Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Find lawyers in the LII Lawyer Directory

Your query revenue returned 102 results.

Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to consider using additional terms to narrow it.

	RALEIGH V. ILLINOIS DEPT. OF REVENUE [Syllabus] Should tax claims in bankruptcy be given the advantage of placing the burden of proof on an objecting trustee, in contrast to the rule applicable to the claims of other creditors?"
	ARIZONA DEPT. OF REVENUE V. BLAZE CONSTR. CO. [Syllabus]
	FLORIDA DEPT. OF REVENUE V. PICCADILLYCAFETERIAS, INC. [Syllabus]
	FULTON CORP. V. FAULKNER, SECRETARY OF REVENUE OF N. C., 516 U.S. 325 (1996). [Syllabus]
	DIRECTOR OF REVENUE OF MO. V. COBANK ACB [Syllabus] Does 12 U.S.C. Section 2134 authorize states to tax the income of the National Bank for Cooperatives, a federally chartered instrumentality of the United States?""."
	DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF KY. V. DAVIS [Syllabus]
	COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE V. LUNDY, 516 U.S. 235 (1996). [Syllabus]
	STEWARD MACHINE CO. V. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	STEWARD MACHINE CO. V. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE [Dissent]
	STEWARD MACHINE CO. V. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE [Opinion]
	STEWARD MACHINE CO. V. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE [Syllabus]
	STEWARD MACHINE CO. V. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE [Concur in part, dissent in part]
	PASQUANTINO V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	FULTON CORP. V. FAULKNER, SECRETARY OF REVENUE OF N. C., 516 U.S. 325 (1996). [Syllabus]
	COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE V. LUNDY, 516 U.S. 235 (1996). [Syllabus]
	ARIZONA DEPT. OF REVENUE V. BLAZE CONSTR. CO. [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	RALEIGH V. ILLINOIS DEPT. OF REVENUE [Syllabus] Should tax claims in bankruptcy be given the advantage of placing the burden of proof on an objecting trustee, in contrast to the rule applicable to the claims of other creditors?"
	DIRECTOR OF REVENUE OF MO. V. COBANK ACB [Syllabus] Does 12 U.S.C. Section 2134 authorize states to tax the income of the National Bank for Cooperatives, a federally chartered instrumentality of the United States?""."
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	FLORIDA DEPT. OF REVENUE V. PICCADILLYCAFETERIAS, INC. [Syllabus]
	WAGNON V. PRAIRIE BAND POTAWATOMI NATION [Syllabus]
	HIBBS V. WINN [Syllabus]
	DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF KY. V. DAVIS [Syllabus]
	C.I.R. V. ESTATE OF HUBERT, 520 U.S. 93 (1997) [Syllabus]
	COMMISSIONER V. BANKS [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	BALLARD V. COMMISSIONER [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	GITLITZ  V.  COMMISSIONER [Syllabus] Whether, in conflict with the holdings of the Third Circuit in United States v. Farley, No 99-3209, F. 3d (3d Cir. 2000) (App. 92) and the Fifth Circuit in CSI Hydrostatic Testers, Inc. and Subs. v. Commissioner, 62 F.3d 136 (5th Cir. 1995), aff'g and adopting the opinion of the Tax Court, 103 T.C. 398 (1994), the Tenth Circuit incorrectly held that tax attributes subject to reduction under 26 U.S.C. 108(b), including the suspended losses of an S corporation shareholder, must be reduced in the year that discharge of indebtedness income, excluded under 26 U.S.C. 108(a), is realized, despite the statutory requirement that all tax attributes, including suspended losses, be adjusted in the succeeding taxable year, and only after the determination of tax for the taxable year, of the discharge."
