DOCSLIB.ORG

Economic Analysis of Property Law

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPERTY LAW Steven Shavell Working Paper 9695 http://www.nber.org/papers/w9695 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 May 2003 Research support from the John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business is gratefully acknowledged. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Bureau of Economic Research. ©2003 by Steven Shavell. All rights reserved. Short sections of text not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit including ©notice, is given to the source. Economic Analysis of Property Law Steven Shavell NBER Working Paper No. 9695 May 2003 JEL No. H4, K2, K11, L5 ABSTRACT This part deals with the basic elements of property law. I begin in chapter 7 by examining the fundamental question of what justifies the social institution of property, that is, the rationale for the rights that constitute what we commonly call ownership. I also discuss examples of the emergence of property rights. Then I consider a number of important issues about property rights. In chapter 8, I inquire about the division of property rights (property rights may be divided contemporaneously, over time, and according to contingency). In chapter 9, I study a variety of issues about the acquisition and transfer of property, including the discovery of unowned or lost property, registration systems for transfer of property, and the transfer of property at death. In chapter 10, I investigate “externalities” and property -- problems concerning cooperation and conflict in the use of property, together with the resolution of such problems through bargaining and legal rules. In chapter 11, I discuss public property; here I address the question of why the state should own property, and also the manner of state acquisition of property through purchase or by the exercise of powers of eminent domain. Finally, in chapter 12, I analyze the special topic of intellectual property. Steven Shavell Harvard Law School 1575 Massachusetts Avenue Hauser Hall 508 Cambridge, MA 02138 and NBER [email protected] Table of Contents Economic Analysis of Property Law (part of Foundations of Economic Analysis of Law) Chapter 7. Definition, Justification, and Emergence of Property Rights 1. Property Rights Defined 2. Justifications for Property Rights 3. The Emergence of Property Rights Chapter 8. Division of Property Rights 1. Division of Rights Described 2. Social Advantages and Disadvantages of Division of Possessory Rights 3. Social Advantages and Disadvantages of Separation of Possessory Rights from Rights to Transfer Possessory Rights 4. The Socially Optimal Division of Property Rights, Their Actual Division, and the Law Chapter 9. Acquisition and Transfer of Property 1. Acquisition of Unowned Property 2. Loss and Recovery of Property 3. Sale of Property -- In General 4. Registration Systems and Sale and Theft of Property 5. Sale and Theft of Property in the Absence of a Registration System 6. Constraints on the Sale of Property Imposed by the State 7. Gifts 8. Transfer of Property at Death: Bequests 9. Control of Property after Death: The “Dead Hand” 10. Involuntary Transfer of Property: Adverse Possession Chapter 10. Conflict and Cooperation in the Use of Property: The Problem of Externalities 1. Notion of External Effects in the Use of Property 2. Socially Optimal Resolution of External Effects 3. Resolution of Externalities Through Frictionless Bargaining 4. Why Bargaining May Not Occur and, If It Does, Why It May Fail To Result in Mutually Beneficial Agreements 5. Resolution of External Effects Through Legal Rules in the Absence of Successful Bargaining 6. Resolution of External Effects Through Legal Rules Given the Possibility of Bargaining Chapter 11. Public Property 1. Justifications for Public Property 2. Acquisition of Property by the State: By Purchase and by Power of Eminent Domain Chapter 12. Property Rights in Information 1. Information of Repeat Value 2. Other Types of Information 3. Information of Value as a Label Summary Table of Contents Foundations of Economic Analysis of Law (forthcoming 2003, Harvard University Press) Chapter 1. Introduction Part One. Accident Law Chapter 2. Liability and Deterrence: Basic Theory Chapter 3. Liability of Firms Chapter 4. Extensions of the Basic Theory Chapter 5. Liability, Risk-bearing, and Insurance Chapter 6. Liability and Administrative Costs Part Two. Property Law Chapter 7. Definition, Justification, and Emergence of Property Rights Chapter 8. Division of Property Rights Chapter 9. Acquisition and Transfer of Property Chapter 10. Conflict and Cooperation in the Use of Property: The Problem of Externalities Chapter 11. Public Property Chapter 12. Property Rights in Information Part Three. Contract Law Chapter 13. Overview of Contracts Chapter 14. Contract Formation Chapter 15. Production Contracts Chapter 16. Other Types of Contract Part Four. Litigation and the Legal Process Chapter 17. Basic Theory of Litigation Chapter 18. Extensions