{
  "id": "RS22881",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RS22881",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 341975,
      "date": "2008-09-26",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T03:08:47.005398",
      "title": "Coal Excise Tax Refunds: United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co.",
      "summary": "In 1998, a U.S. district court held that the imposition of the coal excise tax, or black lung excise tax, on exported coal was unconstitutional. Refunding the tax has been controversial. This is because some coal producers and exporters attempted to bypass the limitations in the Internal Revenue Code\u2019s refund scheme by bringing suit under the Export Clause in the Court of Federal Claims, seeking damages from the United States in the amount of coal excise taxes paid. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals held there was Tucker Act jurisdiction to hear some of the suits and allowed them as an alternative to the Code\u2019s refund process. However, in a 2008 decision, United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., the Supreme Court held that taxpayers must comply with the Code\u2019s refund process. Meanwhile, several bills would provide an alternative method for coal excise tax refunds, including the amended version of H.R. 6049 (Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008) that was passed by the Senate on September 23, 2008, and H.R. 7060 (Renewable Energy and Job Creation Tax Act of 2008), which was passed by the House on September 26, 2008.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RS22881",
          "sha1": "a8f1ed8d7068d62c9ca28a9dce41ff3ec15a37ab",
          "filename": "files/20080926_RS22881_a8f1ed8d7068d62c9ca28a9dce41ff3ec15a37ab.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RS22881",
          "sha1": "7d80244c449696d3910c80ebff88622c7ff48c7a",
          "filename": "files/20080926_RS22881_7d80244c449696d3910c80ebff88622c7ff48c7a.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10743/",
      "id": "RS22881_2008May16",
      "date": "2008-05-16",
      "retrieved": "2008-12-11T20:32:18",
      "title": "Coal Excise Tax Refunds: United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co.",
      "summary": "In 1998, a U.S. district court held that the imposition of the coal excise tax, or black lung excise tax, on coal destined for export was unconstitutional. The process of refunding the tax has been controversial. This is because some coal producers and exporters have attempted to bypass the limitations in the Internal Revenue Code's refund scheme for bringing suit under the Export Clause in the Court of Federal Claims, seeking damages from the United States in the amount of coal excise taxes paid. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals held the court had jurisdiction under the Tucker Act to hear the suits and allowed them as an alternative to the Code's refund process. However, in a 2008 decision, United States v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., the Supreme Court unanimously held that taxpayers must comply with the Code's administrative refund process before bringing suit. Meanwhile, H.R. 1762 and S. 373 would provide an alternative method for taxpayers to receive coal excise tax refunds.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20080516_RS22881_e0355451d213bf706de67dab181eb063ac946d4b.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20080516_RS22881_e0355451d213bf706de67dab181eb063ac946d4b.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Taxation",
          "name": "Taxation"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Excise tax",
          "name": "Excise tax"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Energy",
          "name": "Energy"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Coal",
          "name": "Coal"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Coal industry",
          "name": "Coal industry"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Tax refunds",
          "name": "Tax refunds"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Labor",
          "name": "Labor"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Medicine",
          "name": "Medicine"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Black lung",
          "name": "Black lung"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Constitutional Questions"
  ]
}