Knowledge (XXG)

Mayo Foundation for Medical Education & Research v. United States

Source 📝

725:
of the employer's classification of the employee, an employee whose normal work schedule is 40 hours or more per week is considered a full-time employee. An employee's normal work schedule is not affected by increases in hours worked caused by work demands unforeseen at the start of an academic term. However, whether an employee is a full-time employee is reevaluated for the remainder of the academic term, if the employee changes employment positions with the employer. An employee's work schedule during academic breaks is not considered in determining whether the employee's normal work schedule is 40 hours or more per week. The determination of an employee's normal work schedule is not affected by the fact that the services performed by the employee may have an educational, instructional, or training aspect." 26
747:
purpose. A regulation may have particular force if it is a substantially contemporaneous construction of the statute by those presumed to have been aware of congressional intent. If the regulation dates from a later period, the manner in which it evolved merits inquiry. Other relevant considerations are the length of time the regulation has been in effect, the reliance placed on it, the consistency of the Commissioner's interpretation, and the degree of scrutiny Congress has devoted to the regulation during subsequent re-enactments of the statute."
49: 356:, the Court first found that Congress had left the matter to the agency, because the statute was silent on the definition of "student" and on its applicability to medical residents specifically. Second, the Court found, that the regulation was a reasonable interpretation of the statute, and that its clear line helped distinguish workers who study and students who work, simplified enforcement and furthered the broad coverage of Social Security. 626:. In March 2010, while the case was pending before the Supreme Court, the Treasury announced that it would not contest refund claims for taxes paid prior to the April 2005 regulation. It would however assess taxes on salaries paid after that date, which would cost residency programs a total of approximately $ 700 million annually, or $ 3,100 a year for a resident earning $ 50,000 a year (and equivalent amount for the resident's employer). 1731: 448:, the Treasury agreed to repay the taxes it had collected. However, it also promulgated a new regulation to take effect in April 2005, which stated that any full-time employee, including nearly all medical residents, were ineligible to receive the student exemption, clearly stating that it was doing so to "overturn court rulings that had upheld the view that residents remained students". 587:, on the other hand, requires that reviewing courts take into account "whether the regulation harmonizes with the plain language of the statute, its origin, and its purpose" and states that courts may examine a statutory interpretation made years after the passage of the original act on the merits. The Mayo Foundation had requested that the Court rule according to the 583:, a landmark case regarding deference to government agencies, instituted a two-part test: The job of the reviewing court is to first establish whether Congress has unambiguously spoken about the matter. If so, the court is to follow Congress' intent. If not, it is the job of the court to determine whether the agency's statutory interpretation was a reasonable one. 608:, the role of the courts should solely be to determine whether the Treasury Department made a reasonable decision—and the Court concluded that the Treasury did just that. In writing for the Court, Roberts stated that "The department certainly did not act irrationally in concluding that these doctors – 'who work long hours, serve as high [ 658:, finding that an agency should have leeway in interpreting the statute in question, no matter when or how long ago the statute was placed in effect, how consistent the agency was in interpreting the statute, the importance of the statute or how closely Congress has looked into the agency's decision. However, an article in the 514:, also argued that the rule was "arbitrary", as the tax would apply to a resident working 40 hours per week but not to a resident working only 39 hours per week. The medical schools proposed that the IRS should base their determination on the primary purpose of a program—providing an education versus providing a livelihood. 418:. An amendment to the Act, passed four years later, provided that a "service performed in the employ of... a school, college, or university... if such service is performed by a student enrolled in and regularly attending classes at such school, college, or university" would be exempt. First-year residents, or 724:
The relevant section of the Treasury's regulation states: "The services of a full-time employee are not incident to and for the purpose of pursuing a course of study. The determination of whether an employee is a full-time employee is based on the employer's standards and practices, except regardless
499:
from a number of residency programs and medical organizations, argued that a residency is primarily educational in nature. They asserted that a residency is generally chosen based on academic criteria and that a residency must be completed in order for a physician to be licensed to practice medicine.
