U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

93–277—PDF 2015

S. HRG. 113–564 

NOMINATIONS OF ROBERT W. HOLLEYMAN II 

AND CARY DOUGLAS PUGH 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON THE

NOMINATIONS OF 

ROBERT W. HOLLEYMAN II, TO BE DEPUTY UNITED STATES TRADE 

REPRESENTATIVE, WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR; AND CARY 

DOUGLAS PUGH, TO BE A JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES TAX 

COURT 

JULY 16, 2014 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

RON WYDEN, Oregon, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado 

ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania 

MARK R. WARNER, Virginia 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania 

JOSHUA SHEINKMAN, Staff Director 

CHRIS CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director 

(II) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Wyden, Hon. Ron, a U.S. Senator from Oregon, chairman, Committee on 

Finance .................................................................................................................. 1 

Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from Utah ................................................. 2 

CONGRESSIONAL WITNESS 

Landrieu, Hon. Mary, a U.S. Senator from Louisiana ......................................... 5 

ADMINISTRATION NOMINEES 

Holleyman, Robert W., II, nominated to be Deputy United States Trade 

Representative, with the rank of Ambassador, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC .......................................................................................... 7 

Pugh, Cary Douglas, nominated to be a judge of the United States Tax 

Court, Washington, DC ........................................................................................ 9 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL 

Hatch, Hon. Orrin G.: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 2 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

Holleyman, Robert W., II: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 24 

Biographical information ................................................................................. 26 

Responses to questions from committee members ......................................... 37 

Landrieu, Hon. Mary: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 49 

Pugh, Cary Douglas: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 51 

Biographical information ................................................................................. 52 

Wyden, Hon. Ron: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62 

(III) 

(1) 

NOMINATIONS OF ROBERT W. HOLLEYMAN II, 

TO BE DEPUTY U.S. TRADE 

REPRESENTATIVE, WITH THE RANK OF 

AMBASSADOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE 

PRESIDENT; AND CARY DOUGLAS PUGH, 

TO BE A JUDGE OF THE 

UNITED STATES TAX COURT 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2014 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in 

room SD–215, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Wyden 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Hatch, Crapo, and Thune. 

Also present: Democratic Staff: Michael Evans, General Counsel; 

Kara Getz, Senior Tax Counsel; Todd Metcalf, Chief Tax Counsel; 

Lisa Pearlman, International Trade Counsel; Elissa Alben, International Trade Counsel; Anderson Heiman, International Competitiveness and Innovation Advisor; and Jayme White, Chief Advisor 

for International Competitiveness and Innovation. Republican 

Staff: Everett Eissenstat, Chief International Trade Counsel; Rebecca Eubank, International Trade Analyst; Nicholas Wyatt, Tax 

and Nominations Professional Staff Member; and Kevin Rosenbaum, Detailee. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM OREGON, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

The CHAIRMAN. The Finance Committee will come to order. 

Today the Finance Committee is going to consider two nominees, 

Mr. Robert Holleyman, who is nominated to be Deputy United 

States Trade Representative at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and Ms. Cary Pugh, nominated to be a judge for the 

U.S. Tax Court. 

First is Robert Holleyman. If confirmed as Deputy USTR, Mr. 

Holleyman will be responsible for a broad portfolio of issues, including trade matters affecting U.S. service providers and intellectual property rights owners, as well as the ongoing Trans-Pacific 

Partnership negotiations and the broader U.S. trade relationship 

with Asia, including China. 

It is essential that the U.S. has a Deputy USTR in place, given 

the critical juncture of the TPP negotiations and the many chalVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:30 Feb 20, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\93277.000 TIMD
2 

lenges that U.S. companies face in China and across the region. 

Mr. Holleyman has had a long career in the technology industry, 

from which he brings a valuable perspective on the importance of 

digital trade to the American economy. He has years of experience 

on the ground, working to expand access to markets such as India 

and China. Digital trade has rapidly emerged as a major source of 

economic growth and innovation, and it is fundamentally reorganizing how goods and services are made and traded across our borders. 

