- 27 -
The term “active conduct of a trade or business” appears in
22 sections of the current version of the Code. MedChem (P.R.),
Inc. v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. at 330. Ordinarily, we would
expect that this term would have the same meaning in all the
places it appears. United States v. Cleveland Indians Baseball
Co., 532 U.S. 200, 213 (2001); Commissioner v. Keystone Consol.
Industries, Inc., 508 U.S. 152, 159 (1993); United States v.
Olympic Radio & Television, 349 U.S. 232, 236 (1955); Zuanich v.
Commissioner, 77 T.C. 428, 442-443 (1981), and cases there
cited.9 However, none of the other Code provisions includes a
9This is the general rule not only because of the authority
of the cited opinions, but also because this is the way
legislative drafters are instructed to draft statutes. See,
e.g., Office of the Legislative Counsel U.S. House of
Representatives, Style Manual; Drafting Suggestions for the
Trained Drafter, 3 (1989), as follows:
(4) Use same word over and over.--If you have
found the right word, don’t be afraid to use it again
and again. In other words, don’t show your pedantry by
an ostentatious parade of synonyms. Your English
teacher may be disappointed, but the courts and others
who are straining to find your meaning will bless you.
(5) Avoid utraquistic subterfuges.--Do not use the
same word in 2 different ways in the same draft (unless
you give the reader clear warning).
To the same effect, see Dickerson, The Interpretation and
Application of Statutes 224 (1975), quoted in Zuanich v.
Commissioner, 77 T.C. 428, 443 n.26 (1981), as follows:
26 See R. Dickerson, The Interpretation and
Application of Statutes 224 (1975), as follows:
Because legal documents are for the most part
(continued...)
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011