About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


64 Duke L.J. Online 1 (2014-2015)

handle is hein.journals/duljo64 and id is 1 raw text is: Duke LawJournal Online VOLUME 64 OCTOBER 2014 WHICH INSTITUTION SHOULD DETERMINE WHETHER AN AGENCY'S EXPLANATION OF A TAX DECISION IS ADEQUATE?: A RESPONSE TO STEVE JOHNSON RICHARD J. PIERCE, JR.t The participants in the 2014 Duke Law Journal Administrative Law Symposium came to three important conclusions. First, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Treasury (Treasury) have been systematically declining to act in accordance with the duties imposed on them by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) for many decades.1 Second, courts should require the IRS and Treasury to comply with the APA.2 Third, the Supreme Court has signaled its intent to take administrative law to tax-as suggested by the title of this symposium-by requiring the IRS and Treasury to comply with the APA.3 I agree with Professor Steve Johnson that the duty to explain why it has taken an action is one of the most important duties that the APA imposes on the IRS and Treasury.4 I am concerned, however, that the agencies that implement tax laws lack the resources required to comply with the demands of the APA, as those demands have been interpreted, expanded, and applied by courts. Copyright © 2014 Richard J. Pierce, Jr. t Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University. 1. See generally Amandeep S. Grewal, Taking Administrative Law to Tax, 63 DUKE L.J. 1625 (2014) (examining scholarship that discusses whether, and to what degree, the reasoned- explanation requirement of the APA should apply to the IRS and Treasury). 2. Steve R. Johnson, Reasoned Explanation and IRS Adjudication, 63 DUKE L.J. 1771, 1773 (2014). 3. Id. 4. Id. at 1774.