Now, Caterpillar, in its written statement submitted to the Subcommittee, says that even if it were stipulated that the changes made in 1999 were motivated primarily by tax considerations and generated primarily tax effects, the economic substance doctrine would still not apply.
Levin references Caterpillar's statement on the economic substance doctrine's applicability.
Share
More from Carl Levin
The tired rhetoric about big labor, big labor, big labor, the organizations that workers create and pay for themselves to advocate their interests; yes, there is a lot of support for this bill from the labor movement. This bill is also…
I wish I had time to rebut many arguments, like the one we just heard. The requirement that the employer share lists of the employees during a union election is decades and decades old. It hasn't changed. In any event, I am here to support…
It is great to stand here with Representative Bowman, with our colleague Jan Schakowsky, with Mr. Kahele, with all of our brothers and sisters in Congress to say that we can and we must, and we will do so much better right now for our…
I thank Chairman Meeks and Ranking Member McCaul for their support in bringing this resolution to the floor today. Last month, the Burmese military, Tatmadaw, staged a coup and quashed Burma's fragile experiment with democracy. Burma had…
Other voices in this conversation
