Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Boulez v. C.I.R.

810 F.2d 209 (1987)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 34,000+ case briefs...

Boulez v. C.I.R.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

810 F.2d 209 (1987)

Facts

Pierre Boulez (plaintiff) was a French composer and conductor. In 1971 Boulez contracted with Beacon Concerts, Ltd. (Beacon) to work with the New York Philharmonic Symphony and the Cleveland Orchestra. In 1971 and 1972, Beacon paid Boulez approximately $188,000. Boulez filed nonresident-alien tax returns for those years but did not include the money from Beacon in his gross income. He also failed to include his income from Beacon in his 1973 and 1974 income-tax returns. In 1975 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (defendant) launched an investigation into Boulez’s tax obligations. Boulez made an oral agreement with the IRS’s director of international operations (the Director) whereby Boulez would amend his 1973 and 1974 income-tax returns to include the money he received from Beacon. In exchange, Boulez would not have to pay his tax liability from 1971 or 1972. In 1977 the IRS audited Boulez’s 1975 tax return, discovered the unpaid tax liabilities from 1971 and 1972, and assessed a tax deficiency. Boulez challenged the deficiency before the United States Tax Court, asserting that the oral agreement he had made with the Director settled his tax liabilities from 1971 and 1972. The tax court held that the Director lacked authority to make the oral agreement because Treasury Regulation § 301.7122-1(d) (the treasury regulation) required all compromise agreements to be in writing. Boulez appealed, arguing that the treasury regulation was invalid.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Robinson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 607,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 607,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 34,000 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 607,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 34,000 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership