All rise … today is First Monday

Seeing as today is the first Monday of October, I thought that I would list out the Supreme Court cases with a tax relevance to be heard during this term.

Kentucky Department of Revenue v. Davis, No. 06-666
Date of Oral Argument: Nov. 7, 2007
Issue: Whether a state violates the dormant Commerce Clause by providing an exemption from its income tax for interest income derived from bonds issued by the state and its political subdivisions, while treating interest income realized from bonds issued by other states and their political subdivisions as taxable to the same extent, and in the same manner, as interest earned on bonds issued by commercial entities, whether domestic or foreign.

Knight v. Commissioner, No. 06-1286
Date of Oral Argument: Not Yet Scheduled
Issue: There is a deep, irreconcilable and widely noted conflict among the Second, Fourth, Sixth and Federal Circuits about the meaning of § 67(e) — which permits trusts and estates to deduct on their income tax returns certain administrative expenses — and whether the statute permits fees for investment management and advisory services to be fully deducted on trust’s and estate’s income tax returns. This is an important and recurring question of federal tax law that involves deductions by trusts and estates that total in the billions of dollars annually. The Question Presented is: Whether § 67(e) permits a full deduction for costs and fees for investment management and advisory services provided to trusts and estates.

CSX Transportation Inc. v. Georgia State Board of Equalization, No. 06-1287
Date of Oral Argument: Nov. 5, 2007
Issue: Whether, under the federal statute prohibiting state tax discrimination against railroads, 49 U.S.C. § 11501(b)(1), a federal district court determining the “true market value” of railroad property must accept the valuation method chosen by the State.

MeadWestvaco Corp. v. Illinois, No. 06-1413
Date of Oral Argument: Not Yet Scheduled
Issue: Is the attempt by Illinois to tax the approximately $1 billion gain realized by Petitioner when it sold its investment in Lexis/Nexis in 1994 (which it acquired in 1968 for $6 million and which functioned for 26 years as an independent, nonunitary business) in direct conflict with the decisions of the Court in Allied-Signal, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation, 504 U.S. 768 (1992), FW. Woolworth Co. v. Taxation & Revenue Department of New Mexico, 458 U.S. 354 (1982), and ASARCO Inc. v. Idaho State Tax Commission, 458 U.S. 307 (1982) and the Due Process and Commerce Clauses of the United States Constitution?

Boulware v. United States, No. 06-1509
Date of Oral Argument: Not Yet Scheduled
Issue: Whether the diversion of corporate funds to a shareholder of a corporation without earnings and profits automatically qualifies as a non-taxable return of capital up to the shareholder's stock basis, see § 301(c)(2), even if the diversion was not intended as a return of capital."