As significant trade agreements take shape, it is essential that 

USTR provide global leadership in the development of rules that 

make sense for a 21st-century digital economy. I am eager to work 

with USTR and Mr. Holleyman, if confirmed, as they work to adopt 

trade agreements that address these new challenges. 

Mr. Holleyman also has experience on Capitol Hill, where he 

worked in both the majority and minority and served as senior 

counsel on the Senate Commerce Committee. Understanding how 

to work effectively with the Congress is an essential skill in the 

role for which he is nominated. 

Also with us today is Ms. Cary Pugh, who is nominated to be a 

judge on the U.S. Tax Court. The Tax Court is the judicial backbone of the Federal Tax Code. The 19 judges who make up the 

court have a challenging mission that requires them to travel 

around the Nation. While it is certainly difficult, these judges do 

indispensable work to ensure that taxpayers’ voices are heard and 

that the Nation’s tax laws are enforced in a fair and effective manner. 

Ms. Pugh comes to this task well-prepared. She served in a variety of roles, including time at the IRS, and she is yet another alum 

of the Finance Committee. She has also spent time working in the 

private sector. This range of experiences and knowledge is going to 

serve her well as she adjudicates the Nation’s tax cases. 

I thank both of the nominees for coming before the committee 

this morning, and I look forward to hearing from each of you. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Wyden appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I will say that we are going to have a bit of a 

logistics challenge this morning. There is a vote at 10:15, so we will 

have Senator Hatch make his opening remarks. We are also very 

pleased to have the chair of the Energy Committee here. I have 

had a chance to watch her expertise in action. 

So we will get as far as we can in the first few minutes. I do anticipate that we will have to come back, and it should not be long 

after we come back, but we appreciate your patience. It is my intention to return immediately after the vote. I know some of these 

votes seem to go on forever, but I will return immediately. 

Senator Hatch? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ORRIN G. HATCH, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH 

Senator HATCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to say 

these are excellent nominees. I intend to vote for them. I have 

known them for quite a while, to be honest with you, and they are 

good people. I am told that Ms. Pugh has deep roots in the Old DoVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:30 Feb 20, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\93277.000 TIMD
3 

minion. Her family has lived in the same rural community for 

many generations. I am told that your passion is Duke University. 

Ms. PUGH. Yes, sir. 

Senator HATCH. Well, I happen to like that too. I like their basketball team very much. They tell me you are also a patient and 

well-prepared angler, so you cannot be all bad, is all I can say. You 

also happen to be a great former staffer to this committee. 

During your tenure on the Finance Committee Democratic tax 

staff, you became known as a reliable member of Senator Baucus’s 

team and developed a reputation as a problem-solver, which is important to the committee, accomplishing quite a bit in the legislative arena in a relatively short period of time. 

Your reputation only grew in your later government and privatesector experience. I think your small-town common sense is going 

to be very important here, but you also have excellent academic 

and professional credentials which should serve you well in this position on the Tax Court. 

The Deputy USTR also plays an important role, particularly in 

formulating U.S. trade policy and advocating on behalf of America’s 

international trade interests. I have known Mr. Holleyman a long 

time and have a lot of regard for him, and I intend to support him. 

You will be taking on a very important portfolio, including Asia, 

services, and intellectual property, all areas where we face significant challenges. 

If anybody can make some inroads there, you ought to be able 

to. Turning first to Asia, China continues to be one of our most important and most challenging trading partners. China reaps great 

benefits from an open world trading system, but its record of adhering to the rules of that system is mixed at best. U.S. exporters 

and investors in China face a host of challenges when trying to 

compete in China’s large and growing market, including the continued theft of U.S. intellectual property and trade secrets, tradedistorting subsidies, forced localization, and regulatory barriers. 

Throughout Asia, our exporters face a range of barriers to their 

goods and services, and one way to address many of these barriers 

is to negotiate strong rules in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or 

TPP. But here too, problems persist. 

While I continue to support these negotiations, I am becoming increasingly concerned with the direction the negotiations appear to 

be taking. It seems that the administration may consider something far less than full tariff liberalization from Japan. This would 

not only result in a weak TPP agreement, but also set a very bad 

precedent for other negotiations, including the TTIP negotiations, 

the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. 

