- 9 -
religion, respondent has satisfied the compelling interest test.
2. Compelling Governmental Interest Test
In cases where the claimants’ rights have been substantially
burdened, the Government may impose a substantial burden on the
free exercise of religion if it demonstrates that the application
of the burden (i) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental
interest and (ii) is the least restrictive means of furthering
that compelling interest. 42 U.S.C. sec. 2000bb-1(b); see Miller
v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 511, 516 (2000). In addition to
holding that Rules 24 and 200 do not violate the substantial
burden test of the RFRA, we conclude that respondent satisfies
the compelling interest and least restrictive means test.
Respondent’s interest in administering the tax system
properly is a compelling governmental interest. See, e.g.,
Hernandez v. Commissioner, 490 U.S. 680, 699-700 (1989)(“[E]ven a
substantial burden would be justified by the ‘broad public
interest in maintaining a sound tax system,’ free of ‘myriad
exceptions flowing from a wide variety of religious beliefs.’”
(quoting United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 260 (1982))). This
Court has stated:
the Supreme Court has established that uniform,
mandatory participation in the Federal income tax
system, irrespective of religious belief, is a
compelling governmental interest. * * * As a result,
requiring petitioner’s participation in the Federal
income tax system is the only, and thus the least
restrictive, means of furthering the Government’s
interest. * * * [Citations omitted.]
Adams v. Commissioner, supra at 139; see Hernandez v.
Commissioner, supra; United States v. Lee, supra.
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