- 35 -
The question relates to section 1601 of the bill
which excludes from unrelated trade or business income
revenues from the use of a tax-exempt organization's
mailing list by another such organization. Section
1601 of the bill, which specifically exempts certain
such revenues from the tax on unrelated business income
in the future, carries no inference whatever that
mailing list revenues beyond its scope or prior to its
effective date should be considered taxable to an
exempt organization.
132 Cong. Rec. 26208 (Sept. 25, 1986). It is at best hazardous
to infer the intent of an earlier Congress from a later one. See
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101, 114 (1989);
United States v. Price, 361 U.S. 304, 313 (1960). See Sierra
Club, Inc. v. Commissioner, 86 F.3d at 1534 n.17, where the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said it would not rely on
enactment of section 513(h) to infer legislative intent of
Congress in originally enacting section 512(b).
Respondent relies on a concurring opinion in Disabled Am.
Veterans v. Commissioner, 942 F.2d at 317 (Martin, J.,
concurring), which states:
Congress, in enacting * * * [section 513(h)], obviously
felt that the court of claims decision in DAV1 was the
proper interpretation of "royalties" for purposes of �
512(b)(2) with respect to the payments received by an
exempt organization from a commercial organization.
* * * * * * *
The acceptance of DAV's position that the monies
it receives from list rental are royalties under �
512(b)(2) would totally eviscerate section 513(h).
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011