Skip to main content
Download PDF
- Main
Ninth Circuit Brief of Law Academics and Professors as Amici Curiae in Opposition to the Petition for Rehearing En Banc in Altera v. Commissioner
- Zolt, Eric M;
- Lederman, Leandra;
- Morse, Susan C;
- Shay, Stephen E;
- Wallace, Clint;
- Avi-Yonah, Reuven S;
- Batchelder, Lily L;
- Bearer-Friend, Jeremy;
- Blank, Joshua D;
- Book, Leslie;
- Camp, Bryan;
- Cunningham, Noel B;
- Fleischer, Victor;
- Fleming, J Clifton;
- Fogg, Keith;
- Gamage, David;
- Glogower, Ari;
- Kane, Mitchell;
- Kleiman, Ariel Jurow;
- Kleinbard, Edward D;
- Kysar, Rebecca M;
- Liscow, Zachary D;
- Mason, Ruth;
- Marian, Omri Y;
- Peroni, Robert J;
- Shanske, Darien;
- Shaviro, Daniel;
- Steines, John P;
- Wells, Bret
Abstract
The purpose of this brief is to correct and respond to two arguments in Petitioner-Appellee Altera’s petition for rehearing en banc and briefs of amici supporting the petition for rehearing. First, Treasury’s regulation requiring cost sharing of stock-based compensation and the Ninth Circuit panel’s decision are entirely consistent with longstanding precedents, practices and understandings regarding the meaning of the arm’s length standard. Second, reversal of the U.S. Tax Court by a Court of Appeals is an ordinary occurrence that reflects the federal courts’ hierarchy and is not a basis for granting en banc review.