26 U.S.C. § 199
Repealed. Pub. L. 115–97, title I, § 13305(a), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2126]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2024 · leading case: In Re Mirant Corp., 334 B.R. 800 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2005).
In Re Mirant Corp., 334 B.R. 800 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2005). “26U.S.C. § 199. 86 . See TR (Shaked) at pp.”
Hernandez v. United States, 450 F. Supp. 2d 1112 (C.D. Cal. 2006). “§ 172 ], except that— (A) the amount of such deduction shall not exceed the sum of— (i) the lesser of— (I) the amount of such deduction attributable to net operating losses (other than the deduction described in clause (h)(1)), or (II) 90 percent of alternative minimum taxable…”
John Thomas Longino v. Comm'r of IRS, 593 F. App'x 965 (11th Cir. 2014). “26 U.S.C. § 199 (a)(1)-(2) (2006). Longino argues that he was entitled to a deduction for domestic production activity because he had grading and surveying work done on a parcel of land.”
At&t Advert., L.P. v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2020). “In tax years 2005 to 2009, the Partnership claimed a tax deduction related to advertising revenue pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 199 (repealed 2017). (Compl. at 7–11).”
Direct Supply, Inc. v. United States, 96 F.4th 1031 (7th Cir. 2024). “Section 199 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. §199 , was in force between 2004 and 2017.”
Universal EDI Corp. v. Dep't of Revenue (Or. T.C. 2013). “In his Brief, Roode wrote: “Meals on the Business Premises are allowed based on the specific language in 26 USCS § 199 when the meals are provided for a substantial noncompensatory business reason.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.