# United Stationers, Inc. v. United States

> Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · February 19, 1999 · 163 F.3d 440

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9491743

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATIONERS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- **Decided:** February 19, 1999
- **Citations:** 163 F.3d 440; 1998 WL 895200
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Manion
- **Judges:** Cudahy, Manion, Evans
- **Cited by:** 17 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9491743

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the legislative history strongly suggests that “qualifying research must from its outset involve some technical uncertainty about the possibility of developing the product” and concluding that “debugging programs” alone can not constitute a “process of experimenta…

## Opinion text

MANION, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and concurring in result.
Although I concur with the court’s opinion and holding, I take issue with the analysis in *449 part IIC which addresses the proposed exception to the statutory exclusion. Section 41(d)(4)(E) disallows the qualified research credit for computer software that is developed by or for the taxpayer “primarily for internal use by the taxpayer.” 26 U.S.C. § 41 (d)(4)(E). The plain meaning of the statute eliminates the eight projects for which United Stationers seeks the credit because the projects were clearly for internal use. The court expands on this exception by applying a regulation found only in the legislative history to 26 U.S.C. § 41 and proposed regulations; it is not in the statute and it has not been formally adopted by the Treasury Department. In the absence of a law passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President, or a regulation adopted pursuant thereto, we have no basis on which to conclude that a taxpayer meeting this exception is entitled to a tax credit. While the court’s analysis of this exception correctly concludes that the credit does not apply, it could send the wrong signal both to taxpayers and to the Treasury Department to invoke a regulation not legally in place. Until the regulation is made law, this court’s analysis should be confined to the statute.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9491743. Public record. Not legal advice.