I am also concerned that the administration may once again 

short-change U.S. innovators and intellectual property rights holders by agreeing to a weak outcome for intellectual property rights 

protection. Let me just be clear: I will not support an agreement 

that does not provide for the robust protection of U.S. intellectual 

property rights, including terms of data protection for biologics 

similar to those found in the U.S. law. 

As the author of Hatch-Waxman, I know how important that 

data protection really is, and I get tired of the politics being played 

around that all the time. It had better be the same. That was a 

4 

very hard set of negotiations that allowed us to reach those particular data protection figures. 

Mr. Holleyman, if confirmed, intellectual property rights and innovation will also be part of your portfolio. It is essential that the 

Deputy USTR be a powerful advocate for strong intellectual property rights protection. I think you will be. I hope that you will be 

that voice, and such an advocate is badly needed at USTR right 

now. 

But another area that would be in your portfolio is services. 

Trade in services is one of our country’s most competitive exports. 

If confirmed, you must work closely with Ambassador Punke to ensure that we meet the ambitious goals of the trade and services 

agreement and the TTIP. I will also be counting on you, if confirmed—and I think you will be—to ensure that all services, including financial services, are included in the regulatory coherence and 

market access outcomes of TTIP. 

Finally, I hope you will help push the administration to be a 

stronger, more public advocate on behalf of renewing Trade Promotion Authority, or TPA. Without it, I do not think the administration can negotiate high-standard trade agreements that will 

achieve the goals of Congress and that will be passed into law. The 

Bipartisan Trade Priorities Act that I introduced with former Senator Baucus and Chairman Camp would renew TPA and outline a 

set of bipartisan priorities for our trade negotiators. 

Now, a lot has changed since the last time TPA was renewed in 

2002. Our bill recognizes that reality and, with extensive input 

from multiple stakeholders, we have created a bill that addresses 

the challenges our job creators, workers, farmers, and ranchers are 

facing today. So I hope we can move on our legislation as soon as 

possible. We have a new chairman, and he is excellent, and I think 

we can do this. It is essential to ensure that the ambitious trade 

negotiations currently under way are successful and that we 

achieve the best possible outcome for the American people. 

Mr. Chairman, I thank you once again for holding this hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hatch. I very much appreciate your statement. I also want to note that you have long focused on this absolutely critical area of protecting intellectual property, and I very much appreciate your focus here again today. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Hatch appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Our first nominee is going to be Mr. Robert 

Holleyman, nominated to be Deputy United States Trade Representative. It is a tradition in this committee, Mr. Holleyman, that 

you introduce your family. 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to introduce my husband, Bill Keller, who is here in the front row and 

who is joined by friends who are here and family in Louisiana who 

are watching via the webcast. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very good. It is nice to have the chair of the Energy Committee here, a long-time ally of Senator Hatch and I on 

a whole host of matters. She wants to make sure that the voice of 

Louisiana is heard again this morning. 

Senator Landrieu, let us have you introduce Mr. Holleyman. 

5 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARY LANDRIEU, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is wonderful to 

see you in your new role as chair of this important committee. 

Thank you for your leadership for our Nation and for your support 

of me as I learn how to be a chair of the Energy Committee. Senator Hatch, thank you for your support of these two nominees. 

I am here to present to the committee Robert Holleyman. Robert 

and I did not meet here on the Hill; we actually met in high school 

many years ago when we were both up here to represent our respective schools—his in Lake Charles, mine in New Orleans—at 

the Louisiana Youth Seminar. It was there that we were encouraged to pursue more leadership abilities, and so here we are as the 

U.S. Senator and as Ambassador from our State, or soon to be. 

We shared that unique experience early in life and both of us 

have continued our passion to represent our State and to try to 

help make this country a better place. 

Robert grew up in Lake Charles. He still has family and friends 

throughout the State. He is married to Bill Keller. Bill is a wonderful partner, and we are proud of both of them. 

