ARTICLE
7 October 2016

Possible Congressional Action May Undercut Proposed 2704 Regulations

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
Republicans in the House of Representatives and the Senate have introduced bills to derail the Proposed Regulations under Section 2704 of the Internal Revenue Code...
United States Government, Public Sector
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Republicans in the House of Representatives and the Senate have introduced bills to derail the Proposed Regulations under Section 2704 of the Internal Revenue Code ("Proposed Regulations"), including bills to (1) nullify the Proposed Regulations and prevent future regulations, and (2) cut federal funding associated with the enforcement of such Proposed Regulations.

The first bill, introduced by Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., in the House of Representatives, would invalidate the Proposed Regulations. It is a short bill and essentially states that the Proposed Regulations and any substantially similar regulations promulgated shall have no force or effect. The second bill, sponsored by Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, in the House of Representatives, is similar to the first bill but adds another element. It too states that the Proposed Regulations shall have no force or effect. It then seeks to block federal funding for the rules: "No Federal funds may be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce such proposed regulations or any substantially similar regulations."

Republicans in the Senate are also actively pursuing action against the Proposed Regulations. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., introduced companion legislation to Rep. Davidson's bill, stating that the Proposed Regulations shall have no force or effect, with identical language blocking federal funding. In addition, numerous Republican Senators co-signed a letter sent to the Honorable Jacob Lew, Secretary of the Treasury, asking the Treasury to withdraw the Proposed Regulations.

It remains to be seen whether the congressional actions will gain traction. A public hearing on the Proposed Regulations is scheduled for Dec. 1.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More