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	ATLANTIC MUT. INS. CO. V. COMMISSIONER, 523 U.S. 382 (1998) [Syllabus]
	PORTLAND GOLF CLUB V. COMMISSIONER, 497 U.S. 154 (1990) [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	TIMMONS V. TWIN CITIES AREA NEW PARTY, 520 U.S. 351 (1997) [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. CLINTWOOD ELKHORN MINING CO. [Syllabus]
	CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. V. ALABAMA DEPT. OFREVENUE [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. CLEVELAND INDIANSBASEBALL CO. [Syllabus] Back wages are subject to FICA and FUTA taxes by reference to the year the wages are in fact paid.
	ARIZONA CHRISTIAN SCHOOL TUITION ORGANIZATION V.WINN [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. REOGANIZED CF&I FABRICATORS OF UTAH, INC., ET AL., 518 U.S. 213 (1996) [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. UNITED STATES SHOE CORP., 523 U.S. 360 (1998) [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. GALLETTI [Syllabus] Whether, in order to enforce the derivative liability of partners for the tax debts of their partnership, the United States must make a separate assessment of the taxes owed by the partnership against each of the partners directly?
	UNITED DOMINION INDUSTRIES, INC. V.UNITED STATESSYLLABUS [Syllabus] The "product liability loss" (PLL) of an affiliated group of corporations electing to file a consolidated federal income tax return must be figured on a consolidated, single-entity basis, not by aggregating PLLs separately determined company by company.
	MAYO FOUNDATION FOR MEDICAL ED. AND RESEARCH V.UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	DRYE V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] Whether the interest of an heir in an estate constitutes 'property ' or a 'right to property' to which the federal tax lien attaches under 26 U.S.C 6321 even though the heir thereafter purports retroactively to disclaim the interest under state law.
	METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC. V.GROKSTER, LTD. [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP., 517 U.S. 843 (1996). [Syllabus]
	HEMI GROUP, LLC V. CITY OF NEW YORK [Syllabus]
	NIJHAWAN V. HOLDER [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	ALLIED-SIGNAL, INC. V. DIRECTOR, DIV. OF TAXATION, 504 U.S. 768 (1992). [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	HINCK V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	U.S. V. BROCKAMP, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF MCGILL, DECEASED, 519 U.S. 347 (1997) [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	MEADWESTVACO CORP. V. ILLINOIS DEPT. OFREVENUE [Syllabus]
	CSX TRANSP., INC. V. GEORGIA STATE BD. OFEQUALIZATION [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. URSERY, 518 U.S. 267 (1996). [Syllabus]
	KNIGHT V. COMMISSIONER [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	CENTRAL LABORERS’ PENSION FUND V. HEINZ [Syllabus] Whether an amendment to a multiemployer pension plan that provides for the suspension of the payment of early retirement benefits during the period that a participant, after retiring, is employed by another firm in the same industry is a prohibited elimination or reduction of such benefits under the "anti-cutback" rule in Section 204(g) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1054(g), when applied to employees who retired prior to adoption of the amendment.
	UNITED STATES V. CRAFT [Syllabus] Michigan law gives a tenant by the entirety individual rights in the estate sufficient to constitute "property" or "rights to property" to which a federal tax lien may attach under 26 U. S. C. §6321.
	PHILLIPS V. WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION, 524 U.S. 156 (1998) [Syllabus]
	MEDIMMUNE, INC. V. GENENTECH, INC. [Syllabus]
	BOULWARE V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	RAYMOND B. YATES, M.D., P.C. PROFIT SHARINGPLAN V. HENDON [Syllabus] Whether the working owner of a business (here, the sole shareholder of a corporate employer) is precluded from being a "participant" under Section 3(7) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1002(7), in an ERISA plan?
	KELO V. NEW LONDON [Syllabus]
	FITZGERALD V. RACING ASSN. OF CENTRAL IOWA [Syllabus] Can the State of Iowa tax the revenue from slot machines at parimutuel racetracks and the revenue from all casino games on riverboats, including slot machines, at different rates without violating the Equal Protection Clause?
	BARAL V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] Whether a remittance of estimated taxes or of taxes withheld from wages is a payment of tax that is subject to the limitation on tax refunds set forth in Section 6511(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. 6511(b).
	RANSOM V. FIA CARD SERVICES, N. A. [Syllabus]
	BOEING CO. V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] Title 26 CFR §1.861-8(e)(3) (1979)-which governs allocation of research and development expenses in computing taxable income from export sales entitled to special tax treatment under Internal Revenue Code provisions pertaining to "domestic international sales corporations" and "foreign sales corporations"-is a proper exercise of the Secretary of the Treasury's rulemaking authority.
	GRABLE & SONS METAL PRODUCTS, INC. V. DARUEENGINEERING & MFG. [Syllabus]
	OKLAHOMA TAX COMM'N V. JEFFERSON LINES, 514 U.S. 175 (1995). [Syllabus]
	YOUNG V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] The Bankruptcy Code's lookback period, which provides that a discharge does not extinguish certain tax liabilities for which a return was due within three years before the filing of the individual debtor's petition, 11 U. S. C. §507(a)(8)(A)(i), is tolled during the pendency of a prior bankruptcy petition.
	UNITED STATES V. FIOR D’ITALIA, INC. [Syllabus] In assessing a restaurant for Federal Insurance Contribution Act taxes based upon tips that its employees may have received but did not report, the Internal Revenue Service is authorized to use an aggregate estimate of all tips that the restaurant's customers paid its employees.
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	ROUSEY V. JACOWAY [Syllabus]
	MATRIXX INITIATIVES, INC. V. SIRACUSANO [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. SANTOS [Syllabus]
	SKILLING V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	SEC V. EDWARDS [Syllabus] Whether the Court of appeals erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that an investment scheme is excluded from the term investment contract in the definitions of ''securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(10), if the promoter promises a fixed rather than variable return or if the investor is contractually entitled to a particular amount or rate of return.
	POLAR TANKERS, INC. V. CITY OF VALDEZ [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. NOLAND, 517 U.S. 535 (1996) [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. NAVAJO NATION [Syllabus] Under United States v. Mitchell, 445 U. S. 535, and United States v. Mitchell, 463 U. S. 206, the Navajo Tribe's claim for compensation from the Government based on the Interior Secretary's actions with respect to a coal lease between the Tribe and a private lessee fails, for it does not derive from any liability-imposing provision of the Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938 or its implementing regulations.
	UNITED STATES V. WILLIAMS, 514 U.S. 527 (1995). [Syllabus]
	UNITED STATES V. ESTATE OF ROMANII, 523 U.S. 517 (1998) [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP V. CARLISLE [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	JEFFERSON COUNTY V. ACKER [Syllabus]
	CHICKASAW NATION V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] The Indian Regulatory Gaming Act provision codified at 25 U. S. C. §2719(d)(i) does not exempt tribes from paying the gambling-related taxes imposed by chapter 35 of the Internal Revenue Code.
	[Syllabus]
	EMPIRE HEALTHCHOICE ASSURANCE, INC. V. MCVEIGH [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	TRAVELERS CASUALTY & SURETY CO. OF AMERICA V.PACIFIC GAS & ELEC. CO. [Syllabus]
	YELLOW TRANSP., INC. V. MICHIGAN [Syllabus] The Michigan Supreme Court erred in holding that, under 49 U. S. C. §14504(c)(2)(B)(iv)(III), only a State's "generic" interstate motor carrier registration fee is relevant to determining the fee that was "collected or charged as of November 15, 1991." States may not renounce or modify a reciprocity agreement with another State so as to alter any fee charged or collected as of that date.
	ATKINSON TRADING CO. V. SHIRLEY [Syllabus] The Navajo Nation's imposition of a hotel occupancy tax upon nonmembers on non-Indian fee land within its reservation is invalid.
	EC TERM OF YEARS TRUST V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	[Syllabus]
	CLEVELAND V. UNITED STATES [Syllabus] 1. Can alleged false statements or omissions in applications for state licenses be the basis for federal mail or wire fraud charges, on the theory that a license that has not yet been issued constitutes ""property"" of the State, of which the State is deprived when it issues the license? 2. Is materiality an element of the offense of mail fraud?"