Embracing the Queen of Hearts: Deference to Retroactive Tax Rules

41 Pages Posted: 22 Aug 2013

See all articles by James M. Puckett

James M. Puckett

Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Law

Date Written: August 17, 2013

Abstract

The Supreme Court’s decision in Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research v. United States underscored the importance of a uniform approach to judicial review of administrative action; accordingly, the Court clarified that tax administration is generally subject to the same review as other kinds of administrative action by other federal agencies. Tax guidance from the IRS and Treasury Department serves an important role in clarifying the tax law so that taxpayers may report their tax liability accurately and plan their affairs. Meanwhile, aggressive attempts by a relatively small number of taxpayers to avoid tax liability by exploiting arguable ambiguities in the tax law present a perennial challenge for tax administration. In either case, as long as statutory and regulatory ambiguities exist, some surprises in the form of retroactive resolutions of uncertain tax positions are inevitable; the issue is who decides? Because of the Internal Revenue Code’s unusual grant of retroactive rulemaking power to the Treasury Department, tax administration cannot simply be collapsed with all other administrative action into a uniform framework of judicial review. This Article attempts to shed light on judicial review of more typical prospective tax guidance in part by drawing from the special case of retroactive tax guidance. This Article also argues that the general approach to judicial review of administrative action, as infused by the Code’s express grants of retroactive rulemaking power, affords the IRS and Treasury flexibility to make policy retroactively through rulemaking and receive deference from the courts. Moreover, though some constitutional limitations on retroactivity exist, the retroactive administrative clarification of an ambiguity should not be unconstitutional. Finally, this Article briefly assesses strengths and weaknesses of the current regime and the principal alternatives.

Keywords: tax administration, rulemaking, retroactive rules, retroactivity, Mayo, Home Concrete, Chevron, Skidmore, temporary regulations

Suggested Citation

Puckett, James M., Embracing the Queen of Hearts: Deference to Retroactive Tax Rules (August 17, 2013). Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2013; Penn State Law Research Paper No. 32-2013. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2311810

James M. Puckett (Contact Author)

Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Law ( email )

Lewis Katz Building
University Park, PA 16802
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.pennstatelaw.psu.edu/faculty/puckett

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
57
rank
351,320
Abstract Views
523
PlumX Metrics