Tax and Accounting Software Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
301 F.3d 1254 (2002)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Tax and Accounting Software Corporation (TAASC), an S Corporation, was in the business of developing and selling software for tax and accounting professionals. In 1993 and 1994, TAASC incurred research and development (R&D) expenses to make four computer-software products. The products were innovative in the sense that they uniquely allowed for financial data to be turned into financial statements and transferred for tax-preparation purposes in a manner that was convenient and desirable for professionals. TAASC did not doubt that the products could be developed, and the products were not technically difficult to develop. The owners of TAASC (the taxpayers) (plaintiffs) claimed a tax credit under 26 U.S.C. § 41 for the R&D expenses, but the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (defendant) disallowed the credit. The taxpayers brought a refund suit, and the district court awarded summary judgment for TAASC. The government appealed, arguing that R&D expenditures for developing computer-software products did not meet the requirements for a tax credit insofar as the R&D was not undertaken to discover new information and did not involve a process of experimentation within the meaning of the statute.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lucero, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.