TAX 650 Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric Review the following case: Jim Turin & Sons, Inc., Petitioner-Appellee, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent-Appellant. Analyze the cash method and...

• 
  4-1 Short Paper: Turin vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Case AnalysisAssignment
  

  
  Jim Turin & Sons, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 219 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2000).
  
  Analyze the cash method and the accrual method described in the case above. How did Jim Turin & Sons, Inc. assert its position? What were the key points in the decision that determined revenue recognition?

  
  

TAX 650 Short Paper Guidelines and Rubric Review the following case: Jim Turin & Sons, Inc., Petitioner-Appellee, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent-Appellant. Analyze the cash method and the accrual method described in the case above. How did Jim Turin & Sons, Inc. assert its position? What were the key points in the decision that determined revenue recognition? Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:  Analyzes the cash method described in the case  Analyzes the accrual methods described in the case  Assesses how Jim Turin & Sons inc. asserted its position in the case  Summarizes the key points in the decision that determined revenue recognition Guidelines for Submission: Your paper must be submitted as a 2–4-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one- inch margins, and at least three sources cited in APA format. Your paper must include at least three key points that determine the revenue recognition. Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value Cash Method Analysis Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis is supported with specific and relevant details Accurately analyzes the cash method described in the case Analyzes the cash method described in the case, but the response lacks depth and clarity Does not analyze the cash method described in the case 20 Accrual Method Analysis Meets “Proficient” criteria and analysis is supported with specific and relevant details Accurately analyzes the accrual method described in the case Analyzes the accrual method described in the case, but the response lacks depth and clarity Does not analyze the accrual method described in the case 20 Assessment of Jim Turin & Sons, Inc.’s Position Meets “Proficient” criteria and supports assessment with examples and details Effectively assesses how Jim Turin & Sons, Inc. asserted its position in the case Assesses how Jim Turin & Sons, Inc. asserted its position in the case, but the response lacks depth and clarity Does not assess how Jim Turin & Sons, Inc. asserted its position in the case 20 Summary Meets “Proficient” criteria and includes relevant details Accurately summarizes at least three key points of the decision Summarizes at least three key points of the decision, but the response lacks depth and clarity Does not summarize three key points in the decision 20 http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/219/1103/532061/ Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to- read format Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas 20 Earned Total 100%