1392:
In Mayo, the Eighth Circuit held that the IRS regulation exempting residents was a permissible interpretation of FICA. The Second, Sixth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits have come out the other way, finding the IRS regulations contrary to the plain meaning of the "student exception" provision. Those
746:
indicated that the proper standard for judicial review should be the following: "In determining whether a particular regulation carries out the congressional mandate in a proper manner, we look to see whether the regulation harmonizes with the plain language of the statute, its origin, and its
603:
Despite the Mayo Foundation's arguments otherwise, the Court ruled that "student" was a sufficiently ambiguous term to state that Congress has specifically addressed the issue. The Court also noted that Congress in the past had specifically singled out medical residents when making exemptions
533:
noted that the case was a "very familiar situation of an apprentice who is both an employee and a student," and that the only way that one could draw a line between the two "is to have somebody say: This is going to be the line." He was of the opinion that, if anyone should draw the line, the
380:
exams and complete at least one year of residency training to obtain an unrestricted medical license. In practice, this requires most practicing physicians to complete a multiyear residency first. While training, residents practice medicine with considerable autonomy under the supervision of
645:
as its test for reviewing the Treasury Department's decision for marked a departure from previous practice; the Court had the courts have previously given less deference to the Internal Revenue Service's statutory interpretations. According to an article in the
550:
appeared to be more favorable to the medical schools, asking the Justice Department's lawyer at one point "in general, why do medical students become residents? Are they enrolled in the program to make money...or do they want additional education?"
599:
had been superseded. The Court had in fact cited both cases in opinions since 1984, but agreed with the Government's position, stating that it would not be wise to "carve out an approach to administrative review good for tax law only".
1308: 526:, residents who had not yet obtained their unrestricted medical license, that exemption was removed in 1965 to allow doctors to begin paying into Social Security earlier, so that they could be eligible for certain benefits. 614:] skilled professionals, and typically share some or all of the terms of employment of career employees' – are the kind of workers that Congress intended to both contribute and benefit from the Social Security system". 521:
argued on behalf of the United States that patient care and not educational curricula occupies the vast majority of residents' time. He also argued that although the 1939 FICA Amendment had originally specifically exempted
345:
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously to uphold the regulation as within the Treasury Department's statutory authority to issue and as a reasonable construction of FICA. The Court clarified that the deferential standard of
633:
noted that "esidents could find additional support in the Court's unambiguous holding for efforts to enforce other workplace rights, such as unemployment benefits (e.g., after hospital closure) or protection under the
792:
Wagner, Derek (2011). "Who's the (Son of) BOSS?: The Struggle Between the Federal Circuit and Treasury to Define "Omits from Gross Income" in Son of BOSS Tax Shelters and Other Overstatement-of-Basis Tax Cases".
443:
review, and the University recovered $ 40 million. A number of other residency programs quickly filed lawsuits, attempting to recoup the taxes they had paid. After some of those programs were successful in other
1814: 1558: 575: 542:, on the other hand, felt that residents were employees, as evidenced by her statement "You don't think receiving $ 50,000 or $ 60,000 a year is enough to make you an employee of someone?" According to 348: 136: 1735: 180:
are categorically ineligible for the student exemption from Social Security taxes codified at 26 U.S.C. §3121(b)(10), is a reasonable construction of that statute. Eighth Circuit affirmed.
1304: 28: 485: 481: 898: 1746: 473: 465: 434: 155: 100: 1507: 1794: 477: 392: 391:. Residents in the past had literally resided in hospitals for the duration of their training. By 2010, when the case was argued before the Supreme Court, regulations from the 681:
test is only to be used in "complex questions of statutory interpretation" and that the Court left open the possibility that a future scenario may warrant the use of the
1804: 433:
sued to recover a small portion of those taxes. An initial administrative review ruled for the Social Security Administration, but the district court reversed. The
425:
Until the 1990s, the Act and its application to medical residents were not an issue. Many hospitals assessed and paid FICA taxes on behalf of their employees. The
315:
regulation on the grounds that the courts should defer to government agencies in tax cases in absence of an unreasonable decision on the part of the agency.
326:
taxes. The Treasury Department issued a regulation in 2004, declaring those who worked more than 40 hours a week were ineligible for such an exemption. The
1109: 1647:
Orenbach, Kenneth B. (2011). "A New Twist to an On-Going Debate About Securities Self-Regulation: It's Time to End FINRA's Federal Income Tax Exemption".
805:
Berg, Michael E. (2008). "Judicial Deference to Tax Regulations: A Reconsideration in Light of National Cable, Swallows Holding, and Other Developments".
