Brief Outline on Research Citations
And Assorted Valuable Commentary
The Code is generally arranged as follows:
Subtitle A. Income
Taxes
Chapter 1. Normal Taxes
Subchapter A. Determination of Tax Liability [[Aside: Ever hear of
Sub S companies?]]
Sections
Part II. Tax on Corporations
Sections
All that said and
done, we generally are looking to the SECTION numbers.
For example,
Internal Revenue Code
What’s the Code? It’s the big daddy and foundation for all of
our tax research, it is the statutory law authorizing
certain events.
IRC § 101 è This
section is actually entitled Certain Death Benefits
Another favorite of ours is
IRC § 1 “Tax Imposed”
Lets get down and get more
complicated.-----
§ (section) 2
(section number, duh) (a) Subsection number(letter)
(1)
paragraph (A)
subparagraph
thus, IRC
§ 2(a)(1)(A), which happens to deal with income taxes imposed on individuals.
If
you have several sections, the abbreviation is §§
Practical stuff: where do you
find the symbol “§” in the word processor?
At least in Word, you go to
Insert, then to symbols, and its usually under “basic Latin”
symbols – note you can make a shortcut to it, I personally use Alt S. The paragraph symbol is usually close to the
section symbol as well, I use Alt P – obviously use whatever mnemonic you
prefer.
Regulations
What’s in the Regs? Ok, you go read some of the Code and see if
you understand what it says! The regs attempt to explain what the code says, and even
occasionally gives some useful examples.
Notice, however, that the examples are never updated!!!
Reg. §1.614-3(f)
NOTICE
the part number (here 1.) added to the beginning which designates
what major grouping of tax we are talking about, for example part number 1=
income tax, part 20= estate tax, part 25= gift tax, part 301=procedural matters. So, what is the 614-3(f)? That is the actual code section that the
regulation is referring to in its analysis.
Well,
lets remember that we also have Regs
that haven’t been finalized and are proposed. These look like
this:
Prop.Reg.
§1.2
Revenue Rulings &
Revenue Procedures.
Okie dokie, what do the Rev Rulings do?
Well, they are usually responses to taxpayers on specific questions that
contain useful advice that is considered useful to all taxpayers. They interpret the law as to specific fact circumstances.
But, they cannot be used for heavy duty support for your position like a
regulation may be. Don’t let that
dissuade you, however, its better than nothing!!
Rev. Procs deal with the IRS’s internal management
stuff.
Temporary
Rev. Rul. 84 – 101, I.R.B. No. 28, 5
This
one says, hey, dudes, I was issued in 1984 and was the 101st ruling,
and I am located in the 28th weekly issue at page 5. Coooool, eh dudes?
Permanent
Rev. Rul. 84-101, 1984-2 C.B. 115
Ok,
lets figure this one out. Really, the first part is pretty much the
same, but now we are dealing with the Permanent “book” that these are filed
within, and the book(s) is called the Cumulative Bulletin. Here, its located in
the 1984 series, volume 2, at page 115. Same stuff, just different file finding mechanism.
Letter Rulings
So,
what is a letter ruling? Basically a
nice income source for the service (around $700 or so to do one), but, it is
considered as substantial authority if you have “reasonably close” fact
situations in your own case. In other words, if you haven’t had it issued for
yourself (where in that case it would be rock solid support), it is very useful
but not overwhelming support for your position, and more importantly, it will
avoid certain penalties such as the accuracy related penalties.
LtrRul. 9742002
First, break it down into 97 42 002
I
like these, they actually are elegantly simple:
here we have a letter ruling issued in 1997, 42nd week, and
ruling number 2 of the week.
If it was issued in 2001, it
would look like LtrRul. 200142003
Tax Court
M. Bitsko
Co., 65 T.C. 694 (1997)
Ah,
the beloved tax court, the refuge of many a taxpayer. What we have here is the case name (usually
the dude or dudette who is getting the treatment by the IRS, but not always),
located in Volume 65 of the Tax Court Reporter at page 694. And, by the way, it was a 1997 case. (You
won’t find this out there, I made it up, as I like Mickey Bitsko
who is of Mad
Magazine fame.
