Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ) is a Washington, D.C.–based think tank and advocacy group founded in 1979 focusing on tax policies and their impact. [2] CTJ's work focuses primarily on federal tax policy, but also analyzes state and local tax policies.
The head of the Tax Division is an Assistant Attorney General, who is appointed by the President of the United States. The Assistant Attorney General is assisted by four Deputy Assistant Attorneys General, who are each career attorneys, who each oversee a different branch of the Tax Division's sections.
McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Comm'n, 411 U.S. 164 (1973), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States holding that Arizona has no jurisdiction to impose a tax on the income of Navajo Indians residing on the Navajo Reservation if their income is wholly derived from reservation sources.
Automated payment transaction tax; 9–9–9; Competitive Tax Plan; Efficient Taxation of Income; FairTax; Flat tax; Hall–Rabushka flat tax; Kemp Commission; Taxpayer Choice Act; USA Tax; Value added tax; Border-adjustment tax
This is a list of United States–related templates.They should be listed right above/below each other (without extra spaces between lines); if there are extra spaces, then they are within the templates themselves, and whenever the template is used with other templates on a page, the spacing will be messed up.
This template's initial visibility currently defaults to autocollapse, meaning that if there is another collapsible item on the page (a navbox, sidebar, or table with the collapsible attribute), it is hidden apart from its title bar; if not, it is fully visible. To change this template's initial visibility, the |state= parameter may be used:
Free trade; Free-trade zone; ... Tax Foundation (US) Tax Justice Network (TJN) Tax Policy Center ... This template includes collapsible lists.
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac & Fox Nation, 508 U.S. 114 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that absent explicit congressional direction to the contrary, it must be presumed that a State does not have jurisdiction to tax tribal members who live and work in Indian country, whether the particular territory consists of a formal or informal reservation ...