1789: 364:
In the first decade of the 21st century the vast majority of medical residents in the United States were physicians, who had recently graduated from a
1113: 622:
The Mayo Clinic noted that it had been paying the taxes while the case was pending in the courts, so the 15-page opinion would not force them to pay
500:
They also argued that residency training involves not only supervised work, but also an educational curriculum, conferences, and lectures, much like
1077: 1530: 488:
Circuits, which had all previously ruled that residents may count as students for the purpose of FICA taxes. The Eighth Circuit's ruling created a
1784: 1393:
circuits held that a case-by-case approach is required to determine whether residents serving at specific institutions qualify for the exception.
342:
by the medical profession. The District Court ruled for the Mayo Foundation and struck the regulation, but was reversed by the Court of Appeals.
1020: 564: 508: 995: 882: 569: 501: 407: 365: 319: 287: 1499: 834: 559:
In a decision written by Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the Eighth Circuit's decision. Associate Justice
53: 1687: 1414:
McMahon, Martin J. Jr.; Shepard, Ira B.; Simmons, Daniel L. (2011). "Recent Developments in Federal Income Taxation: The Year 2010".
749:
McMahon, Martin J. Jr.; Shepard, Ira B.; Simmons, Daniel L. (2011). "Recent Developments in Federal Income Taxation: The Year 2010".
1799: 312: 1659:
Aprill, Ellen P.; Galler, Linda; Salem, Irving (2004). "ABA Section on Taxation, Report of the Task Force on Judicial Deference".
604:
available, which in the Court's eyes made the Mayo Foundation's arguments about unambiguity unreasonable. Therefore, according to
396: 1359:
La Fleur, Zachary (2010). "Are Medical Residents Classified as Full-Time or Student Employees Under FICA and IRS Regulations?".
1267: 445: 415: 323: 838: 708:
test does not depend on whether Congress intended to delegate out general authority over a matter or just specific authority.
430: 422:, were also specifically exempted. In 1965, Congress repealed the intern exemption but left the student exemption in place. 352:(1984) applied, notwithstanding prior Court rulings that had adopted a more stringent standard to tax regulations. Applying 72:
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research; Mayo Clinic; and Regents of the University of Minnesota v. United States
700: 505: 874: 461: 457: 1439: 1139: 729: 726: 388: 308: 294: 291: 173: 1379: 1165:
Cohen, Wilbur J. (1983). "The Development of the Social Security Act of 1935: Reflections Some Fifty Years Later".
472:
the cases for entry of judgments in favor of the United States. This decision was at odds with decisions from the
694: 1117: 635: 535: 469: 563:
recused herself from participating in the case, as she had signed the government's brief during her tenure as
1042:
Levin, R. (1988). "Beyond "The Men of Steel": The Origins and Significance of House Staff Training Stress".
426: 142: 1596: 1473: 1330: 1277: 1084: 1750: 776: 667: 523: 419: 279: 92: 1305:"Supreme Court Upholds IRS Regulation Saying Medical Residents are "Students" and Subject to FICA Tax" 1809: 1622: 1253: 331: 1078:"Resident Duty Hours in the Learning and Working Environment: Comparison of 2003 and 2011 Standards" 1012: 1197:
Kesselheim, A. S.; Austad, K. E. (2011). "Residents: Workers or Students in the Eyes of the Law?".
382: 223: 27:
This article is about a case involving Social Security taxes. For the service of process case, see
518: 1440:"Supreme Court says medical residents are considered employees for Social Security tax purposes" 1232:
Lerner, Justin (2010–2011). "Comment: United States v. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center".
