| Description |
1 online resource (xi, 126 pages) : illustrations |
| Contents |
Tax policy and the pursuit of justice -- Courts and the IRS -- Tax litigation and tax forum choice -- Tax decision making -- Influence on the IRS and the audits of low-income taxpayers -- Courts, fairness, and the creation and enforcement of national tax policy |
| Summary |
Annotation Public policy often favors one group over another. In the case of tax policy, the conventional wisdom has been that the dominant political coalition will offer policies that favor their primary constituents. The longstanding belief has been that the disfavored group may always assert their rights in court, the expectation being, as Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote, that "all citizens are equal before the law." In this revealing and insightful study, Robert M. Howard demonstrates that long-cherished beliefs such as equality before the law are more wishful thinking than reality. Courts, he argues, differ little from national policy makers in their approach to tax policy and tax enforcement. Examining the tax litigation process, particularly the influence and impact of competing courts, Howard discovers that fairness before the law may be a laudable goal, but the appointment process ensures that tax policy and tax enforcement rulings by the courts reflect the perspectives of the dominant political coalition. Robert M. Howard is Associate Professor of Political Science at Georgia State University |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Notes |
English |
|
Print version record |
| Subject |
Tax courts -- United States
|
|
Tax protests and appeals -- United States
|
|
Tax collection -- United States
|
|
Justice, Administration of -- United States
|
|
LAW -- Taxation.
|
|
Justice, Administration of
|
|
Tax collection
|
|
Tax courts
|
|
Tax protests and appeals
|
|
United States
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| ISBN |
9781441629777 |
|
1441629777 |
|
9781438428901 |
|
1438428901 |
|
