Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=347501
 


 



Judicial Activism Is Not the Solution to the Attorney's Fee Problem


Brant J. Hellwig


University of South Carolina - School of Law


Tax Notes, Vol. 97, No. 5, November 4, 2002

Abstract:     
The report responds to criticism of the Tax Court's decision in Biehl v. Commissioner, in which the court determined that contingency fees paid to the taxpayer's attorney in employment litigation did not constitute an above-the-line deduction under section 62(a)(2)(A). The report examines the relevant statutes, regulations, and legislative history and concludes that the Tax Court reached the correct decision. Professor Hellwig further contends that had the Tax Court interpreted section 62(a)(2)(A) to grant above-the-line status to the attorney's fees in this case to avoid the disallowance of the miscelleaneous itemized deduction for attorney's fees under the alternative minimum tax, the court would have assumed an impermissible legislative role.

Accepted Paper Series





Not Available For Download

Date posted: November 1, 2002  

Suggested Citation

Hellwig, Brant J., Judicial Activism Is Not the Solution to the Attorney's Fee Problem. Tax Notes, Vol. 97, No. 5, November 4, 2002. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=347501

Contact Information

Brant J. Hellwig (Contact Author)
University of South Carolina - School of Law ( email )
Main & Greene Streets
Columbia, SC 29208
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 398

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.297 seconds