17: 368:. While graduating from a medical school provides an individual with a medical degree, a state 1668: 1214: 1059: 991: 942: 878: 339: 132: 1672: 961: 921:"Commentary: Watching Closely at a Distance: Key Tensions in Supervising Resident Physicians" 1535: 1206: 1051: 932: 372:
is required to practice medicine. All states require, that an individual pass Step 3 of the
1702: 539: 369: 327: 283: 239: 215: 211: 330:
filed suit to challenge the regulation and for a refund of the taxes it had paid on its
511: 439: 227: 203: 1757: 81: 1778: 1281: 1055: 779: 670: 489: 335: 177: 399:
had limited work hours to about 80 hours per week, and a first-year resident at the
1623:"Medical Schools Must Pay Social Security Taxes for Residents, Supreme Court Rules" 1272: 547: 530: 496: 235: 195: 151: 1447: 845: 937: 920: 176:§31.3121(b)(10)– 2(d)(3)(iii), providing that student employees working at least 95: 560: 411: 400: 247: 129: 650:, the Court in doing so "unambiguously overruled" its previous decision in the 1730: 1334: 623: 264:
Roberts, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor
159: 1083:. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. 2010. Archived from 107: 1218: 946: 42:
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, et al. v. United States
1143: 1142:. Mayo School of Graduate Medical Education. July 21, 2010. Archived from 1063: 677:
may not have been entirely overruled, arguing that the Court implied that
322:(FICA), students and their educational employers are exempted from paying 1766: 1210: 990:(1 ed.). New York City: Grand Central Publishing. pp. 200–201. 389:
Medical residencies traditionally require lengthy hours of their trainees
1688:"Judicial Deference to Retroactive Interpretative Treasury Regulations" 591:
standard, while the United States argued that the Court should use the
1380:"Supreme Court to hear several cases affecting labor & employment" 1743:
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education & Research v. United States
414:
on workers. The revenues of the tax were meant to be used to finance
377: 126:
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research v. United States
373: 468:
consolidated the two cases into one and reversed the judgments,
269:
Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
148: 1559:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
576:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
349:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
48: 1016: 610: 452:
Lower court proceedings and arguments before the Supreme Court
1736:
Mayo Foundation for Medical Ed. and Research v. United States
1579:
Mayo Foundation for Medical Ed. and Research v. United States
492:, and on appeal, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. 429:'s hospitals did not, however, and in the early 1990s, the 1582:, 562 U.S. ___, Part II (S. Ct. 2011). 1563:, 467 U.S. 837, 842–843 (S. Ct. 1984). 1013:"Today's medical training – better or worse for patients?" 1474:"Justices Reluctant to Let Medical Residents Skip Taxes" 1268:"High court rules medical residents must pay FICA taxes" 456:
The Mayo Clinic and the University of Minnesota sued in
437:
affirmed the district court's decision after granting a
29:
United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and His Staff
1815:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
1354: 1352: 573:(1979), the Court instead used a standard set out in 570:
National Muffler Dealers Assn., Inc. v. United States
147:, 2008 WL 906799 (D. Minn. 2008); both reversed, 568 1595:
Kendall, Brent; Vaughan, Martin (January 11, 2011).
393:
Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education
338:
providing patient care but who are still considered
871:
State Medical Licensure Requirements and Statistics
666:
standard in reviewing retroactive tax regulations (
