- 39 -
The aforementioned revenue requirement is a good example of
the coordination between the implementing agreement and the
regulations. Obviously, whether tax receipts rise or fall within
American Samoa is directly related to the Secretary’s definition
of “income derived from sources within [American Samoa]” and
“income effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or
business by such individual within [American Samoa].” The
definition of these terms can be adjusted to ensure that certain
income does not escape from both the U.S.- and American Samoan-
tax systems. Thus, the implementing agreement and the regulation
were intended to, and in fact do, work in tandem to outline the
scope of American Samoa’s tax authority.
C. Section 931(d)(2) Presents a Case of First Impression
On numerous occasions, this Court has considered whether the
promulgation of regulations pursuant to a statutory grant of
authority was a condition precedent to the execution of a
statute. See Schwalbach v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 215 (1998);
Intl. Multifoods Corp. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. 579 (1997);
Estate of Neumann v. Commissioner, 106 T.C. 216 (1996); H Enters.
Intl., Inc. v. Commissioner, 105 T.C. 71 (1995); Estate of Hoover
v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 777 (1994); Alexander v. Commissioner,
95 T.C. 467 (1990); Estate of Maddox v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 228
(1989); First Chicago Corp. v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 663 (1987);
Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 819 (1984).
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011