You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Step-Up vs. Carryover Basis for Capital Gains: Implications for Estate Tax Repeal

Step-Up vs. Carryover Basis for Capital Gains: Implications for Estate Tax Repeal

Date: April 20, 2001
Creator: Noto, Nonna A
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
The Flat Tax, Value-Added Tax, and National Retail Sales Tax: Overview of the Issues

The Flat Tax, Value-Added Tax, and National Retail Sales Tax: Overview of the Issues

Date: September 24, 2004
Creator: Esenwein, Gregg A & Gravelle, Jane G
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
FY2004 Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Global War on Terrorism: Military Operations

FY2004 Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Global War on Terrorism: Military Operations

Date: October 15, 2003
Creator: Daggett, Stephen; Nowels, Larry; Tarnoff, Curt & Margesson, Rhoda
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Tax Incentives for Alcohol Fuels

Tax Incentives for Alcohol Fuels

Date: February 9, 1995
Creator: Lazzari, Salvatore
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Economic Issues Surrounding the Estate and Gift Tax: A Brief Summary

Economic Issues Surrounding the Estate and Gift Tax: A Brief Summary

Date: January 29, 2003
Creator: Gravelle, Jane G
Description: Supporters of the estate and gift tax argue that it provides progressivity in the federal tax system, provides a backstop to the individual income tax and appropriately targets assets that are bestowed on heirs rather than assets earned through their hard work and effort. However, progressivity can be obtained through the income tax and the estate and gift tax is an imperfect backstop to the income tax. Critics argue that the tax discourages savings, harms small businesses and farms, taxes resources already subject to income taxes, and adds to the complexity of the tax system.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Date: February 19, 2002
Creator: Burke, Vee
Description: This report is one in the series of reports that discusses the Charitable Choice Act of 2001 (Title II of the House bill) and its rules, as well as the charitable choice laws, and other areas of this program.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Date: August 21, 2002
Creator: Burke, Vee
Description: The Senate Finance Committee version of H.R. 7, approved on July 16, 2002, does not contain the “charitable choice” title of the House-passed H.R. 7; nor does it include a compromise “faith-based” provision (from S. 1924 as introduced) that sought to assure equal treatment for nongovernmental providers of almost all federally-funded social services. Remaining in the Senate Finance bill are tax incentives to promote private giving. The Charitable Choice Act of 2001 (Title II of the House bill) would apply its rules, which are significantly different from those in four existing charitable choice laws, to nine new program areas.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Date: October 21, 2002
Creator: Burke, Vee
Description: This report is one in the series of reports that discusses the Charitable Choice Act of 2001 (Title II of the House bill) and its rules, as well as the charitable choice laws, and other areas of this program.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Date: January 3, 2003
Creator: Burke, Vee
Description: The 107th Congress did not pass tax incentives for private giving or legislation intended to assure equal treatment of religious organizations as providers of social services (provisions in S. 1924, the original CARE bill). The House voted to extend charitable choice rules to numerous new programs (H.R. 7), as the President urged, but the Senate refused. However, in an Executive Order, President Bush on December 12, 2002, directed six cabinet-level departments and the Agency for International Development (AID) to bring policies concerning social service programs into line with charitable choice principles set forth in the Order.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF

Date: May 9, 2003
Creator: Burke, Vee
Description: The 108th Congress has resumed efforts to pass tax incentives for private giving (S. 476, passed by the Senate on April 9, and H.R. 7, introduced May 7, 2003). However, these bills do not contain provisions intended to promote religious organizations as providers of federally funded social services – charitable choice provisions.. The House voted in 2001 to extend charitable choice rules, which now apply to a limited set of programs, to numerous new programs (H.R. 7 in the 107th Congress), as the President urged, but the Senate refused. However, in an Executive Order, President Bush on December 12, 2002, directed six cabinet-level departments and the Agency for International Development (AID) to bring policies concerning social service programs into line with charitable choice principles set forth in the Order.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department