334:—recently graduated physicians, who work more than 273: 260: 255: 184: 166: 120: 115: 87: 77: 67: 60: 41: 567:. Declining to review using a standard set out in 1500:"Court seems divided on taxing medical residents" 786:"created confusion among the lower courts". The 517:In response, Assistant to the Solicitor General 1573: 1571: 1569: 775:standard to "tax regulations promulgated under 406:In 1935, the United States Congress passed the 1409: 1407: 1405: 1403: 1401: 839:"Results and Data: 2010 Main Residency Match" 8: 962:"More Physicians Say No to Endless Workdays" 1795:United States taxation and revenue case law 1597:"Tax on Medical Residents Upheld by Court" 1378:Winston & Strawn LLP (July 19, 2010). 38: 1114:Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine 936: 739: 737: 172:The Treasury Department's regulation, 26 1192: 1190: 1188: 1186: 1184: 1182: 1180: 1590: 1588: 1467: 1465: 1331:"Court: Medical residents not students" 1011:Gajilan, A. Chris (September 6, 2006). 844:(2 ed.). p. 9. Archived from 826: 717: 464:agreed with them, but upon appeal, the 1805:Medical education in the United States 1498:Holland, Jesse J. (November 8, 2010). 1438:Holland, Jesse J. (January 11, 2011). 1307:. Council on Law in Higher Education. 1303:Harding, Bertrand (January 24, 2011). 565:Solicitor General of the United States 1433: 1431: 1429: 1311:from the original on October 30, 2011 701:United States v. Vogel Fertilizer Co. 538:should be the one. Associate Justice 529:During oral arguments, Chief Justice 36:2011 United States Supreme Court case 7: 1621:Kelderman, Eric (January 11, 2011). 1529:Stripling, Jack (January 12, 2011). 1472:Vaughan, Martin (November 8, 2010). 641:The Supreme Court's decision to use 1531:"Medical Residents Ruled Employees" 662:which advocates for the use of the 460:to overturn those regulations. The 408:Federal Insurance Contributions Act 366:medical school in the United States 320:Federal Insurance Contributions Act 288:Federal Insurance Contributions Act 1510:from the original on June 28, 2011 1446:. Associated Press. Archived from 1361:American Journal of Trial Advocacy 1266:Phelps, David (January 12, 2011). 1023:from the original on June 24, 2010 960:Harris, Gardiner (April 1, 2011). 835:National Resident Matching Program 54:Supreme Court of the United States 25: 1790:United States Supreme Court cases 1627:The Chronicle of Higher Education 771:, the Court's application of the 495:Mayo and Minnesota, supported by 311:case in which the Court upheld a 1753:44 (2011) is available from: 1729: 1110:"Intern & Resident Policies" 901:Mayo Foundation v. United States 502:clinical years of medical school 397:American Osteopathic Association 304:Mayo Foundation v. United States 47: 18:Mayo Foundation v. United States 1199:New England Journal of Medicine 795:The Federal Circuit Bar Journal 769:The Federal Circuit Bar Journal 631:New England Journal of Medicine 162:. granted, 560 U.S. ___ (2010). 1785:2011 in United States case law 1234:New York Law School Law Review 431:Social Security Administration 1: 1140:"Compensation & Benefits" 790:decision settled the matter. 730:§31.3121(b)(10)– 2(d)(3)(iii) 403:made $ 47,259 plus benefits. 295:§31.3121(b)(10)– 2(d)(3)(iii) 1695:George Washington Law Review 1056:10.1016/0163-8343(88)90096-5 938:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181eb4fa4 875:American Medical Association 660:George Washington Law Review 1044:General Hospital Psychiatry 767:According to an article in 695:Rowan Cos. v. United States 309:United States Supreme Court 307:, 562 U.S. 44 (2011), is a 1831: 1767:Oyez (oral argument audio) 899:"Brief for Petitioners in 504:. Mayo's attorney, former 26: 782:" in the years following 704:(1982), stating that the 692:The Court also overruled 278: 268: 189: 171: 124:Judgment for plaintiffs, 46: 1800:Social Security lawsuits 636:Family Medical Leave Act 536:Internal Revenue Service 410:(FICA), which imposed a 63:Decided January 11, 2011 1686:Pruitt, Andrew (2011). 