of the Basic Theory of Litigation Chapter 19. General Topics on the Legal Process Part Five. Public Law Enforcement and Criminal Law Chapter 20. Deterrence with Monetary Sanctions Chapter 21. Deterrence with Nonmonetary Sanctions Chapter 22. Extensions of the Theory of Deterrence Chapter 23. Other Functions of Sanctions: Incapacitation, Rehabilitation, Retribution Chapter 24. Criminal Law Part Six. General Structure of the Law Chapter 25. The General Structure of the Law and Its Optimality Part Seven. Welfare Economics, Morality, and the Law Chapter 26. Welfare Economics and Morality Chapter 27. Implications for the Analysis of Law Chapter 28. Income Distributional Equity and the Law *** Chapter 29. Commonly-Raised Questions about Economic Analysis of Law Chapter 7 DEFINITION, JUSTIFICATION, AND EMERGENCE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS In this chapter, I first define property rights, then address the question of their justification, that is, the advantages that might be thought to explain their existence, and last discuss several instances of their emergence. 1. Property Rights Defined I will use the term “property rights” to refer broadly to two subsidiary types of rights, possessory rights and rights of transfer. 1.1 Possessory rights. What are often called possessory rights allow individuals to use things and to prevent others from using them.1 A particular possessory right is a right to commit a particular act or a right to prevent others from committing a particular act.2 On reflection, it can be seen that common property arrangements entail considerable agglomerations of possessory rights, but with certain limitations. The basic notion of ownership embraces a large bundle of possessory rights subject to exceptions. When we say that a person owns a parcel of land, we ordinarily mean that the person can do virtually as he pleases on the land (plant crops on it, build on it, leave it idle) over time and under most contingencies. Also included in the idea of ownership is the right of the owner to prevent others from using what he owns over time and in most contingencies. However, the owner=s possessory rights are not absolute. If a use harms others (maintaining a compost heap that produces noxious odors), it may be proscribed; or, under certain conditions, an owner may be compelled to allow others to use his things (in an emergency, someone might be permitted to seek shelter on his land). Likewise, under rental provisions, the renter of property generally enjoys a large swath of possessory rights, most of those associated with ownership. For example, someone who rents an apartment can use it more or less as he pleases and bar the entry of others, even generally the landlord. But there may be limitations on the renter=s possessory rights that would not be faced by an owner-occupier; typically, a renter of an apartment is forbidden from making major modifications to it. Another example worth noting is property arrangements within enterprises. When a person is working for an enterprise, he will often enjoy certain possessory rights. A person may be able to do a variety of things in the office to which he is assigned and exclude others from it under a fairly wide range of circumstances. 1The subject of the enforcement of these and other rights will be addressed generally in Part Five. Here I shall simply assume that property rights are upheld. 2A completely specified act includes in its description the place, time, and contingency under which it is committed -- for example, digging at a designated location, on Thursday at 4 PM, if it is not raining (the contingency). Chapter 7 - Page 1 In strict logic, and for some purposes, it will be helpful to reduce such common property arrangements to their more basic elements, including the arrays of possessory rights that they encompass. 1.2 Rights of transfer. The other type of right associated with the notion of property rights is a right to transfer a possessory right, that is, the option of a person who holds a possessory right to give it to another person (usually, in exchange for something). Closely related, but distinct, is the right of the recipient subsequently to transfer his possessory right to another person (and for that person to do the same, and so forth). We will assume unless otherwise noted that rights to transfer possessory rights implicitly include these subsequent-order rights to transfer. It is apparent that common property arrangements entail certain rights to transfer possessory rights. The concept of ownership incorporates not only possessory rights, but also rights to transfer these possessory rights; an owner is usually presumed to be able to sell or give away his property, in which case the acquirer obtains all the possessory rights held by the owner, as well as the rights to transfer these rights. Under rental arrangements, however, the renter of a thing may or may not enjoy the right to transfer his possessory rights to another.
Recommended publications
  • Four Property Wrongs of Self Storage