As many of you will understand, you can take a man out of Louisiana, but you cannot take Louisiana out of the man. I am confident that Robert—who grew up literally within earshot and 

across the street from the Port of Lake Charles, which is the most 

important trading port in our country—will bring all of that background to the position that the President has nominated him to 

serve. He graduated from Barbe High School, a great public school 

in Lake Charles, graduated from Trinity University in San Antonio, and then received his law degree from Louisiana State University. 

After being admitted to the bar, he served as clerk for the late 

U.S. District Judge Jack Gordon in the Eastern District of New Orleans. He then, amazingly, moved to Washington to work for Senator Russell Long, former chair of this exact committee. So he is 

actually back where he started many years ago, and now as a proposed Trade Representative. 

He worked for an extensive period of time with the Senate Commerce Committee. He is extraordinarily familiar with and steeped 

in the issues before the Finance Committee as they relate to trade. 

I believe strongly that is why President Obama has tapped him to 

serve in this capacity. 

In addition, his career after the Hill, which was in the software 

industry and remains to this day in the high-tech community, is 

going to best serve him, I think, to represent our country in these 

negotiations. He is currently CEO and founder of Cloud4Growth, a 

cloud technology development company, and he represented the 

Software Alliance from 1990 to 2013. 

So, Mr. Chairman, his experience as a young leader, his commitment to leadership and excellence throughout his career, his professional background, his academic degrees, and his work already 

deeply imbedded in work of the Finance Committee, on the Commerce Committee, and in the office of Senator Long, I think give 

him a very long and broad perspective of the kind of issues that 

Senator Hatch has raised which are so important, making sure 

6 

that America is well-represented—America as our country, but also 

America as small business owners—and that the average person is 

well-represented at those trade negotiations so that our people are 

not left behind. 

I will conclude with, Louisiana has right now—and Mr. Holleyman is very familiar with the challenges of trying to promote fair 

trade with the Pacific Rim, with China, and many of the countries 

in the Pacific. We have had some serious issues with dumping of 

seafood, crawfish, and shrimp that are undermining a part of our 

economy that is very, very important. There have been some 

threats to the Jones Act, which protects our maritime shipbuilding 

industry, which is extremely important to Louisiana. 

So believe me, I would not be supporting someone for this position if I did not think that he was capable of representing the interests of Louisiana, the Gulf Coast, shipbuilding, our seafood industry, and let me mention our movie industry. I am not California, 

but Louisiana has literally just surpassed California in movie production in the Nation, amazingly. 

There is a big threat under way for China and some of these 

countries to steal this intellectual property and to undermine the 

domestic creative industries here in America and promoted, amazingly, through Louisiana. 

So Robert is familiar with these challenges. That is why I give 

him full support. I know he will do a wonderful job. Robert, thank 

you for your leadership over these many years. 

And I will submit the rest of my statement for the record, Mr. 

Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Landrieu, thank you for a very thoughtful introduction. I think, Mr. Holleyman, you know that, when you 

are with Chairman Landrieu, you are running with the right 

crowd. Suffice it to say, Chairman Landrieu, I think your point 

with respect to trade enforcement is particularly important. After 

Ambassador Froman came to the committee, that was actually our 

first hearing on trade enforcement. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Landrieu appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I like to think that it is already paying off, because we had the United Steelworkers and the U.S. Steel Company 

here, and last week we had a favorable decision with respect to 

Korea. So I think that what is now being shown is strong bipartisan interest around exactly the kind of issues that you have 

raised, and I thank you for, once again, your incisive comments. 

Our next nominee is Cary Pugh, nominated to be a judge on the 

U.S. Tax Court. Ms. Pugh, if you could introduce your family, that 

would be great. 

