy Institute, Urban Institute, Mr. Stephen J. Entin of The Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation, and Hon. Eileen J. O'Connor of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, and former Assistant Attorney General for the Tax Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, as the moderator.

Armour v. Indianapolis - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 03-13-12 featuring Shay Dvoretzky
Shay Dvoretzky March 13, 2012

SCOTUScastOn February 29, 2012, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Armour v. Indianapolis. The question presented in this case is whether a local government violated the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause when it forgave the obligations of taxpayers who had elected to pay on a multi-year installment plan, but refused to refund payments made by similarly situated taxpayers who had paid their assessments up front and in full.

To discuss the case, we have Shay Dvoretzky, who is a Partner at Jones Day.

Armour v. Indianapolis - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 07-23-12 featuring David Bernstein
David E. Bernstein July 23, 2012

David BernsteinOn June 4, 2012, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Armour v. Indianapolis, a case involving municipal assessments for a sewer improvement project.  The question presented in this case was whether a local government violated the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause when it forgave the obligations of taxpayers who had elected to pay on a multi-year installment plan, but refused to refund lump sum payments made by similarly situated taxpayers who had paid their assessments up front and in full.

In an opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court held by a vote of 6-3 that the government did not violate the Equal Protection Clause when it refused to to refund any of the lump sum payments, because the government had a rational basis for distinguishing between the lump sum and installment plan groups.  Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined Justice Breyer’s opinion. Chief Justice Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Scalia and Alito.

To discuss the case, we have David Bernstein, who is the George Mason University Foundation Professor at the George Mason University School of Law.

[Listen now!]

Charity: Whether and, if so, How Our Tax Laws Affect Charitable Activities, Religious Institutions, and Free Speech - Event Audio/Video

Administrative Law Practice Group
Anne D. Neal, Matthew Vadum, Lee E. Goodman, Kevin J. Hasson May 12, 2008

The Federalist Society's 2008 Tax Policy Conference titled "Our Nation's Founding Principles and Our Tax Code - Consistent or In Conflict?" was held at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on May 7, 2008. This panel featured Mr. Lee E. Goodman of LeClairRyan, Mr. Kevin Hasson of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Ms. Anne D. Neal of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, and Mr. Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center as the moderator.