Columbia Journal of Tax Law最新文献_第3页

Gallery-Supported Art Exhibitions: Critiquing “Crayola” 画廊赞助艺术展:评“蜡笔画”

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2019-04-27 DOI: 10.7916/D8902GF6

Anne Choike

引用次数: 0

Chinese State Capitalism and the International Tax Regime 中国国家资本主义与国际税收制度

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2019-01-02 DOI: 10.7916/CJTL.V10I1.2867

Cameron Rotblat

{"title":"Chinese State Capitalism and the International Tax Regime","authors":"Cameron Rotblat","doi":"10.7916/CJTL.V10I1.2867","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/CJTL.V10I1.2867","url":null,"abstract":"As signaled by its participation in the G-20/OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, China is gaining significant influence over international tax rules. Yet, how exactly China intends to shape international tax law remains an open question, even amongst leading Chinese tax scholars. As both a major capital importer and exporter as well as a developing economy with tremendous global economic power, China does not fit neatly into the traditional dichotomies of the international tax regime. This article argues that China’s international tax policy is likely to be strongly influenced by its unique system of state capitalism. Both the history of Chinese domestic tax reforms and the Communist Party’s current mechanisms of control over the Chinese economy suggest that China’s tax policy cannot be understood separately from its system of state capitalism. This article contends that as a result, China is likely to adopt distinctive international tax policies including maintaining a worldwide system of corporate taxation, providing tacit state support for international tax planning by major Chinese multinationals, and negotiating for broad exemptions in tax treaties for state-associated entities. If not proactively addressed by OECD countries, these policies may lead to significant fractures within the international tax regime.","PeriodicalId":368484,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Tax Law","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128111404","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Tax Planning Under the Destination Based Cash Flow Tax: A Guide for Policymakers and Practitioners 基于目的地的现金流税下的税收筹划:政策制定者和从业者指南

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2017-10-21 DOI: 10.7916/D8V98MQS

David S. Miller

引用次数: 5

A Guide to the Guide to the Republican Better Way Plan 《共和党更好的道路计划指南

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2017-04-20 DOI: 10.7916/D84T6X00

Alex Raskolnikov

{"title":"A Guide to the Guide to the Republican Better Way Plan","authors":"Alex Raskolnikov","doi":"10.7916/D84T6X00","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D84T6X00","url":null,"abstract":"This special Issue of the Columbia Journal of Tax Law is bound to have both an immediate impact and a lasting significance. The immediate impact is assured because the sole focus of this Issue is the tax plan proposed by the Congressional Republicans as part of their broad reform agenda called A Better Way: Our Vision For A Confident America. As this Issue goes to print, the Better Way Plan (or the Plan for short) is being debated in the White House, on Capitol Hill, in the press, in academic circles, think tanks, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and all major law and accounting firms, as well as in many other places. For anyone thinking through the implications of the Plan, this Issue is a must read. At the same time, the contributions in this Issue will provide a lasting benefit to the tax policy community. Even though the intellectual foundations of the tax system proposed in the Plan were laid decades ago, the core ideas underlying the Plan have never been considered, tested, and scrutinized nearly as rigorously and comprehensively as they are now. Simply put, the level of intellectual capital that is being invested in analyzing the Plan is extraordinary. This Issue combines some of the best applied work on the subject to date. So it will benefit academics, policymakers, and practitioners thinking about the tax systems similar to the one proposed in the Plan for decades to come. This Issue is a guide to the Plan based on what we know so far, and this Introduction is a guide to the Issue. Readers familiar with the basics of the Plan and interested in a comprehensive list of questions, concerns, and uncertainties it raises should start with Michael Graetz’s The Known Unknowns of the Business Tax Reforms Proposed in the House Republican Blueprint. The list of unknowns is long and daunting. Some will not be resolved until after the Plan is put in place, for better or worse. Others will need","PeriodicalId":368484,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Tax Law","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116952020","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Property Tax Exemptions for Hospitals: A Blunt Instrument Where a Scalpel is Needed 医院的财产税豁免:需要手术刀的钝器

