Emerging Cryptocurrencies and IRS Summons Power: Striking the Proper Balance between IRS Audit Authority and Taxpayer Privacy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mollie T. Adams ◽  
William A. Bailey
Keyword(s):  
Data Privacy ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Tax Compliance ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
Customer Information ◽  
History Of

To protect the privacy and other civil liberties of its citizens, federal courts place limits on the power and actions of government. These limits create a need for balance between the IRS’s mission of tax law enforcement and taxpayers’ privacy rights. A much-watched contemporary lower court case intersecting cryptocurrencies, summons power, and taxpayer privacy is Coinbase v. U.S.  There, the IRS sought to summons massive amounts of customer information from Coinbase, a cryptocurrency exchange platform. This article examines the history of the IRS summons power and argues that the Coinbase court correctly extended a wealth of summons enforcement case law by weighing the protection of taxpayer privacy with the tax compliance mission of the IRS. By allowing the IRS summons to stand, but limiting and defining the scope of relevant records allowed to be examined, the Coinbase court correctly balanced IRS tax enforcement with taxpayer data privacy.

scholarly journals Clarifying the Scope of Texas’s Cross-Jurisdictional Tolling Rule

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-271
Author(s):  
Andrew W. Bell
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Class Action ◽  
History Of

This Comment seeks to clarify the scope of cross-jurisdictional tolling in Texas. Although both Texas and federal courts interpreting Texas law have addressed this issue, no Texas court has specifically addressed whether putative members of a class action lawsuit—which was filed in a federal court located in Texas and that asserts Texas property-related claims—can rely on the class action lawsuit to toll the statute of limitations applicable to their claims. Part I of this Comment provides a brief history of the class action tolling doctrine, specifically describing American Pipe and its progeny. Part II discusses recent Texas case law decisions on the American Pipe doctrine and their applicability when cross-jurisdictional tolling is involved. Part III briefly discusses the policy concerns behind cross-jurisdictional tolling. Part IV recommends that Texas should adopt cross-jurisdictional tolling in property-related cases, especially when the class action lawsuit is filed in a federal court located in Texas. Finally, Part V summarizes the points discussed in this Comment.

scholarly journals RECENT DECISIONS AFFECTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MARCELLUS SHALE IN PENNSYLVANIA

2011 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin C Abbott ◽  
Nicolle R Snyder Bagnell
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Marcellus Shale ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Oil And Gas Operations ◽  
History Of ◽  
Exploration And Development

Pennsylvania has a long history of natural gas exploration and development beginning in the 1800's. Despite having some of the country's oldest jurisprudence dealing with oil and gas disputes, Pennsylvania case law regarding oil and gas operations is relatively undeveloped in comparison to states like Texas and Oklahoma. With the boom in leasing and developing in the region in the last few years, there has also been an increase in oil and gas litigation in Pennsylvania state and federal courts. This paper will discuss the recent decisions that have impacted the development of Marcellus law in Pennsylvania, as well as identify some of the significant pending issues that are worth watching.

The Estelle Medical Professional Judgment Standard: The Right of Those in State Custody to Receive High-Cost Medical Treatments

1992 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 347-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc J. Posner
Keyword(s):  
Medical Care ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Medical Professional ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
Medical Treatments ◽  
State Custody ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive

This Article discusses the rights of prisoners, pretrial detainees, and the involuntarily committed to receive high-cost medical treatments. More specifically, the Article analyzes U.S. Supreme Court and lower court case law dealing with the medical care rights of those in state custody and argues that, under a proper understanding of this case law, the financial considerations of states should play no role in determining the rights of these people to receive high-cost medical care. Finally, the Article defends the current medical care standard against various critiques.

scholarly journals Should an Online Blogger Be Protected by the Illinois Reporter’s Privilege?

