The Becker-Posner Blog Inside the Law School Scam Bench Memos The IRS and its defenders in Halbig v. Sebelius, one of several cases challenging IRS’s interpretation of the Affordable Care Act, have raised questions about whether Congress really meant to deny tax subsidies to taxpayers if their states didn’t set up insurance exchanges. As we shall see, this was one of several mechanisms to “encourage” states to set up exchanges by threatening their residents with the loss of benefits if they didn’t join the party. The central issue in Halbig, you’ll recall, is whether insurance plan tax subsidies established under 26 U.S.C. § 36B apply only to plans purchased on an exchange “established by the State,” as the statute says, or whether the subsidies also go to plans purchased on a federally-established exchange. At oral argument in March, the majority seemed to be leaning in favor of the challengers. Quite a lot, as it turns out. Think for a moment about how the Medicaid expansion incentives would have worked.
What About Paris? Patent Practice Center - Practising Law Institute in Advanced Search PLI offers programs and publications to serve attorneys and professionals in all areas of practice: View all Seminars View all Webcasts View all One-Hour Briefings View all On-Demand Web Programs View all Publications Featured Program 2014 Treatise Catalog News & Expert Analysis April 7, 2014 New Conflict Mineral Reporting FAQ’s from SEC From: The SEC Institute Blog Today the SEC issued additional FAQ’s dealin... April 4, 2014 Actavis Announces Daytrana® Patent Challenge Settlement From: Patent Law Practice Center On March 19, 2014, Actavis plc (NYSE: ACT) announc... April 2, 2014 About That “In Like a Lion” Thing… In an earlier post Carol and George talked about t... Explore our blogs Patent Law Practice Center The SEC Institute Blog
LLC Law Monitor FP Legal Post A move to close a discipline hearing into two lawyers who used to represent Conrad Black and his related companies is turning into a “waiver bandwagon,” as key companies indicate a willingness to forgo their right to solicitor-client privilege over critical legal documents that would allow the hearings to be held in public. “We want an open hearing,” stressed Phil Campbell, who represents Beth DeMerchant, at the Law Society of Upper Canada hearing. “There’s been a recent flurry of activity in the direction of waiver,” he told the three-member discipline panel on Thursday. Ms. The two lawyers are accused of preferring the economic interests of some of their clients over others in transactions such as the sale of Hollinger newspaper assets to Canwest Global Communications Corp. in 2001. On Thursday, Mr. Lawyer Paul Henderson, one of the three persons hearing the charges, stressed that the panel wanted the proceeding as “open as possible.” Mr. Jim Middlemiss
How Appealing