Issue: (1) Whether 26 U.S.C. § 512(a)(3)(E)(i), which provides that investment income of a voluntary employees’ beneficiary association (“VEBA”) is tax exempt only if a set-aside of the income for a purpose specified in Section 512(a)(3)(B)(ii) “does not result in an amount of assets set aside for such purpose in excess of the account limit determined under section 419A” – which, along with Section 419, limits an employer’s deduction for contributions to a VEBA – must be interpreted consistently with Sections 419 and 419A to mean that a set-aside of income results in set-aside assets only if the income is considered, under Section 419(c), not to have been spent for a specified purpose in the year the income is earned, but instead to have been accumulated for use in a later year; (2) whether a regulation adopting the Federal Circuit’s interpretation outstanding in “temporary” form since 1986 should be given deference despite having been issued without the explanation required by 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) and without the prior notice and comment required by 5 U.S.C. § 553; and (3) whether the variance rule in Treasury Regulation § 301.6402-2(b)(1) is jurisdictional, barring the deference argument and precluding application of judicial exceptions to such administrative exhaustion requirements.
On Monday the Court granted five new cases and issued four opinions in argued cases. The archived Live Blog is here.
On Thursday the Justices will meet for their May 23 Conference. Our list of “Petitions to watch” for that Conference is here.
Bloomberg Law and SCOTUSblog’s Supreme Court Challenge
Current Standings - Top 5 Teams
1. The Silent Ts
Georgetown University Law Center
1. Ninos Angels
George Washington University Law School
1. Protect Sam Chase
St. Johns University School of Law
1. Bro Bono
Indiana University -Bloomington, Maurer School of Law
5. Motion to Strike
Cornell University Law School
Click here to learn more