Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In a case before the United States Tax Court in 1974, Everett and Dorothy Vernaccini argued that the Internal Revenue Service should allow them certain deductions on the theory that the record keeping requirements of Internal Revenue Code section 274 were unconstitutional under the Thirteenth Amendment (prohibiting slavery and involuntary ...
A 527 organization or 527 group is a type of U.S. tax-exempt organization organized under Section 527 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. § 527).A 527 group is created primarily to influence the selection, nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates to federal, state or local public office.
Section 7805 of the Internal Revenue Code gives the United States Secretary of the Treasury the power to create the necessary rules and regulations for enforcing the Internal Revenue Code. [2] These regulations, including but not limited to the "Income Tax Regulations," are located in Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or "C.F.R ...
Charles E. Moritz v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 469 F.2d 466 (1972), was a case before the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in which the Court held that discrimination on the basis of sex constitutes a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.
The Internal Revenue Service website elaborates on this prohibition: [58] Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.
Internal Revenue Code section 280E specifically denies a deduction or credit for any expense in a business consisting of trafficking in illegal drugs "prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted." [17]
The Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, also known as Taxpayer Bill of Rights III (Pub. L. 105–206 (text), 112 Stat. 685, enacted July 22, 1998), resulted from hearings held by the United States Congress in 1996 and 1997. The Act included numerous amendments to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
The Court found that Wrigley’s activities in Wisconsin exceeded the provisions of the state code and allowed the imposition of the tax. [3] The Court ruled that the replacement of stale gum, "agency stock checks", and maintenance of inventory for those purposes were not protected, and the Court sided with the Wisconsin Department of Revenue.