The Ethical Tax Judge

  • Kim BrooksEmail author


This chapter advances the claim that judges have an ethical obligation of competence that requires them to enhance their knowledge about language (in the context of statutory interpretation) and income tax law design and policy. It articulates some of the foundational understandings that support that competence and provides a simple hierarchy of approaches to interpreting income tax law. It concludes by contending that greater competence is not only more ethical but also advances other important societal goals fulfilled by the imposition of income tax systems.


  1. Alm, James, and Benno Torgler. 2011. Do Ethics Matter? Tax Compliance and Morality. Journal of Business Ethics 101: 635–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alstadsæter, Annette, Niels Johannesen, and Gabriel Zucman. 2018. Tax Evasion and Inequality. Accessed 1 Aug 2018.
  3. Bank, Steven A. 2017. When Did Tax Avoidance Become Respectable? Tax Law Review 71: 123–178.Google Scholar
  4. Beaulac, Stéphane. 2008. Handbook on Statutory Interpretation: General Methodology, Canadian Charter and International Law. LexisNexis: Markham.Google Scholar
  5. Berkowitz, Arthur L. 2003. Have We Turned the Corner on Tax Ethics? Taxes 81: 41–47.Google Scholar
  6. Braithwaite, Valerie. 2003. Dancing with Tax Authorities: Motivational Postures and Non-compliant Actions. In Taxing Democracy: Understanding Tax Avoidance and Evasion, ed. Valerie Braithwaite, 15–39. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Brooks, Neil. 1997. The Responsibility of Judges in Interpreting Tax Legislation. In Tax Avoidance and the Rule of Law, ed. Graeme S. Cooper, 93–130. Amsterdam: IBFD.Google Scholar
  8. Brooks, Neil. 2006. The Appropriate Role of Courts in Interpreting GST Legislation: Reflections on the Canadian Experience. Australian GST Journal 6 (1): 1–19.Google Scholar
  9. Cahn, Edmond N., et al. 1952. Ethical Problems of Tax Practitioners: Transcript of the Tax Law Review’s 1952 Banquet. Tax Law Review 8: 1.Google Scholar
  10. Canadian Judicial Council. 2004. Ethical Principles for Judges. Accessed 1 Aug 2018.
  11. Charnock, Ross. 2006. Clear Ambiguity. In Legal Language and the Search for Clarity: Practice and Tools, Anne Wagner and Sophie Cacciaguidi-Fahy (eds.), 65–103. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  12. Côté, Pierre-André. 2000. The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada, 3rd edn. Scarborough, ON: Carswell, 280–281.Google Scholar
  13. Doyle, Elaine, Jane Frecknall-Hughes, and Barbara Summers. 2004. Ethics in Tax Practice: A Study of the Effect of Practitioner Firm Size. Journal of Business Ethics 122: 623–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Driedger, Elmer A. 1983. The Construction of Statutes, 2nd revised edn. Toronto: Butterworths.Google Scholar
  15. Eskridge Jr., William N. 2016. Interpreting Law: A Primer on How to Read Statutes and the Constitution. St. Paul, MN: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
  16. Freedman, Judith. 2007. Interpreting Tax Statutes: Tax Avoidance and the Intention of Parliament. Law Quarterly Review 123: 52–90.Google Scholar
  17. Gluck, Abbe R. 2011. Intersystemic Statutory Interpretation: Methodology as “Law” and the Erie Doctrine. Yale Law Journal 120 (8): 1898–1998.Google Scholar
  18. Goodrich, Peter. 1987. Legal Discourse: Studies in Linguistics, Rhetoric and Legal Analysis. New York: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goodrich, Peter. 1990. Languages of Law: From Logics of Memory to Nomadic Masks. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
  20. Hansen, Don R., Rick L. Crosser, and Doug Laufer. 1992. Moral Ethics v. Tax Ethics: The Case of Transfer Pricing among Multinational Companies. Journal of Business Ethics 11: 679–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hart, Henry M, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks. 1958. The Legal Process: Basic Problems in the Making and Application of Law (tentative ed. 1958). Westbury, NY: Foundation Press (1994).Google Scholar
  22. Klinck, Dennis R. 1992. The Word of the Law: Approaches to Legal Discourse. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lederman, Leandra. 2003. The Interplay Between Norms and Enforcement in Tax Compliance. Ohio State Law Journal 64: 1453–1514.Google Scholar
  24. Noonan Jr., John T., and Kenneth I. Winston. 1993. The Responsible Judge: Readings in Judicial Ethics. Westport: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Payne, Dinah M., and Cecily A. Railborn. 2018. Aggressive Tax Avoidance: A Conundrum for Stakeholders, Governments, and Morality. Journal of Business Ethics 147 (3): 469–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenkranz, Nicholas Q. 2002. Federal Rules of Statutory Interpretation. Harvard Law Review 115: 2085–2157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rostain, Tanina. 2006. Travails in Tax: KPMG and the Tax Shelter Controversy. In Legal Ethics Stories, ed. Deborah L. Rhode and David J. Luban, 89–117. New York: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
  28. Simons, Henry C. 1938. Personal Income Taxation: The Definition of Income as a Problem of Fiscal Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Sullivan, Ruth. 1999. Statutory Interpretation in the Supreme Court of Canada. Ottawa Law Review 30: 175–227.Google Scholar
  30. Sullivan, Ruth. 2002. Sullivan and Driedger on the Construction of Statutes, 4th ed. Markham, ON: Butterworths.Google Scholar
  31. Sullivan, Ruth. 2014. Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes, 6th ed. Markham, ON: LexisNexis Canada.Google Scholar
  32. Sullivan, Ruth. 2016. Statutory Interpretation, 3rd ed. Toronto: Irwin Law.Google Scholar
  33. Sunstein, Cass R. 2018. Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Weinrib, Ernest J. 1988. Legal Formalism: On the Immanent Rationality of Law. Yale LJ 97 (6): 949–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wenzel, Michael. 2007. The Multiplicity of Taxpayer Identities and Their Implications for Tax Ethics. Law & Policy 29: 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. West, Andrew. 2018. Multinational Tax Avoidance: Virtue Ethics and the Role of Accountants. Journal of Business Ethics 4 (2018): 1–14. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Schulich School of LawDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations