SCOTUS

A High Court case examines what, exactly, ‘impeding or obstructing’ the IRS means.

For Carl J. Marinello II, the omnibus clause, or “uber” clause, in Code section 7212(a) had the effect of turning his failures to file tax returns over a period of years from misdemeanors into a felony.

U.S. Supreme Court justices signaled they will narrow an anti-retaliation provision in the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial law, hearing arguments in a case that could insulate publicly traded companies from some whistle-blower lawsuits.

The South Dakota Supreme Court brought the question of whether online retailers should pay sales tax back into sharp focus.

The U.S. Supreme Court put sharp new limits on a favorite tool used by securities regulators to recoup money from people found to have violated federal laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to question a Michigan tax change that companies including IBM Corp. and Procter & Gamble Co. say will hit them retroactively with a $1 billion bill.

Imagine that you arrive home one day to find a letter from the Internal Revenue Service: “Dear Taxpayer: Although you paid your taxes in full four years ago, Congress has since decided to eliminate a deduction that you took at that time. The deduction was legal when you took it but isn’t legal anymore. We therefore require immediate payment of $10,000, the amount by which you benefited from the deduction that no longer exists.”

What would happen if the current brick-and-mortar standard continues to survive in an increasingly Web-based world?

The Internal Revenue Service has issued a notice outlining special procedures for handling the estates of same-sex couples.

Supreme Court lets stand a Colorado law that imposes reporting requirements on internet retailers.