595:standard, arguing that 544:The Wall Street Journal 427:University of Minnesota 143:University of Minnesota 61:Argued November 8, 2010 1701:: 1558. Archived from 1278:Minneapolis, Minnesota 1116:. 2010. Archived from 988:This Won't Hurt a Bit 986:Au, Michelle (2011). 1506:. Associated Press. 1211:10.1056/NEJMp1100414 1167:Minnesota Law Review 1146:on February 25, 2011 1120:on February 17, 2011 919:Babbott, S. (2010). 851:on December 27, 2010 685:test instead of the 555:Opinion of the Court 546:, Associate Justice 383:attending physicians 106:131 S. Ct. 704; 178 1708:on December 1, 2011 1649:Virginia Tax Review 1601:Wall Street Journal 1478:Wall Street Journal 1450:on January 28, 2011 1284:on October 14, 2012 1251:Minnesota v. Apfel, 803:, partially citing 506:Bush Administration 313:Treasury Department 284:§ §3121(b)(10) 224:Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1416:Florida Tax Review 1337:. January 11, 2011 751:Florida Tax Review 648:Florida Tax Review 629:An article in the 519:Matthew D. Roberts 200:Associate Justices 110:588; 2011 WL 66433 1734:Works related to 997:978-0-446-53824-4 925:Academic Medicine 884:978-1-60359-108-9 509:Solicitor General 332:medical residents 300: 299: 16:(Redirected from 1822: 1771: 1765: 1762: 1756: 1733: 1718: 1717: 1715: 1713: 1707: 1692: 1683: 1677: 1676: 1656: 1644: 1638: 1637: 1635: 1633: 1618: 1612: 1611: 1609: 1607: 1592: 1583: 1581: 1575: 1564: 1562: 1554: 1548: 1547: 1545: 1543: 1536:Inside Higher Ed 1526: 1520: 1519: 1517: 1515: 1495: 1489: 1488: 1486: 1484: 1469: 1460: 1459: 1457: 1455: 1435: 1424: 1423: 1411: 1396: 1395: 1389: 1387: 1375: 1369: 1368: 1356: 1347: 1346: 1344: 1342: 1327: 1321: 1320: 1318: 1316: 1300: 1294: 1293: 1291: 1289: 1280:. Archived from 1263: 1257: 1248: 1242: 1241: 1229: 1223: 1222: 1194: 1175: 1174: 1162: 1156: 1155: 1153: 1151: 1136: 1130: 1129: 1127: 1125: 1106: 1100: 1099: 1097: 1095: 1089: 1082: 1074: 1068: 1067: 1039: 1033: 1032: 1030: 1028: 1008: 1002: 1001: 983: 977: 976: 974: 972: 957: 951: 950: 940: 931:(9): 1399–1400. 916: 910: 909: 907: 895: 889: 888: 867: 861: 860: 858: 856: 850: 843: 831: 815: 814: 802: 773:National Muffler 765: 759: 758: 744:National Muffler 741: 732: 722: 683:National Muffler 675:National Muffler 664:National Muffler 652:National Muffler 597:National Muffler 589:National Muffler 585:National Muffler 185:Court membership 145:v. United States 51: 50: 39: 21: 1830: 1829: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1775: 1774: 1769: 1763: 1760: 1754: 1726: 1721: 1711: 1709: 1705: 1690: 1685: 1684: 1680: 1658: 1646: 1645: 1641: 1631: 1629: 1620: 1619: 1615: 1605: 1603: 1594: 1593: 1586: 1577: 1576: 1567: 1556: 1555: 1551: 1541: 1539: 1528: 1527: 1523: 1513: 1511: 1497: 1496: 1492: 1482: 1480: 1471: 1470: 1463: 1453: 1451: 1437: 1436: 1427: 1413: 1412: 1399: 1385: 1383: 1377: 1376: 1372: 1358: 1357: 1350: 1340: 1338: 1329: 1328: 1324: 1314: 1312: 1302: 1301: 1297: 1287: 1285: 1265: 1264: 1260: 1256:(8th Cir. 1998) 1249: 1245: 1231: 1230: 1226: 1196: 1195: 1178: 1164: 1163: 1159: 1149: 1147: 1138: 1137: 1133: 1123: 1121: 1108: 1107: 1103: 1093: 1091: 1090:on May 31, 2011 1087: 1080: 1076: 1075: 1071: 1041: 1040: 1036: 1026: 1024: 1010: 1009: 1005: 998: 985: 984: 980: 970: 968: 959: 958: 954: 918: 917: 913: 905: 897: 896: 892: 885: 869: 868: 864: 854: 852: 848: 841: 833: 832: 828: 824: 819: 818: 804: 791: 788:Mayo Foundation 766: 762: 748: 742: 735: 723: 719: 714: 620: 557: 540:Sonia Sotomayor 462:district courts 454: 416:Social Security 370:medical license 362: 328:Mayo Foundation 324:Social Security 240:Sonia Sotomayor 238: 226: 216:Clarence Thomas 214: 212:Anthony Kennedy 141:Regents of the 111: 62: 56: 37: 32: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 1828: 1826: 1818: 1817: 1812: 1807: 1802: 1797: 1792: 1787: 1777: 1776: 1773: 1772: 1739: 1725: 1724:External links 1722: 1720: 1719: 1678: 1639: 1613: 1584: 1565: 1549: 1521: 1490: 1461: 1425: 1397: 1370: 1348: 1322: 1295: 1258: 1243: 1224: 1205:(8): 697–699. 