In less than four months, the citizens of the United States will be electing their next President to a four-year term. They will also be deciding which of the two major political parties will “control” the Senate, the House,...more
A team of BakerHostetler lawyers, led by Partners Andrew Grossman and Jeff Paravano, represented clients Charles and Kathleen Moore at the Supreme Court, arguing that realization is required for federal taxation of income...more
On June 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-anticipated decision in Moore v. United States, in which a 7-2 majority upheld the constitutionality of the mandatory repatriation tax (“MRT”) under section 965 of the...more
Almost exactly a year after it shook the tax world by granting certiorari, on June 20, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Moore v. United States, No. 22-800. By a vote of 7-2, the Court upheld the constitutionality...more
On June 20, 2024, the Supreme Court released its opinion in Moore et ux v. US, authored by Kavanaugh, decided by 6-3 vote and marking a rare instance for the Court to interpret the 16th Amendment, upholding the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court today upheld the constitutionality of the so-called “mandatory repatriation tax” in a narrow ruling, stating that the MRT taxes realized income — income earned by the offshore corporation — and...more
On June 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the so called mandatory repatriation tax under Internal Revenue Code Section 965 (“MRT”) is constitutional. Justice Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion...more
In December 2023, the Supreme Court considered the fundamental question: “How is income defined?” Moore v. United States centered on the question of taxation of unrealized income. Unrealized income is defined as a gain that...more
On December 5, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Moore v. United States, which is potentially the next landmark tax case on the meaning of income under the Sixteenth Amendment....more
On December 5, 2023, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. United States, addressing the constitutionality of the section 965 transition tax, which was enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Section 965...more
Unless you have been living under a rock—as we tax lawyers are wont to do—you have probably been following Moore v. United States, which we last discussed. On December 5, the tax community stepped into the spotlight...more
On October 23, 2023, Proskauer attorneys submitted an amicus brief in connection with the U.S. Supreme Court case of Moore v. United States[1] on behalf of the American College of Tax Counsel—a nonprofit professional...more
Many of you, perhaps most, may have read about a case that will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court during its current term. The case, Moore v. United States, comes out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court...more
A tax case pending in the United States Supreme Court, Moore v. United States, may cause a cataclysmic change in the federal income tax. The 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution empowers Congress to impose “taxes...more
The U.S. tax system developed in response to colonial opposition to taxation without representation. As such, Article I of the Constitution provides that Congress may not impose a “direct tax” unless the tax is “apportioned”...more
On June 26, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal of Moore v. United States, a development that reverberated throughout the world of tax. The Moore case deals with the constitutionality of the transition tax under...more
In Eisner v. Macomber, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that for purposes of the Sixteenth Amendment, “income” was “a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value proceeding from the property, severed from the capital however...more
How Are You Doing? How are you coping with social distancing? Are you working remotely? If so, has it been as “seamless” as you would have others believe? Have you snuck out to visit family or close friends, or have they...more
Cannabis (or marijuana) dispensaries have long stated that they are subjected to harsher tax consequences under the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC” or “Code”) than their “legal” counterparts. Specifically, they have argued, in...more
As more and more states are allowing legal use of marijuana, medical marijuana businesses are faced with large tax bills because of marijuana’s continued classification as a Schedule I controlled substance under federal law. ...more
Dear Littler: My company recently hired a new employee who is giving our human resources department some pushback on submitting his W-4. The HR manager says the employee mentioned something about not being subject to income...more
The Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission (“the MMCC”) recently reported to the Maryland legislature on “the deleterious effects of the federal tax code on medical cannabis businesses.” As stated in its report, I.R.C. § 280E...more