    Four Property Wrongs of Self Storage

    FOUR PROPERTY WRONGS OF SELF-STORAGE LAW Jeffrey Douglas Jones Table of Contents Introduction: Setting Aside the Constitutional Question I. The Wild, Wild Lease: Self-Storage Agreements and Default Practices A. Owner’s Liens B. Lien Attachment and Risk of Loss C. From Default to Lien Enforcement D. Lien Enforcement Transferring Title to Landlord E. Lien Enforcement by Public Auction II. The Property Wrongs of Self-Storage Law A. The “Crap” Rule B. Tort Law Misfires and the Elimination of Bailments C. Ignored Parallels to Residential Landlord-Tenant Reform D. Treasure Trove and Self-Storage Treasure Hunters III. Conclusion: Legal Reform, Voluntariness, and the Property Ethic “Own Less” Jeffrey Douglas Jones, Associate Professor of Law, Lewis & Clark Law School; J.D., The University of Michigan Law School-Ann Arbor; Ph.D. Philosophy, The University of Wisconsin-Madison. [Thanks] 1 Jones / Four Property Wrongs of Self-Storage Law Introduction: Setting Aside the Constitutional Question Self-storage leases are troubling. Under such leases, self-storage facility owners may freely dispose of defaulting tenants’ medical and tax records, family ashes, heirlooms, etc. in the same manner as they would treat fungible items such as chairs or a bookshelf. Facility owners are legally entitled to do so through facility-sponsored auctions, most of which are unrestricted by any duty to conduct commercially reasonable sales. Still worse, these legal self- storage practices have generated a clandestine culture of treasure-hunting that often leaves tenants—some of whom default due to medical emergencies, bankruptcy or who are homeless working poor—with little opportunity either to regain good standing or obtain fair market value for their belongings.
  • Civil Law Property - the Law of Treasure and Lost Things Gerald L

    Civil Law Property - the Law of Treasure and Lost Things Gerald L

    Louisiana Law Review Volume 20 | Number 4 June 1960 Civil Law Property - The Law of Treasure and Lost Things Gerald L. Walter Jr. Repository Citation Gerald L. Walter Jr., Civil Law Property - The Law of Treasure and Lost Things, 20 La. L. Rev. (1960) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol20/iss4/9 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Notes CIVIL LAW PROPERTY-THE LAW OF TREASURE AND LOST THINGS Upon the death of the decedent her heirs were placed in pos- session of her estate. In disposing of the estate the heirs,sid decedent's mattress to the vendee-claimants for two dollars, and fifty cents. The mattress was delivered to a mattress factory for renovation. In the process of renovation the cotton contents, when subjected to a blast of air, yielded several thousand dollars in gold certificates. The mattress company made no claim, for the certificates. The United States brought an interpleader, 1 claiming the certificates but agreeing to pay the rightful owner their face value. The vendees claimed ownership of the certifi- cates by virtue of Article 34232 of the Louisiana Civil Code, con- tending that the certificates were treasure and that therefore ownership vested in them as finders. 3 The heirs, in asserting their right to the certificates, relied on Article 3422, 4 contending that the certificates were lost property and as such should be returned to them.
  • Protection for Owners Under the Law on Adverse Possession: an Inconsistent Use Test Or a Qualified Etv O System?

    Protection for Owners Under the Law on Adverse Possession: an Inconsistent Use Test Or a Qualified Etv O System?

    Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 57 Issue 2 Volume 57, Issue 2 (Fall 2020) Article 2 1-14-2021 Protection for Owners under the Law on Adverse Possession: An Inconsistent Use Test or a Qualified etV o System? Una Woods School of Law, University of Limerick, Ireland Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Law Commons Article Citation Information Woods, Una. "Protection for Owners under the Law on Adverse Possession: An Inconsistent Use Test or a Qualified etV o System?." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 57.2 (2021) : 342-380. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol57/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Protection for Owners under the Law on Adverse Possession: An Inconsistent Use Test or a Qualified etV o System? Abstract This article will assess the case for reforming the Irish law on adverse possession to confer additional protection on the owner. Assuming such reform is warranted, it is possible that an existing judicial solution, known as the rule in Leigh v Jack, has already been devised. Ontario’s experience with an equivalent rule, known as the inconsistent use test, is of interest in this context and certain academic literature is discussed which explains why the inconsistent use test was developed and argues in favour of its retention or resurrection. An alternative model of protection is then analyzed: the English Qualified Veto System of adverse possession introduced by the Land Registration Act 2002.
  • Quake Estate (Board Game)

    Quake Estate (Board Game)

    DOCUMENT 'ESUME ED 216 927 * SE 038 131 AUTHOR- Stoever, Edward C., Jr. iITLE Quake Estate (board game). CrUktal Evolution Education Project. Teacher's Guide [and] Student Investigation. INSTITUTION National Association of Geology Teachers. SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. REPORT NO CEEPtcMOD-CA18-4-1; ISBN-0-89873-046-5; ISBN-0-89873r047-3 PUB DATE 79* GRANT' SED-75-20151; SED-77-08539; SED-78-25104 NOTE 45p. AVAILABLE FilOMWard's Natural Science Establishment, Inc., P.O.Box 1712, Rochester, NY 14603 (or P.O. Box 1749, Monterey, CA 493940.) EDRS PRICE , MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS *Earth cienc0 Educational Games; Environmental EducatiOn; Geology;-Instructional Materials; Oceanography; *ScienCe Activities; *Science Course Improvement Projects; SciendCurriculum; Science Education; Science Instruction; Secondary Education; *Secondary School Science; *Seismology; Teaching Guides; Teaching Methods IDENTIFIERS *Crustal Evolution Education Project; Earthquakes; National Science Foundation; *Plate Tectonics ABSTRACT Crustal Evolution Educati6n Project (CEEP) modules were designed to:(1) provide students with the methods and results of continuing investigations into the composition, history,and processes,of'the eartb's crust and the application ofp-thisknowledge to man's activities and (2) to be used by teachers with littleor no previous backgrOudd in the modern theories ofsea-floor spreading, continental drift, and plate tectonics. Each module consistsof two booklets: a teacher's guide.and ttudent investigation.The teacher's guide contains all of the information present inthe student investigation booklet as wellas:(1). a general introduction; (2) prerequisite student background; "(3) objectives;(4) list of required materials;(5) background information; (6) suggested approach; (7) procedure, including number of 45-minuteclass periods required; (8) .summary questions (with answers);(9) extension activities; and (10) list of references.
  • The Role of Private Property Rights and Ethics in the Market Economy

    The Role of Private Property Rights and Ethics in the Market Economy

    UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-1994 In defense of private property: The role of private property rights and ethics in the market economy Iftikhar Ahmed University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation Ahmed, Iftikhar, "In defense of private property: The role of private property rights and ethics in the market economy" (1994). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 371. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/cpxp-v4in This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction.
  • Treasure Trove May 2021

    Treasure Trove May 2021

    Treasure Trove may 2021 This ediTion: officer’s desk reference The LeGaL sTaTUs and TaX cLassificaTion of canadian coUnciLs The forUm Lock iT Up – secUre passwords home secUriTy oTher pUbLicaTions indeX (arTicLes of inTeresT in pasT newsLeTTers) worThy coUnciL financiaL secreTaries & TreasUrers welcome to theTreasure Trove. It is dedicated to all Council Financial Secretaries & Treasurers but shared with the Council Grand Knight and all District Deputies. You may share this with anyone in your Council, but it relates strictly to your responsibilities in the Council. It is designed to provide Financial and other information on the Rules and Laws of our Order. Remember…it is your responsibility to ensure that the Council Executive knows, understands, and follows these Laws and Rules. The LeGaL sTaTUs and TaX cLassificaTion of canadian coUnciLs A local Knights of Columbus / Chevaliers de Colomb Council in Canada is an unincorporated association, chartered by the Supreme Council. For purposes of Canadian tax law, it is considered to be a tax-exempt non-profit organization. It is not a registered charity. The legal classification … An unincorporated association is defined as a group of individuals working together for a common purpose. An unincorporated association is not legally separate and distinct from 2 the members of the association, which means that the Council lacks legal status for certain purposes. For example, it may not hold real property in its own name. The tax status … A Council qualifies as a tax-exempt non-profit organization (NPO) under the Canadian Income Tax Act. See paragraph 149(1)(l) of the Act. That means that it is exempt from taxes for all or part of its income, provided that no portion of the Council’s income is payable to or available for the personal benefit of a Council member.
  • Public Auction