1176: 1157: 1131: 1101: 1069: 1050:(2): 114–121. 1034: 1003: 996: 978: 966:New York Times 952: 911: 890: 883: 862: 837:(April 2010). 825: 823: 820: 817: 816: 780:§ 7805(a) 760: 733: 716: 715: 713: 710: 673:) states that 671:§ 7805(b) 619: 616: 556: 553: 512:Theodore Olson 466:Eighth Circuit 453: 450: 446:circuit courts 435:Eighth Circuit 361: 358: 298: 297: 280:26 U.S.C. 276: 275: 271: 270: 266: 265: 262: 258: 257: 253: 252: 251: 250: 228:Stephen Breyer 204:Antonin Scalia 201: 198: 193: 187: 186: 182: 181: 169: 168: 164: 163: 122: 118: 117: 113: 112: 105: 89: 85: 84: 79: 75: 74: 69: 68:Full case name 65: 64: 58: 57: 52: 44: 43: 35: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1827: 1816: 1813: 1811: 1808: 1806: 1803: 1801: 1798: 1796: 1793: 1791: 1788: 1786: 1783: 1782: 1780: 1768: 1759: 1752: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1738:at Wikisource 1737: 1732: 1728: 1727: 1723: 1712:September 26, 1704: 1700: 1696: 1689: 1682: 1679: 1674: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1654: 1650: 1643: 1640: 1628: 1624: 1617: 1614: 1602: 1598: 1591: 1589: 1585: 1580: 1574: 1572: 1570: 1566: 1561: 1560: 1553: 1550: 1538: 1537: 1532: 1525: 1522: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1494: 1491: 1479: 1475: 1468: 1466: 1462: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1434: 1432: 1430: 1426: 1421: 1417: 1410: 1408: 1406: 1404: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1381: 1374: 1371: 1366: 1362: 1355: 1353: 1349: 1336: 1332: 1326: 1323: 1310: 1306: 1299: 1296: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1274: 1269: 1262: 1259: 1255: 1252: 1247: 1244: 1239: 1235: 1228: 1225: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1193: 1191: 1189: 1187: 1185: 1183: 1181: 1177: 1172: 1168: 1161: 1158: 1145: 1141: 1135: 1132: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1105: 1102: 1094:September 26, 1086: 1079: 1073: 1070: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1038: 1035: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1007: 1004: 999: 993: 989: 982: 979: 967: 963: 956: 953: 948: 944: 939: 934: 930: 926: 922: 915: 912: 904: 902: 894: 891: 886: 880: 877:Press. 2010. 876: 872: 866: 863: 847: 840: 836: 830: 827: 821: 812: 808: 800: 796: 789: 785: 781: 778: 774: 770: 764: 761: 756: 752: 745: 740: 738: 734: 731: 728: 721: 718: 711: 709: 707: 703: 702: 697: 696: 690: 688: 684: 680: 676: 672: 669: 665: 661: 657: 653: 649: 644: 639: 637: 632: 627: 625: 617: 615: 613: 612: 607: 601: 598: 594: 590: 586: 582: 578: 577: 572: 571: 566: 562: 554: 552: 549: 545: 541: 537: 532: 527: 525: 520: 515: 513: 510: 507: 503: 498: 497:amicus briefs 493: 491: 490:circuit split 487: 483: 479: 475: 471: 467: 463: 459: 458:federal court 451: 449: 447: 442: 441: 436: 432: 428: 423: 421: 417: 413: 409: 404: 402: 398: 394: 390: 386: 384: 379: 375: 371: 367: 359: 357: 355: 351: 350: 343: 341: 337: 333: 329: 325: 321: 316: 314: 310: 306: 305: 296: 293: 289: 285: 281: 277: 272: 267: 263: 259: 254: 249: 245: 241: 237: 233: 229: 225: 221: 217: 213: 209: 205: 202: 199: 197: 194: 192:Chief Justice 191: 190: 188: 183: 179: 175: 170: 165: 161: 157: 153: 150: 146: 144: 138: 134: 131: 127: 123: 119: 114: 109: 103: 102: 97: 94: 90: 86: 83: 80: 76: 73: 70: 66: 59: 55: 45: 40: 34: 30: 19: 1742: 1710:. Retrieved 1703:the original 1698: 1694: 1681: 1664: 1660: 1652: 1648: 1642: 1630:. Retrieved 1626: 1616: 1604:. Retrieved 1600: 1578: 1557: 1552: 1540:. Retrieved 1534: 1524: 1514:February 18, 1512:. Retrieved 1504:Boston Globe 1503: 1493: 1481:. Retrieved 1477: 1452:. Retrieved 1448:the original 1444:Star Tribune 1443: 1419: 1415: 1391: 1384:. Retrieved 1373: 1364: 1360: 1339:. Retrieved 1325: 1313:. Retrieved 1298: 1286:. Retrieved 1282:the original 1273:Star Tribune 1271: 1261: 1254:151 F.3d 742 1250: 1246: 1237: 1233: 1227: 1202: 1198: 1170: 1166: 1160: 1148:. Retrieved 1144:the original 1134: 1122:. Retrieved 1118:the original 1104: 1092:. Retrieved 1085:the original 1072: 1047: 1043: 1037: 1025:. Retrieved 1006: 987: 981: 969:. Retrieved 965: 955: 928: 924: 914: 908:. p. 4. 