U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 85— AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— GENERAL PROVISIONS

42 U.S.C. § 1001

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS CONCERNS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a)In General.—In providing for any research relating to the requirements of the amendments made by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 [Pub. L. 101–549, see Tables for classification] which uses funds of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall, to the extent practicable, require that not less than 10 percent of total Federal funding for such research will be made available to disadvantaged business concerns.“(b)Definition.—“(1)(A) For purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘disadvantaged business concern’ means a concern—“(i) which is at least 51 percent owned by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals or, in the case of a publicly traded company, at least 51 percent of the stock of which is owned by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals; and“(ii) the management and daily business operations of which are controlled by such individuals.“(B)(i) A for-profit business concern is presumed to be a disadvantaged business concern for purposes of subsection (a) if it is at least 51 percent owned by, or in the case of a concern which is a publicly traded company at least 51 percent of the stock of the company is owned by, one or more individuals who are members of the following groups:“(I) Black Americans.“(II) Hispanic Americans.“(III) Native Americans.“(IV) Asian Americans.“(V) Women.“(VI) Disabled Americans.“(ii) The presumption established by clause (i) may be rebutted with respect to a particular business concern if it is reasonably established that the individual or individuals referred to in that clause with respect to that business concern are not experiencing impediments to establishing or developing such concern as a result of the individual’s identification as a member of a group specified in that clause.“(C) The following institutions are presumed to be disadvantaged business concerns for purposes of subsection (a):“(i) Historically black colleges and universities, and colleges and universities having a student body in which 40 percent of the students are Hispanic.“(ii) Minority institutions (as that term is defined by the Secretary of Education pursuant to the General Education Provision Act (20 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.)).“(iii) Private and voluntary organizations controlled by individuals who are socially and economically disadvantaged.“(D) A joint venture may be considered to be a disadvantaged business concern under subsection (a), notwithstanding the size of such joint venture, if—“(i) a party to the joint venture is a disadvantaged business concern; and“(ii) that party owns at least 51 percent of the joint venture.A person who is not an economically disadvantaged individual or a disadvantaged business concern, as a party to a joint venture, may not be a party to more than 2 awarded contracts in a fiscal year solely by reason of this subparagraph.“(E) Nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit any member of a racial or ethnic group that is not listed in subparagraph (B)(i) from establishing that they have been impeded in establishing or developing a business concern as a result of racial or ethnic discrimination.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78 cases, 1936–2006 · leading case: Texas Co. v. Higgins, 118 F.2d 636 (2d Cir. 1941).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Texas Co. v. Higgins, 118 F.2d 636 (2d Cir. 1941). · cites it 2× “This is an appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in an action to recover the amount paid to the defendant, a collector of internal revenue, as social security taxes under §§ 801 and 804 of Title VIII of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 , 1004. It was tried to a…”
Radio City Music Hall Corp. v. United States, 135 F.2d 715 (2d Cir. 1943). “, pages 636, 637, 639, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 , 1004, 1101. That question in turn depends upon the meaning of § 811(b), and § 907(c), of that act, 42 U.”
Fahs v. Tree-Gold Co-Op. Growers of Florida, Inc., 166 F.2d 40 (5th Cir. 1948). · cites it 2× “They involve taxes for the period extending from January 1, 1937, to March 31, 1940, and for the calendar years 1937, 1938, and 1939, under Titles VIII and IX, respectively, of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 et seq., 1101 et seq.”
United States v. Mut. Trucking Co., 141 F.2d 655 (6th Cir. 1944). · cites it 2× “, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 ét seq. and 1101 et seq.”
Lee v. MBNA Long Term Disability & Benefit Plan, 136 F. App'x 734 (6th Cir. 2005). “This is a case under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1001 , et seq seeking long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits.”
Jones v. Goodson, 121 F.2d 176 (10th Cir. 1941). “, of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1001 et seq., taxes are levied upon employers and employees, but this case concerns itself only with the tax on employers.”
Beeland Wholesale Co. v. Kaufman, 174 So. 516 (Ala. 1937). “The federal act designates the levy on employees as “Income Tax on Employees” (see Title VIII, 42 U. S.C.A. § 1001 et seq.). And while the Alabama act does not attempt to characterize the tax, it provides that “Each employee shall contribute to the fund one per centum of his…”
Allen v. Shelton, 96 F.2d 102 (5th Cir. 1938). · cites it 2× “620 , 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 , 1004, 1007, 1101. Appellees are engaged in producing crude gum or oleo-resin by the scarification of living pine trees, and in processing the same for the production of gum spirits of turpentine and gum rosin.”
David Stevens v. Seacoast Co., Inc. & M/v Elena S, 414 F.2d 1032 (5th Cir. 1969). “, and Social Security Law, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 et seq. 1101 et seq., United States v.”
Lincoln Mills of Alabama v. Textile Workers Union of Am., CIO, 230 F.2d 81 (5th Cir. 1956). “, and Social Security Law, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001 et seq. 1101 et seq., United States v.”
Midwest Haulers, Inc. v. Brady, 128 F.2d 496 (6th Cir. 1942). “Appellant brought this action to enjoin the collection of additional taxes assessed against it under Titles VIII and IX of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1001 et seq. and § 1101 et seq.”
Party Cab Co. v. United States, 172 F.2d 87 (7th Cir. 1949). “This is an appeal from a judgment adverse to the plaintiff (the taxpayer), entered January 21, 1948, in a suit to recover from the defendant taxes alleged to have been illegally assessed and collected under the provisions of Title VIII and IX of the Social Security Act,…”
Show all 78 citing cases →
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.