CRI-Leslie: Musings on Plain Meaning, Absurdity and Capital Gain

10 Pages Posted: 3 Apr 2018

See all articles by Jeffrey A. Galant

Jeffrey A. Galant

Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Breitstone, LLP

Dana L. Mark

Kaye Scholer, LLP

Date Written: March 29, 2018

Abstract

CRI-Leslie, LLC v Commissioner is a noteworthy case of first impression involving the interpretation of Internal Revenue Code Section 1234A. In CRI-Leslie the U.S. Tax Court and the Eleventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held against capital gain treatment for proceeds received as a result of the cancellation of a contract involving the sale of property. However, the greater importance of these decisions may be the illustration of the methodology used by the courts to interpret the Internal Revenue Code. Or, more to the point, whether the courts were justified in relying on the plain meaning rule rather than the legislative history in determining what Internal Revenue Code Section 1234A means.

Keywords: Plain Meaning, Plain Meaning Rule, Legislative Intent, Legislative Purpose, Absurdity Exception, Absurd Outcome, Ridiculous Outcome, Reasonable Outcome, Section 1234A, Section 1221, Section 1231, Section 1231 Property, Capital Asset, CRI-Leslie, Capital Gain Treatment, Ordinary Loss Treatment

Suggested Citation

Galant, Jeffrey A. and Mark, Dana L., CRI-Leslie: Musings on Plain Meaning, Absurdity and Capital Gain (March 29, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3152387 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3152387

Jeffrey A. Galant (Contact Author)

Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Breitstone, LLP ( email )

190 Willis Avenue
Mineola, NY 11501
United States

Dana L. Mark

Kaye Scholer, LLP ( email )

425 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10022-3598
United States
212-836-7673 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.kayescholer.com

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
31
Abstract Views
159
PlumX Metrics