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2017-02-22 DOI: 10.7916/D8TH9093

Eric J. Santos

引用次数: 3

New Rulings Present Opportunities, but Not Carte Blanche 新裁决带来机遇，但不是全权委托

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2017-01-04 DOI: 10.7916/D8XK8DZT

Michael Bloomfield, N. Richards

引用次数: 0

A New Theory of Taxpayer Standing 纳税人地位的新理论

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2017-01-02 DOI: 10.7916/CJTL.V6I1.2828

J. Parks

{"title":"A New Theory of Taxpayer Standing","authors":"J. Parks","doi":"10.7916/CJTL.V6I1.2828","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/CJTL.V6I1.2828","url":null,"abstract":"Flast v. Cohen, decided by the Supreme Court in 1968, articulated a narrow exception to the general rule that merely being a taxpayer does not provide the necessary standing to challenge an expenditure of government funds alleged to violate the Constitution. Since the time of Flast, the Court has steadily narrowed the exception, retreating from the underlying rationale of the Flast decision—a trend most recently observable in the Court’s decision in Arizona School Tuition Organization v. Winn. This Note proposes a new test for taxpayer standing which aims to preserve the doctrine, while remedying some its ills. Under this Note’s proposed test, taxpayer standing is appropriate when the following three factors are met: (1) the taxpayer’s status as a taxpayer bears a reasonable relationship to the challenged expenditure of government funds in question; (2) it is of practical necessity because the political system is structurally ill-equipped to provide a remedy for those who object to a particular expenditure of government funds alleged to violate the Constitution, or the taxpayer is a member of the class for whom the especial benefit of a constitutional limitation is intended to directly run; and (3) where no other plausible party has standing to challenge the alleged violation, leaving it functionally irremediable.","PeriodicalId":368484,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Tax Law","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124461445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Future of American Tax Administration: Conceptual Alternatives and Political Realities 美国税务管理的未来:概念选择和政治现实

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2016-12-03 DOI: 10.7916/D8QN676Z

Steven R. Johnson

引用次数: 2

Deducting the Cost of Sex Reassignment Surgery: How O’Donnabhain v. Commissioner Can Help Us Make Sense of the Medical Expense Deduction 扣除变性手术的费用:O 'Donnabhain诉专员案如何帮助我们理解医疗费用扣除

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2016-11-25 DOI: 10.7916/CJTL.V3I1.2809

Tamar E. Luszti

{"title":"Deducting the Cost of Sex Reassignment Surgery: How O’Donnabhain v. Commissioner Can Help Us Make Sense of the Medical Expense Deduction","authors":"Tamar E. Luszti","doi":"10.7916/CJTL.V3I1.2809","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/CJTL.V3I1.2809","url":null,"abstract":"In February 2010, the Tax Court held that a taxpayer’s expenses incurred for hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery were deductible as medical expenses under § 213 because they treated the disease of gender identity disorder. The court, however, was deeply divided in its determination of whether sex reassignment surgery qualifies as nondeductible cosmetic surgery under § 213(d)(9). In 1990, Congress amended § 213 to exclude cosmetic surgery from the definition of deductible medical care. Since then, the Tax Court and the I.R.S. have rarely addressed the meaning and extent of that exclusion. The judges’ divergent opinions in O’Donnabhain make it clear that a thorough examination of the statutory meaning of cosmetic surgery is timely. \u0000This Note considers what should qualify as cosmetic surgery within the context of the medical expense deduction. It argues that a medical procedure that improves physical appearance should be deductible under § 213 when it is physician-prescribed treatment for a specific disease, and consistent with generally accepted medical practice. This analysis is grounded in the statutory language of § 213, and is supported by broader principles that bear on the policy debate surrounding the medical expense deduction more generally.","PeriodicalId":368484,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Tax Law","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132684798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

WHO WINS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX APPEALS 谁能赢得住宅物业税上诉

Columbia Journal of Tax Law Pub Date : 2015-02-04 DOI: 10.7916/D8PR7VCR

Randall K. Johnson

引用次数: 1