- 16 -
The reports do not state that section 7436(c) and (d) provide
procedural rules, but it appears that those are the procedural
rules referred to in this legislative history.
Petitioner contends that the legislative history for section
7436 shows that we have jurisdiction to decide the amounts of
employment tax due for the workers whose status is before the
Court. We disagree. The legislative history states that
Congress intended that we decide "certain"8 and not all employment
tax disputes, and does not state that we should decide any issues
other than those specified in section 7436(a).
C. Section 7436 Compared to Declaratory Judgment Provisions
Petitioner points out that section 7436 differs in several
ways from the declaratory judgment provisions (sections 7428,
7476, 7477, 7478, 7479), and contends that this shows that
Congress intended to provide jurisdiction to decide the amounts
of employment tax due. Petitioner points out that section 7436
and the declaratory judgment provisions differ in that (1)
section 7436(a) uses the term "determination", and the
declaratory judgment provisions state "make a declaration"; (2)
section 7436 incorporates the principles of several sections that
pertain to deficiency procedures, and the declaratory judgment
8 The House and Senate committee reports stated as reasons
for change:
It will be advantageous to taxpayers to
have the option of going to the Tax Court to
resolve certain disputes regarding employment
status. [H. Rept. 105-148, at 639 (1997); S.
Rept. 105-33, at 304 (1997); emphasis added.]
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011