If the employer is the United States, or a State, or political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing, the return of the amount deducted and withheld upon any wages may be made by any officer or employee of the United States, or of such State, or political subdivision, or of the District of Columbia, or of such agency or instrumentality, as the case may be, having control of the payment of such wages, or appropriately designated for that purpose.
Notes of Decisions
Capital Fin., LLC v. Rosenberg, 364 F. Supp. 3d 529 (D. Md. 2019).
“Neuman's commission of fraud, however, provides an additional basis for liability under the guaranty agreements because Neuman acted in part as Borrower's manager when he signed false Borrowing Base Certificates.”
State of Cal. v. Blumenthal, 457 F. Supp. 1309 (E.D. Cal. 1978).
“Plaintiff cites no authority, and the Court is aware of none, which precludes the federal government from requiring state governments and agencies to file information returns in their capacity as employers.”
Gen. Tel. & Elec. Corp. v. United States, 364 F.2d 853 (Ct. Cl. 1966).
· cites it 2× “Manufacturer’s excise taxes were imposed by Section 3404 of the 1939 Code, as amended ( 26 U.S.C. § 3404 (1946 Ed., Supp. V, and 1952 Ed.”
California ex rel. Younger v. Blumenthal, 457 F. Supp. 1309 (E.D. Cal. 1978).
“Plaintiff cites no authority, and the Court is aware of none, which precludes the federal government from requiring state governments and agencies to file information returns in their capacity as employers.”
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.