- 23 -
relevant statutory provisions. To be sure, the parties, but for
citations to the conferees’ understanding of the law that
preceded the 1986 Act, have not even cited the Court one iota of
persuasive legislative history in support of their contentions.
The General Explanation of the 1986 Act, the source of the
“legislative history” upon which the parties primarily rely to
support their assertions of legislative intent, is not part of
the statute’s legislative history. See Estate of Hutchinson v.
Commissioner, 765 F.2d 665, 669-670 (7th Cir. 1985), affg.
T.C. Memo. 1984-55; Condor Intl., Inc. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C.
203, 227 (1992). See generally Mertens, Law of Federal Income
Taxation, sec. 3.20, at 31 (1994):
The purpose of the Blue Book [the Staff of Joint
Committee’s general explanation of a tax statute] is to
provide, in one volume, a compilation of the
legislative history of a piece of tax legislation.
While the document is most helpful as a handy reference
volume it also gives some guidance. Where the Blue
Book’s explanation differs from that in a conference
report it may serve to alert the reader that a
technical correction is needed to reconcile the views.
[Emphasis added.]
Such is especially true as to the General Explanation of the 1986
Act, which was written by the Joint Committee of Taxation for the
100th Congress (Joint Committee), or, in other words, the
Congress that next followed the Congress that passed the 1986
Act.10 Although the Staff of Joint Committee’s explanation of a
10 The Joint Committee consisted of 10 Congressmen, 5 from
(continued...)
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011