    Public Auction

    Public auction From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about an auction on behalf of a government. For auctions open to the public, see Auction. A public auction is an auction held on behalf of a government in which the property to be auctioned is either property owned by the government, or property which is sold under the authority of a court of law or a government agency with similar authority. [edit]Sale of property owned by the government Government property sold at public auction may include surplus government equipment, abandoned property over which the government has asserted ownership, property which has passed to the government by escheat, government land, and intangible assets over which the government asserts authority, such as broadcast frequencies sold through a spectrum auction. Public auctions of government property may be conducted by whichever agency is auctioning the property. Some substantial items have been sold at public auction. For example, the United States Navy cruiser USS Philadelphia (C-4) was sold at such an auction at the Puget Sound Navy Yard in 1927. [edit]Sale of private property in a public auction Private property may be sold in a public auction for a number of reasons. It may be seized through a governmental process to satisfy a judgment rendered by a court or agency, or to liquidate amortgage foreclosure, tax lien, or tax sale. Usually, prices obtained at a public auction to satisfy a judgment are distressed - that is, they are much lower than the price which would be obtained for that property if the seller were free to hold out for an optimal time to sell.
  • Report on Prescription and Title to Moveable Property

    Report on Prescription and Title to Moveable Property

    (SCOT LAW COM No 228) Report on Prescription and Title to Moveable Property report Report on Prescription and Title to Moveable Property Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers May 2012 Updated to include corrections to pages vi, 44 and 45, May 2012 SCOT LAW COM No 228 SG/2012/77 EDINBURGH: The Stationery Office £16.00 © Crown copyright 2012 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or email: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any copyright enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. ISBN: 978-0-10-888264-7 Printed in the UK for The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Queen’s Printer for Scotland. 05/12 Cover printed on 75% recycled paper Text printed on 100% recycled paper ii The Scottish Law Commission was set up by section 2 of the Law Commissions Act 19651 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law of Scotland. The Commissioners2 are: Laura J Dunlop, QC Patrick Layden, QC TD Professor Hector L MacQueen Dr Andrew J M Steven. The Chief Executive of the Commission is Malcolm McMillan. Its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. Tel: 0131 668 2131 Fax: 0131 662 4900 Email: [email protected] Or via our website at http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/contact-us NOTES 1.
  • Amicus Bri Ef

    Amicus Bri Ef

    Appeal No. 16-35384 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ________________________________________ PENNY D. GOUDELOCK, Appellant, v. SIXTY-01 ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS, Appellee. ________________________________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN CASE NO. 2:15-CV-01413-MJP ________________________________________ BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE CAI By Brian R. Fellner Nagle & Zaller, P.C. 7226 Lee Deforest Drive, Suite 102 Columbia, Maryland 21046 (410) 740-8100 x110 [email protected] Attorneys for Amicus Curiae CAI TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................................................2 I.DISCHARGING THE POST-PETITION ASSESSMENTS IS INCONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW................................................................................................2 A. SURRENDER HAS NO OPERATION OF LAW ...................................................3 B. UNOWNED PROPERTY .........................................................................................4 C. SURRENDER TO MULTIPLE CREDITORS .........................................................5 D. UTILITIES ................................................................................................................5
  • Mineral, Rock Collecting and Metal Detecting on the National Forests