900: 893: 870: 865: 853:. Retrieved 846:the original 829: 810: 806: 798: 794: 787: 783: 772: 768: 763: 754: 750: 743: 720: 705: 699: 698:(1981), and 693: 691: 686: 682: 678: 674: 663: 659: 655: 654:in favor of 651: 647: 642: 640: 630: 628: 621: 609: 605: 602: 596: 592: 588: 584: 580: 574: 568: 558: 548:Samuel Alito 543: 531:John Roberts 528: 516: 494: 455: 438: 424: 405: 387: 363: 353: 347: 344: 317: 303: 302: 301: 274:Laws applied 256:Case opinion 243: 236:Samuel Alito 231: 219: 207: 196:John Roberts 140: 125: 116:Case history 99: 71: 33: 1810:Mayo Clinic 1632:January 17, 1606:January 17, 1542:January 17, 1483:January 17, 1454:January 17, 1341:January 17, 1315:November 5, 1150:January 17, 1124:January 17, 813:: 481, 498. 561:Elena Kagan 412:payroll tax 401:Mayo Clinic 248:Elena Kagan 130:F. Supp. 2d 1779:Categories 1661:Tax Lawyer 1386:August 21, 1382:. Lexology 1335:SCOTUSblog 1288:August 23, 822:References 624:back taxes 360:Background 318:Under the 78:Docket no. 1657:, citing 470:remanding 336:full-time 178:full-time 108:L. Ed. 2d 88:Citations 1741:Text of 1508:Archived 1309:Archived 1219:21226569 1027:March 3, 1021:Archived 971:April 3, 947:20736665 855:March 2, 579:(1984). 486:Eleventh 395:and the 340:trainees 261:Majority 156:8th Cir. 137:D. Minn. 1667:: 717. 1064:3282987 807:Tax Law 784:Chevron 706:Chevron 687:Chevron 679:Chevron 656:Chevron 643:Chevron 606:Chevron 593:Chevron 581:Chevron 524:interns 482:Seventh 440:de novo 420:interns 354:Chevron 167:Holding 158:2009); 139:2007), 1770:  1764:  1761:  1758:Justia 1755:  1673:518663 1671:  1655:: 135. 1422:: 565. 1367:: 233. 1240:: 359. 1217:  1173:: 379. 1062:  994:  945:  881:  757:: 565. 689:test. 618:Impact 484:, and 474:Second 378:COMLEX 290:); 26 282:  246: 244:· 242:  234: 232:· 230:  222: 220:· 218:  210: 208:· 206:  128:, 503 82:09-837 1749: 1706:(PDF) 1691:(PDF) 1088:(PDF) 1081:(PDF) 906:(PDF) 849:(PDF) 842:(PDF) 801:: 45. 727:C.F.R 712:Notes 478:Sixth 374:USMLE 292:C.F.R 174:C.F.R 121:Prior 1751:U.S. 1714:2011 1669:SSRN 1634:2011 1608:2011 1544:2011 1516:2011 1485:2011 1456:2011 1388:2011 1343:2011 1317:2011 1290:2011 1215:PMID 1152:2011 1126:2011 1096:2011 1060:PMID 1029:2011 992:ISBN 973:2011 943:PMID 879:ISBN 857:2011 160:cert 149:F.3d 133:1164 101:more 93:U.S. 91:562 1747:562 1207:doi 1203:364 1052:doi 1017:CNN 933:doi 777:IRC 668:IRC 638:." 611:sic 376:or 152:675 1781:: 1745:, 1699:79 1697:. 1693:. 1665:57 1663:. 1653:31 1651:. 1625:. 1599:. 1587:^ 1568:^ 1533:. 1502:. 1476:. 1464:^ 1442:. 1428:^ 1420:10 1418:. 1400:^ 1390:. 1365:34 1363:. 1351:^ 1333:. 1276:. 1270:. 1238:55 1236:. 1213:. 1201:. 1179:^ 1171:68 1169:. 1112:. 1058:. 1048:10 1046:. 1019:. 1015:. 964:. 941:. 929:85 927:. 923:. 873:. 811:61 809:. 799:21 797:. 755:10 753:. 736:^ 480:, 476:, 385:. 96:44 1716:. 1675:. 1636:. 1610:. 1546:. 1518:. 1487:. 1458:. 1345:. 1319:. 1292:. 1221:. 1209:: 1154:. 1128:. 1098:. 1066:. 1054:: 1031:. 1000:. 975:. 949:. 935:: 903:" 887:. 859:. 286:( 154:( 135:( 104:) 98:( 31:. 20:)

Index

Mayo Foundation v. United States
United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and His Staff
Supreme Court of the United States
09-837
U.S.
44
more
L. Ed. 2d
F. Supp. 2d
1164
D. Minn.
University of Minnesota
F.3d
675
8th Cir.
cert
C.F.R
full-time
John Roberts
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
26 U.S.C.
§ §3121(b)(10)
Federal Insurance Contributions Act

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.