Two Consequential Tax Cases You May Not Have Heard About
The Supreme Court's decisions in these cases create uncertainty about challenging IRS regulations and guidance. Expect more litigation to follow.


Two of the most consequential Supreme Court cases affecting income tax planning did not directly involve income tax issues and did not even include the word “tax” in the opinion. Nevertheless, these cases substantially affect the enforceability of IRS regulations and guidance. The full effect of these decisions will almost certainly require additional litigation in the years to come.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Docket No. 22-451) was issued by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 28, 2024. Since 1984, courts were required to give deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. That rule was established in Chevron USA, Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) (467 U.S. 877). Loper overruled the long-standing rule providing judicial deference to agency (including the IRS) interpretations of ambiguous statutes. This deference in simple terms created an “uphill battle” to challenge IRS regulations.
The Supreme Court determined that the rule established by Chevron did not comply with the Administrative Procedure Act. The Supreme Court even looked back to 1803 and held that the Chevron rule of deference violated the landmark holding of the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison (1803) (5 U.S. 137), which held that the court decides legal questions by using its own judgment. The net result for tax cases is that the court now decides the best interpretation of a contested statute and not the IRS.

Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
A much different standard
Prior to Loper, the court would determine whether the IRS interpretation was permissible — a much different standard for a taxpayer challenging the IRS interpretation.
Loper recognizes that judicial deference may be appropriate if the statute itself provides that the IRS is to issue regulations or guidance. Even in that case, Loper provides that the courts still have independent authority to police the outer boundaries of the regulations and to ensure that the IRS exercises its discretion in a manner consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act.
Right after Loper, on July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court issued Corner Post, Inc. v. Federal Reserve (Docket No. 22-1008). Corner Post provides that the six-year statute of limitations in 28 USC Section 2401 began to run when the plaintiffs actually suffered an injury rather than from when the rule, regulation or statute became final.
The Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) prevents pre-enforcement of judicial review. If the statute of limitations begins with the date of enactment of the regulation, then the six-year statute under Section 2401 of the AIA would run before the plaintiff, or anyone, could satisfy the requirements for a challenge. The effect of Loper is that a newly created entity would appear to be able to challenge a long-standing regulation that was otherwise believed to be final and not subject to challenge. In the past, the government used Section 2401 of the AIA to prevent judicial challenges to regulations.
Expect more litigation
We can expect to see more litigation due to the uncertainty created by Loper and Corner Post. Taxpayers may now be able to challenge regulations finalized 10 or 20 years ago and otherwise believed to be immune from such challenges. Courts no longer must give deference to the IRS' interpretation of regulations. Taxpayers can now more easily argue for meanings different than those asserted by the IRS.
We can be certain that we have interesting times ahead.
Taxpayers with positions well-reasoned and founded on case law or other authority may now be more willing to pursue positions contrary to IRS regulations. When challenged, the court can more easily accept a contrary position. This is true even for regulations that have been in place for many years.
Related Content
- Supreme Court Strikes Down Chevron: What It Means for the IRS
- How Four Recent Supreme Court Rulings Impact Your Money
- Murdochs' Dispute Highlights Benefits of Trusts in Nevada
- Nine Lessons to Be Learned From the Hilton Family Trust Contest
- What We Can Learn from Tony Bennett's Estate Dispute
Get Kiplinger Today newsletter — free
Profit and prosper with the best of Kiplinger's advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and much more. Delivered daily. Enter your email in the box and click Sign Me Up.
Founder of The Goralka Law Firm, John M. Goralka assists business owners, real estate owners and successful families to achieve their enlightened dreams by better protecting their assets, minimizing income and estate tax and resolving messes and transitions to preserve, protect and enhance their legacy. John is one of few California attorneys certified as a Specialist by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization in both Taxation and Estate Planning, Trust and Probate. You can read more of John's articles on the Kiplinger Advisor Collective.
-
Stock Market Today: Dow Dives 1,679 Points on Trump Tariff Shock
U.S. stocks lost roughly $3.1 trillion in market cap on Thursday – the biggest one-day decline since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020.
By Karee Venema Published
-
Did Florida’s Chance at $1,000 in Property Tax Rebates Vanish?
State Taxes The Florida Legislature bypassed Gov. Ron DeSantis’ wish to cut property taxes and instead voted to lower the state’s sales tax.
By Gabriella Cruz-Martínez Published
-
Stock Market Today: Dow Dives 1,679 Points on Trump Tariff Shock
U.S. stocks lost roughly $3.1 trillion in market cap on Thursday – the biggest one-day decline since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020.
By Karee Venema Published
-
Wall Street Is Worried About Apple Stock. Should You Be Too?
Analysts expect Trump's sweeping tariffs to have an outsized impact on Apple stock. How concerned should investors be?
By Karee Venema Published
-
The Stock Market Is Selling Off. Here's What Investors Should Do
Investors are fleeing the equities market en masse in response to the Trump administration's "jaw-dropping" tariffs. But the experts say don't panic.
By Karee Venema Last updated
-
How Building Liquidity Into Your Retirement Plan Can Pay Off
To succeed in investing for retirement, you need time and discipline — liquidity can give you both.
By Samantha Compton, IAR Published
-
Striking Oil in Opportunity Zones: Now Might Be the Best Time to Invest
You could unlock hidden wealth in QOZs with strategic oil and gas investments, potentially combining tax advantages with long-term growth in an essential industry.
By Daniel Goodwin Published
-
Stock Market Today: It's the Old Up-Down Again on Liberation Day
Markets look forward to what comes with the reordering of 80-year-old global trade relationships.
By David Dittman Published
-
Can a New Manager Cure Vanguard Health Care Fund?
Vanguard Health Care Fund has assets of $40.5 billion but has been ailing in recent years. With a new manager in charge, what's the prognosis?
By Nellie S. Huang Published
-
What You Don't Know About Annuities Can Hurt You
Lack of awareness leads many to overlook these potent financial tools, and with the possibility of running out of money in retirement, that could really hurt.
By Ken Nuss Published