More Murphy? Not so much.

October 16, 2007 · 0 comments

See, you thought that I was going to bring up the Murphy case. Again.

But no. TaxProf blog is reporting that the Ninth Circuit in Polone v. Commissioner, No. 04-72672 (9th Cir. 10/11/07), aff’g T.C. Memo. 2003-339, expressly refused to “address whether amended § 104(a)(2) violates the Sixteenth Amendment.”

Just saying.

Similar Posts:

{ 1 trackback }

Why Murphy Will Fail at the Supreme Court
March 19, 2008 at 4:24 pm

{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post: Getting To Know You Tuesday: Ryan Ellis

Next post: Does Wal-Mart want your child to read?