Document Type
Article
Publication Date
3-30-2009
Publication Title
State Tax Notes
Publication Title (Abbreviation)
St. Tax Notes
Volume
51
First Page
1045
Last Page
1047
Abstract
What is a court trying to do when it interprets or applies a statute? This installment of my column looks at two different answers to that question, doing so through the lens of cases involving state and local tax statutes. Both approaches sometimes use the language of “intent,” so it becomes important for the state-local tax practitioner to understand, and to accommodate his or her arguments to the kind of intent that actually controls in the particular jurisdiction.
The first part describes the two approaches: subjective intent and objectified intent. The second part describes a middle position that some courts have embraced between the two pure poles of subjective and objectified intent. The third part offers suggestions as to how an attorney, accountant, or other tax representative can adapt his or her arguments in light of the way “intent” is used in the interpretational law of the given jurisdiction.
Rights
© 2009 Steve R. Johnson
Faculty Biography
http://www.law.fsu.edu/our-faculty/profiles/johnson
Recommended Citation
Steve R. Johnson,
The Two Kinds of Legislative Intent, 51
St. Tax Notes
1045
(2009),
Available at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/articles/308
Comments
First published in State Tax Notes.