Advertisement

Federal and State Income Tax Aspects in Forensic Economics

  • David Schap
Chapter

Abstract

The chapter focuses on tax aspects involved in assessing money damages in cases involving personal injury or wrongful death on the one hand, and employment discrimination or wrongful termination on the other. In each realm, tax realities and jurisdictional legalities that impinge on assessing damages are first considered, followed by discussion of methods and examples of damages assessment addressed in the forensic economic literature. The chapter serves to provide forensic economists with a sense of the key legal and practical concerns at play in damages assessment in the specified areas, to pinpoint where additional detailed information is available, and to describe opportunities for future research where there are inadequacies in the extant literature.

Keywords

Federal Court State Court Punitive Damage Discrimination Case Award Amount 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aalberts, R. J., Clauretie, T. M., & Jameson, M. (1994). Ordinary and reverse tax effect in personal injury and wrongful death cases. Journal of Forensic Economics, 7(3), 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albrecht, G. A. (1994). Modeling taxes in personal injury and wrongful death award calculations. Journal of Forensic Economics, 7(3), 239–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, G. A., & Barber, J. R. (2010). Taxes and the present value assessment of economic losses in personal injury litigation. Journal of Legal Economics, 17(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
  4. Barca, R. (2011). Taxing discrimination victims: How the current tax regime is unjust and why a hybrid income averaging and gross up remedy provides the most equitable solution. Rutgers Journal of Law & Public Policy, 8(Spring), 673–708.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, E. B., & Taub, A. J. (1994). An analysis of alternative methods of calculating tax-adjusted awards. Journal of Forensic Economics, 7(3), 267–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benich, J. J. (1996). Alternative approaches to tax adjustments in appraising economic loss: Comment. Journal of Legal Economics, 6(2), 91–93.Google Scholar
  7. Ben-Zion, B. (2000). Neutralizing the adverse tax consequences of a lump-sum award in employment cases. Journal of Forensic Economics, 13(3), 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowles, T. J., & Chris Lewis, W. (1996). Taxation of damage awards: Current law and implications. Litigation Economic Digest, 2(1), 73–78.Google Scholar
  9. Brush, B. C. (1997). The distributional effects of using a before-tax standard: A comment.Journal of Forensic Economics 10(1), 65–68.Google Scholar
  10. Brush, B. C., & Breeden, C. H. (1994a). Income taxes and economic damages. Journal of Legal Economics, 4(2), 51–63.Google Scholar
  11. Brush, B. C., & Breeden, C. H. (1994b). The measurement of economic damages: Do taxes really matter? Journal of Forensic Economics, 7(2), 227–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brush, B. C., & Breeden, C. H. (1996). A taxonomy for the treatment of taxes in cases involving lost earnings. Journal of Legal Economics, 6(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
  13. Cheverud, E. (2011/2012). Increased tax liabilities after Eshelman: A call for expanded acceptance beyond the realm of anti-discrimination statutes. New York Law School Law Review, 56, 711–747.Google Scholar
  14. Gilbert, S. (2014). A theory of tax effects on economic damages. Journal of Legal Economics, 20(1–2), 1–13.Google Scholar
  15. Guest, L., & Schap, D. (2014a). Case law concerning the treatment of federal income taxes in personal injury and wrongful death litigation in the state courts. Journal of Legal Economics, 20(1–2), 85–123.Google Scholar
  16. Guest, L., & Schap, D. (2014b). Rationales concerning the treatment of federal income taxes in personal injury and wrongful death litigation in the state courts. Journal of Legal Economics, 21(1), 85–117.Google Scholar
  17. Harris, W. G. (1994). The distributional effects of using a before-tax standard in damage awards. Journal of Forensic Economics, 7(3), 275–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harris, W. G. (1995). Tax-induced errors in the calculation of lump-sum awards. Journal of Forensic Economics, 8(1), 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harris, W. G. (1997). The distributional effects of using a before-tax standard: A reply. Journal of Forensic Economics, 10(2), 217–219.Google Scholar
  20. Hulley, Jr., M. K. (2012). Taking your lump sum or just taking your lumps? The negative tax consequences in employment dispute recoveries and Congress’s role in fashioning a remedy. Michigan State Law Review, 2012(1), 171–210.Google Scholar
  21. Ireland, T. R. (2010). Tax consequences of lump sum awards in wrongful termination cases. Journal of Legal Economics, 17(1), 51–73.Google Scholar
  22. Harris, W. G. (1997). The distributional effects of using a before-tax standard: A reply. Journal of Forensic Economics, 10(2), 217–219.Google Scholar
  23. Jennings, W., & Mercurio, P. (1991). Accounting for taxes in the determination of the reduction for personal consumption. Journal of Forensic Economics, 5(1), 85–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnson, S., & Roney, T. (2015). “Make whole”: The need for gross ups in employment discrimination cases, unpublished paper dated 5/28/15.Google Scholar
  25. Lewis, W. C., & Bowles, T. (1996). Alternative approaches to tax adjustments in appraising economic loss. Journal of Legal Economics, 6(1), 27–38.Google Scholar
  26. Lewis, W. C., & Bowles, T. (1999). A statistical analysis of federal income tax rate stability over time and implications for valuing lifetime earnings. Journal of Forensic Economics, 12(3), 201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liptak, A. (2002, August 11). Tax bill exceeds award to officer in sex bias suit, New York Times.Google Scholar
  28. Markowski, E. P., & Cross, E. M. (1991). Determination of tax adjusted lost income awards. Journal of Legal Economics, 1(2), 11–18.Google Scholar
  29. Marlin, M. (2007). The problem of discounting with an after-tax rate of return in cases of personal injury or wrongful death. Journal of Legal Economics, 14(1), 33–48.Google Scholar
  30. Polsky, G. D. (2004). Employment discrimination remedies and tax gross ups. Iowa Law Review, 90, 67–120.Google Scholar
  31. Rodgers, J. D. (2003). Handling taxes in employment case law. Journal of Forensic Economics, 16(2), 225–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schap, D. (2015). Correction concerning the treatment of federal income taxes in personal injury and wrongful death litigation in the state courts. Journal of Legal Economics, 21(2), 129–130.Google Scholar
  33. Schieren, G. A. (1994). Taxes and present value awards for wrongful death. Journal of Forensic Economics, 7(3), 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Taylor, P. C., & Ireland, T. R. (1996). Accounting for medicare, social security benefits and payroll taxes in federal cases: Federal case law and errors by many forensic economists. Litigation Economic Digest, 2(1), 79–88.Google Scholar
  35. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website. (Accessed 2015). Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination questions and answers. http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

Cases Cited

  1. Boyer v. Kamthan, 978 N.Y.S.2d 633 (2013).Google Scholar
  2. Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938).Google Scholar
  3. Hicks ex rel. Saus v. Jones, 217 W.Va. 107 (2005).Google Scholar
  4. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Pfeifer, 103 S. Ct. 2541 (1983).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Schap
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Economics and AccountingCollege of the Holy CrossWorcesterUSA

Personalised recommendations