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-38
Author(s):  
Donald L. Buresh
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Formal Training ◽  
News Medium ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law ◽  
Reporter's Privilege ◽  
History Of Journalism

The question that this paper answer is whether the Illinois Reporter’s Privilege should protect an online blogger. The definitions of the terms “reporter,” “news medium,” and “source” quoted from 735 ILCS 5/8-902, followed by several examples. Second, a brief history of journalism is presented, where it is demonstrated that for hundreds of years, journalists and publishers alike engaged in their profession with little formal training, but rather with a sincere desire to convey the facts and the truth to their peers. Second, the essay outlines how Illinois and federal courts have employed the privilege in case law. In answering the question, the work examines whether WikiLeaks qualifies under the Illinois Reporter’s Privilege. The position taken is that the answer is yes. The idea is that if WikiLeaks qualifies under the privilege, then other online blogs also qualify. The opinion of the author is that the law is sufficient as it stands. There is no need to change its wording. Finally, some loose ends are discussed before reiterating the conclusion that the Illinois Reporters’ should not be changed.

The Legal Status of Local Government in South Africa under the New Constitutional Dispensation

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mbuzeni Mathenjwa
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Local Government ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
First Time

The history of local government in South Africa dates back to a time during the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910. With regard to the status of local government, the Union of South Africa Act placed local government under the jurisdiction of the provinces. The status of local government was not changed by the formation of the Republic of South Africa in 1961 because local government was placed under the further jurisdiction of the provinces. Local government was enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa arguably for the first time in 1993. Under the interim Constitution local government was rendered autonomous and empowered to regulate its affairs. Local government was further enshrined in the final Constitution of 1996, which commenced on 4 February 1997. The Constitution refers to local government together with the national and provincial governments as spheres of government which are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated. This article discusses the autonomy of local government under the 1996 Constitution. This it does by analysing case law on the evolution of the status of local government. The discussion on the powers and functions of local government explains the scheme by which government powers are allocated, where the 1996 Constitution distributes powers to the different spheres of government. Finally, a conclusion is drawn on the legal status of local government within the new constitutional dispensation.

Argumentation of the Courts and Contemporary Legal Scholarship

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Kuenzler
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Supply Side ◽  
Resale Price Maintenance ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
Resale Price ◽  
The One ◽  
Price Maintenance

This chapter analyzes existing U.S. Supreme Court case law with respect to, on the one hand, antitrust’s minimum resale price maintenance plans, bundling and tying practices, as well as refusals to deal, and, on the other hand, trademark law’s dilution, postsale, sponsorship, and initial interest confusion doctrines, including design patent and selected areas of copyright law. It demonstrates that courts, based on the free riding hypothesis, have come to protect increasing amounts of artificial shortage of everyday consumer goods and services and corresponding incentives to innovate. Through the preservation of such values, antitrust and intellectual property laws have evolved into “dilution laws” and have focused, almost exclusively, on the refurbishment of the technological supply side of our present-day digital economies rather than also on the human demand side of “creative consumption.”

Solving the Internet Jurisdiction Puzzle

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Jerker B. Svantesson
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Data Privacy ◽  
Modern World ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Reform Initiatives ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Privacy Law ◽  
History Of

Internet jurisdiction has emerged as one of the greatest and most urgent challenges online, severely affecting areas as diverse as e-commerce, data privacy, law enforcement, content take-downs, cloud computing, e-health, Cyber security, intellectual property, freedom of speech, and Cyberwar. In this innovative book, Professor Svantesson presents a vision for a new approach to Internet jurisdiction––for both private international law and public international law––based on sixteen years of research dedicated specifically to the topic. The book demonstrates that our current paradigm remains attached to a territorial thinking that is out of sync with our modern world, especially, but not only, online. Having made the claim that our adherence to the territoriality principle is based more on habit than on any clear and universally accepted legal principles, Professor Svantesson advances a new jurisprudential framework for how we approach jurisdiction. He also proposes several other reform initiatives such as the concept of ‘investigative jurisdiction’ and an approach to geo-blocking, aimed at equipping us to solve the Internet jurisdiction puzzle. In addition, the book provides a history of Internet jurisdiction, and challenges our traditional categorisation of different types of jurisdiction. It places Internet jurisdiction in a broader context and outlines methods for how properly to understand and work with rules of Internet jurisdiction. While Solving the Internet Puzzle paints a clear picture of the concerns involved and the problems that needs to be overcome, this book is distinctly aimed at finding practical solutions anchored in a solid theoretical framework.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document