    Mineral, Rock Collecting and Metal Detecting on the National Forests

    MINERAL, ROCK COLLECTING AND METAL DETECTING ON THE NATIONAL FORESTS It is Forest Service policy that the recreational use of metal detectors and the collection of rocks and mineral samples are allowed on the National Forests. Generally, most of the National Forests are open to recreational mineral and rock collecting, gold panning and prospecting using a metal detector. This low impact, casual activity usually does not require any authorization. On some eastern Forests gold panning does require a letter of authorization due to the high clay content of the soils. It is always wise to check with the local District Ranger if you have questions. Some wilderness areas are closed to gold panning and metal detecting. Metal detecting is a legitimate means of locating gold or other mineral specimens and can be an effective prospecting tool for locating larger mineral deposits. This activity can also be conducted as a recreational activity locating lost coins, jewelry or other incidental metallic items of little historical value. Prospecting using a metal detector can be conducted under the General Mining Laws and is covered under the Forest Service 36 CFR 228A locatable mineral regulations for lands open to mineral entry. Metal detecting for treasure trove or lost items such as coins and jewelry is managed as a non minerals- related recreation activity. Metal detecting is a low surface impact activity that involves digging small holes rarely more than six inches deep. Normally, metal detecting does not require a notice of intent or written authorization since it only involves searching for and occasionally removing small rock samples or mineral specimens (36 CFR 228.4(a)).
  • TAX OUTLINE Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:00 PM

    TAX OUTLINE Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:00 PM

    TAX OUTLINE Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:00 PM • POLICIES 1. Taxes levied commensurate with one's ability to pay. 2. Fairness/Equity: i. Horizontal Equity: persons who are similarly situated should be taxed in a similar fashion. ii. Vertical Equity: persons whose situations are different should be taxed differently. 3. Efficiency: one should seek a balance between maximizing tax revenues and minimizing social costs of taxation. i. note: this would violate horizontal equity. 4. Simplicity/Administrative Ease: it should not be so hard as to make it impossible to pay taxes or understand how to pay them. 5. Neutrality: the tax system should avoid unnecessarily shaping economic behavior. • GROSS INCOME (§ 61) ○ § 61: "all income from whatever source derived" ○ Haig-Simons: gains or increases in wealth over a particular period regardless of whether spent on consumption or saved. ○ Glenshaw Glass: (1) undeniable instance of accession of wealth, (2) clearly realized, (3) over which the taxpayer has complete dominion. ○ Statutory Exclusions (IRC §§ 101-140): . Gifts (§ 102) □ Excludes gifts from employers . Discharge of Indebtedness (§ 108) . Employee Benefits (§ 132, § 74(c), § 274(j)) . Employee Achievement Awards. § 74(c) . Rebates ○ Treasure Trove: To the extent of its value in US currency, treasure trove constitutes gross income for the taxable year in which it is reduced to undisputed possession. (Cesarini) ○ Tax Payments by Employer (or any third party) • The payment by the employer of the income taxes, assessable against the employee, constitutes additional taxable income to such employee. (Old Colony Trust) ○ Certain Situations • Extreme Home Makeover: use 280A(g) • Recovered Home Run Ball • Last Month's Rent: Income • Security Deposit: Depends on the lease.
  • Rights of Finders Ralph W

    Rights of Finders Ralph W

    University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Articles Faculty Scholarship 1923 Rights of Finders Ralph W. Aigler University of Michigan Law School Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/798 Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles Part of the Common Law Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Aigler, Ralph W. "Rights of Finders." Mich. L. Rev. 21 (1923): 664-82. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RIGHTS OF FINDERSa By RA.PH W. AImLiR* M UCH of the confusion and uncertainty in the law regarding the topic indicated above is due to a failure to distinguish between several types of situations and to appreciate the applicability of certain fundamental principles. The words "lost" and "find" are used in such widely varying senses that the all too common method of reaching a conclusion by first applying a name to a thing 1 or situation has in this particular field led to special difficulty. While the traveler who throws out of the car window a super- fluous article of clothing has not "lost" anything, it would commonly be said that the person who picked up the discarded article had "found" something. The elusive collar-button is frequently "lost" and "found," though all the time it may have been precisely where its owner placed it.