Voss v. Commissioner
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
796 F.3d 1051 (2015)
Bruce Voss and Charles Sophy (plaintiffs) were not married but owned a house together. For their 2006 and 2007 tax returns, Voss and Sophy each claimed a mortgage interest deduction under section 163(h)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Section 163(h)(3) placed a $1.1 million limit on the amount of home-related debt on which a taxpayer could claim a deduction. The IRS audited Voss and Sophy and determined that as co-owners of the house they were jointly subject to the $1.1 million limit. The IRS thus disallowed a portion of each of their claimed deductions. Voss and Sophy brought suit in tax court. The tax court affirmed the IRS’s determination. Voss and Sophy appealed. The IRS presented a 2009 memorandum from its Chief Counsel, which stated the debt limit applies on a per-residence basis.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Bybee, J.)
Dissent (Ikuta, J.)
What to do next…
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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 173,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.