Supreme Court to consider overruling Chevron doctrine

So what? Our legislature can easily work through writing new, comprehensive legislation, right? Congress is an efficient, level-headed impartial group whose sole function is to serve their constituents and to ensure the efficient maximization of governmental resources.

 

That is certainly the case with the Tax code. Treasury regulations are merely taking a specific legally allowed rule and provides clarification on how that rule would apply to the meriad of business structures and business applications of the facts that would be effected by that section of the code. No way Congress could cover every weird method of doing business in the code.

IRC Title 26; the tax code; is rather short. 2-4 inches thick. Certainly not the thousands of pages people claim. Treasury refs on the other hand are created when an issue starts showing up over and over; so a reg is created to clarify how that rule would apply to a very specific set of facts. Those are 10s of thousands of pages. You still have the right to disagree with their interpretation in Tax court. If the court finds your set of facts should be treated differently from the regs; your case becomes the law within those exact set of facts.

 

Shocker, but Rick misunderstands or misstates the law.

"First, the Chevron deference requires that the administrative interpretation in question was issued by the agency charged with administering that statute. Accordingly, interpretations by agencies not in charge of the statute in question are not owed any judicial deference. Also, the implicit delegation of authority to an administrative agency to interpret a statute does not extend to the agency’s interpretation of its own jurisdiction under that statute."

"In subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has narrowed the scope of Chevron deference, holding that only the agency interpretations reached through formal proceedings with the force of law, such as adjudications, or notice-and-comment rulemaking, qualify for Chevron deference, while those contained in opinion letters, policy statements, agency manuals, or other formats that do not carry the force of law are not warranted a Chevron deference. In such cases, the Court may give a slightly less deferential treatment to the agency’s interpretation, giving a persuasive value under the Court’s “Skidmore deference” analysis."

You'd be better off reading the following rather than sift through Rick's interpretation. He's very confused.

Chevron deference