Ms. PUGH. It would be my pleasure. My parents are also watching from home in Lynchburg, VA, but I am pleased to introduce my 

sister Sydnor Smalera; my brother-in-law Andrew; my niece 

Frances, who is missing camp; my aunt Margie Pugh; and my cousin Daniel Dixon and his son Weston, who also drove up from 

Lynchburg to join me today. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Also with us today, and we are honored to have them, are five distinguished judges of the U.S. Tax 

Court. The Chief Judge is with us, Mr. Michael Thornton, who for 

7 

many years served as tax counsel on the Ways and Means Committee; Judge Joseph Gale, who served as an advisor and chief 

counsel on this committee under Chairman Moynihan; the esteemed Judge John Colvin, who, among many other things, spent 

many years in this room as counsel to Chairman Packwood—so we 

are happy to have the Oregon connections—and they were days, 

notably, during the Tax Reform Act of 1986; Judge Kathy Kerrigan, 

who served with distinction both in the House and under our 

former Finance Committee colleague Senator Kerry; and finally, 

Judge Joe Nega, who joined the Court after serving as a legislative 

counsel on the Joint Committee on Taxation for nearly 30 years. 

So we have the distinguished judges of the U.S. Tax Court out 

in force this morning, and we very much appreciate your professionalism and having you with us. We thank our nominees and our 

guests for being here. 

Just so you know, it is our usual practice that the prepared 

statements are automatically made part of the hearing record. We 

would like you to use your 5 minutes to summarize. Since we are 

well into the vote, I would say to our nominees, I will run over. I 

have my credibility on the line with Senator Hatch that this will 

be very brief, so I will run/sprint over to vote, and I think we can 

recommence in probably about 10, 12 minutes. 

So with that, we will go vote, and we will return shortly for your 

statements. 

[Whereupon, at 10:25 a.m., the hearing was recessed, reconvening at 10:45 a.m.] 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. The committee will come back to order. 

I very much appreciate our nominees’ patience; today looks hectic 

even by Senate standards. 

Let us start with you, Mr. Holleyman. We welcome you. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT W. HOLLEYMAN II, NOMINATED TO 

BE DEPUTY UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE, 

WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF 

THE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Chairman Wyden, I want to thank you, Ranking Member Hatch, and the distinguished members of this committee for the privilege to appear before you to testify as the nominee for Deputy U.S. Trade Representative. I am humbled by the 

confidence that President Obama and Ambassador Froman have 

placed in me to serve in this position. 

I would like to thank Senator Mary Landrieu for her warm introduction and for her support. I have valued our friendship over 

many years, and fellow Louisianians are fortunate to have such a 

strong leader and advocate here in Washington. 

I would also like to thank my husband, Bill Keller, who is with 

me today. His steadfast support and shared belief in public service 

help enable me to make the full commitments needed for the work 

ahead. With my friends who are also here and family who are 

watching, this really has enabled me to eagerly take on these challenges. 

Thirty-two years ago, I moved to Washington to work for my 

home State Senator, Russell Long. He served as chair and ranking 

member of this committee for 20 years. From him I have a proVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:30 Feb 20, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\93277.000 TIMD
8 

found appreciation for the role of this committee and of Congress 

in formulating trade policy. 

Following his retirement, I was fortunate to serve as counsel for 

the Senate Commerce Committee under Chairman Fritz Hollings, 

and I am honored to be sitting now on this side of the witness table 

with the opportunity to once again serve the American people. 

Throughout my time working in Congress and in the technology 

industry, I have witnessed the benefits of trade for American businesses and workers. I have seen directly how U.S. exports can 

drive growth. I have also seen how close consultation with Congress and with stakeholders can help craft better policies that benefit American businesses and support jobs here at home. 

I have lived at the epicenter of the digital economy since its early 

days. I have worked to ensure that U.S. goods and services secure 

fair treatment across borders and that our innovative industries 

which rely on strong and balanced intellectual property protections 

can be given the best chance to succeed abroad. I traveled extensively to Asia, Europe, Africa, and Latin America on behalf of 

American innovators to promote U.S. ingenuity and break down 

trade barriers, helping to create and protect American jobs here at 

home. If confirmed, I hope to build on this work, and I look forward 

to joining a dedicated team at USTR that is working on one of the 

most ambitious trade agendas in a generation. 