FEDERAL
District Courts (we rarely
care about state courts view on federal matters, but occasionally we might)
Well,
we have a bunch of reporters (i.e., the books where the law/case is located)
out there, and naturally everyone has to be cool and do their own style of indexing. So, we get to learn a few different ways of
doing things.
Recall there are at least three levels in the courts:
Trial Court è Appellate Court è Supreme Court
Each
court generally has its own law reporter (a particular volume where all of
their opinions are published). But,
other companies just publish the tax related cases in their own materials. Thus, the
confusion begins, dear reader:
Fed District Court:
CCH:
Cam F. Dowell, Jr. v.
West Publishing
Notice
these have very similar information, but the reporter that each entity uses is
really the only difference. By the way,
the D.Ct Tx means it was in
district court in
Federal Reporter (Appeals Court)
West:
F.
or F.2d or F.3rd
CCH:
Sterling Distributors, Inc. v.
West:
Sterling Distributors, Inc. v.
This
is the federal appeals court. We happen
to be in the 5th districts jurisdiction.
US Supreme Court
What’s
this? This is the designation of the “official” publication done by the Supreme
court. For example, Mickey Bitsko v. Commissioner, 104 U.S. 333 (1999).
In other words, the Supreme court actually publishes
its own materials in its own format and own books. Don’t ask me why, they always take about a
year or so to come out. Therefore, we
want speed, right? We use either the on
line systems or:
US Supreme Ct.
S.Ct.
This
is the example of West Publishing’s reporter.
The same stuff is there (actually more, since it includes editorial
overviews), and it is published sooner.
The same citation might be Mickey Bitsko v. Commissioner, 200 s. Ct. 202 (1999)- notice there is no correlation other than the case name
and the date.
(There are other reporters out there that also carry the same
Supreme Court information, but these are the main ones.)
Strange things
So, what if we see this?
Charles E. Strange, 114 T.C.
___, No. 15 (2000)
This is the 15th
decision that will be put in the permanent Vol. 114.
Other stuff:
A B C D E F G H I
J K L M N O P Q R S T
|
|
SUBCHAPTERS
|
|
SUBTITLE A: INCOME TAXES
|
|
LOCATION OF JUDICIAL SOURCES
USTC AFTR F.Supp. F.3d Cls.Ct. S.Ct.
Series Series Series Series Series Series(a)
U.S. District Courts
(tax cases) Yes Yes Yes No No No
(tax cases) Yes Yes No(e) Yes(e) Yes(e) No
U.S. Courts of Appeals
(tax cases) Yes Yes No Yes No No
U.S. Supreme Court
(tax cases) Yes Yes No No No Yes
U.S. District Courts
(all cases)(f) No No Yes No No No
(all cases) No No No Yes No No
U.S. Supreme Court
(all cases) No No No No No Yes
______________
(a) Answers
also apply to the United States Supreme Court Reports (abbreviated
(b) Regular
(not Memorandum) decisions are published by the U.S. Government Printing Office
in Tax Court of the United States Reports.
(c) Both
CCH and RIA have separate
services for reporting the decisions of the U.S. Tax Court (both regular and
memorandum).
(d) All
decisions (both tax and non-tax) of the U.S. Court of Claims were published by
the U.S. Government Printing Office in Court of Claims Reporter Series. Ceased publication
(e)
From 1945 to 1960, the Court of Claims
decisions were published by West Publishing Company in the F.Supp.
Series; from 1960, to September 30, 1982, in the F.2d Series; from October 1,
1982, to September 30, 1992, in the Claims Court Reporter; and beginning
October 1, 1992, in the Federal Claims Reporter.
(f)
The reference to
“all cases” pertains to non-tax as well as tax cases. Thus, it would include such varied issues as
interstate transportation of stolen goods, civil rights violations, and
antitrust suits.