Together, the TPP and TTIP account for two-thirds of global 

GDP. Our partners in TISA, ITA, and the just-launched Environmental Goods Agreement each account for upwards of 80 percent 

of trade in their respective global sectors. In the WTO, the administration is working with 160 members to make the institution and 

the agenda more relevant to stakeholders and the world as it exists 

today. 

I know firsthand that the United States and our workers can win 

in the global economy. If confirmed, I am committed to making the 

United States the innovation and production platform of choice and 

to strengthening the potential for Made in America goods, services, 

and agricultural products. 

At the same time, we must hold our trading partners accountable 

by vigorously enforcing our existing trade agreements. It is critical 

that we take a whole-of-government approach to addressing unfair 

trade practices. If confirmed, I would bring to my position a strong 

background in global enforcement matters to support the administration’s unmatched enforcement record. 

I have had the honor of meeting with you, Mr. Chairman, and 

other members of this committee in preparing for this hearing. 

That has helped give me an even better understanding of the priorities in your home States and for this committee. If I am confirmed, 

I am committed to strengthening and maintaining that ongoing 

partnership with each of you and with Congress. 

In conclusion, I thank the President for this opportunity and the 

committee for considering my nomination. I look forward to answering any questions you may have. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Holleyman. We will 

have questions momentarily. 

9 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Holleyman appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Pugh, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF CARY DOUGLAS PUGH, NOMINATED TO BE A 

JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. PUGH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Hatch, 

and members of the committee. It is a true honor to be before you 

today as the President’s nominee to serve as a judge on the United 

States Tax Court. I am grateful to the President for his confidence 

in me and to the committee for the opportunity to appear today. 

I am especially grateful for the support of the staff of this committee throughout the process, and their swift consideration. Of 

course, I would not be here today without the support of many others throughout my life and my career, starting with my family, but 

also friends and colleagues and mentors who have helped me immeasurably along the way. Some of them have joined me today, 

and I would like to particularly mention Russ Sullivan, who actually hired me to join the committee staff back in 1999. 

I have been blessed by many opportunities in my chosen profession, including the years I worked for this committee. I treasure 

that experience, but none of my past work could surpass the position for which I have been nominated. My mother worked as a 

legal secretary before I was born, and I announced on a 3rd grade 

academic game show that I would be a lawyer. I chose a legal career early, or it chose me. 

Tax law came later, as I grew to understand how it touches all 

aspects of lives and economic activities. I have learned over my 

legal career and in my endeavors outside work that I feel the greatest sense of accomplishment when I am able to resolve issues and 

disputes. 

As a tax lawyer then, I have a particular affinity for a court 

charged specifically with resolving tax disputes between taxpayers 

and the government. Working for the government—as staff of this 

committee and then at the IRS Office of Chief Counsel—and for clients, both pro bono and paying, I have seen the key role that this 

court plays in shaping the tax law, and I have witnessed the importance of a forum for taxpayers to have their say before an impartial 

party. 

This is true for individuals and corporate clients. It is also true 

for the IRS. The key to our system is respect for the law, for everyone—from the smallest taxpayer to the largest corporation to the 

government—to understand that, in the end, it is the law that matters, not who you are or how much is at stake. 

It is just as important to the work of this committee and Congress to have confidence that the law will be applied fairly and impartially. If I am confirmed, that will be my guiding principle. I am 

grateful to the President for his confidence in nominating me and 

will aspire to be worthy of the position if this committee and the 

Senate deem me qualified. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Hatch, and 

other members of this committee, for your consideration. I would 

be happy to answer any questions. 

10 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Pugh, thank you very much. I appreciate 

both of the statements that you all have made. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pugh appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Now, it is our standard process to ask you four 

questions. I will ask them of both of you, and we can get through 

the questions expeditiously. 

The first question is, is there anything that you are aware of in 

your background that might present a conflict of interest with the 

duties of the office to which you have been nominated? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. PUGH. No, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Second, do you know of any reason, personal or 

otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you 

have been nominated? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. PUGH. No, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do you agree, without reservation, to respond to 

any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress, if confirmed? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. PUGH. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do you commit to provide a prompt response in 

writing to any questions addressed to you by any Senator of this 

committee? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. PUGH. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Let’s do this, because I think it will 

be somewhat discombobulating if we try to go back and forth between trade and the Court. 

Let me start with you, if I might, Mr. Holleyman. I think you all 

there in the trade field know that I feel very strongly that trade 

policy needs an upgrade. It needs an upgrade, at least because we 

have seen an explosion of digital trade, digital goods, digital services, and this is a new economic driver in our country. 

What we have faced is a host of new trade barriers—this is what 

American providers have faced as a result—and the barriers are 

not just, I think you might say, technical, tech industry issues. 

Whether you are an auto manufacturer in Detroit or a financial 

services provider in New Jersey, today you consider data flows absolutely key to efficiently sell your product in these increasingly 

competitive global markets. 

Coming from the tech sector, my view has been that you have a 

unique perspective on how to reshape U.S. trade policy to account 

for these digital challenges, and I think you heard me say that one 

of the reasons I feel so strongly is that this is ‘‘advantage America.’’ 

This is an area where we have a cutting-edge lead. 

Why don’t we start by having you outline what you would do, if 

confirmed, to heighten awareness among the many different offices 

within USTR to address these issues and ensure that an integrated, comprehensive strategy is put together to deal with them? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for that question. I 

certainly know of your keen interest in this issue, and of other 

members of this committee. I share that keen interest. Indeed, I 

11 

share the imperative of ensuring that the U.S. trade policy be at 

the forefront of leading and establishing the rules of the road for 

digital trade. The U.S. currently has a $135-billion trade surplus in digitally 

delivered goods. That number will grow, but that number will only 

grow if we work now to put the right rules in place that will allow 

and recognize not only how this affects the technology industry, but 

also users of data and information that are important. 

Coming out of the technology industry, I know quite well that 

the rules of the road in trade that the U.S. helped negotiate over 

the past 20 years have been essential in allowing U.S. innovators 

to succeed globally as they have under existing trade regimes, but 

those rules, while a good foundation, do not fully contemplate the 

type of barriers that we are now seeing to digital trade. 

That makes it all the more important for this committee, Congress, and the administration to be driving a digital trade agenda. 

I intend to pursue that vigorously to ensure that in the next 20 

years, the next 40 years, that American entrepreneurs and workers 

have the same opportunities to succeed as they have had in the 

past. 

That means things like ensuring that there are cross-border data 

transfers, ensuring that we have provisions against forced localization, ensuring that there is not a discrimination against digital 

products, and ensuring that there is the legal certainty so that 

businesses know how to operate in this environment. I look forward 

to working with you and with the committee, and, if confirmed, 

with USTR and the whole of government, to focus on these critical 

issues. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let’s go to the question of transparency in these 

trade negotiations. I think you heard me say privately, but I just 

want it stated publicly, this is an absolute prerequisite in order to 

build a new bipartisan coalition for trade policy in our country. It 

is something I feel very strongly about. 

In my State, one out of six jobs depends on international trade. 

The trade jobs pay better than do the non-trade jobs, because they 

reflect a high level of productivity. What Oregonians want to do is 

pretty similar to what a lot of people in this country want to do, 

and that is to grow things and make things here, add value to 

them here, and then ship them somewhere. 

We are not going to be able to win support, bipartisan support, 

for a new coalition to get trade policy passed—not just TPP, about 

which you will be specifically concerned with, but trade generally— 

unless the American people are brought into this debate. Right now 

they have been in the dark. They have been in the dark, and some 

of these staff people who were sitting behind me have had difficulty 

getting access to some of the key documents that are necessary. 

I want you to know, and I have told Ambassador Froman this, 

I have told the President this, that the American people have to 

be brought into this debate. This is not something that you can just 

send to the U.S. Congress and say, all right, you all are going to 

have a vote under the current laws—that is that. 

The American people have to be brought into this debate, and 

the Congress has to be consulted about the specific terms. So my 

question to you is, if confirmed, what would you do to make sure 

12 

that both the Congress and the American people are brought into 

this discussion, this discussion about U.S. trade agreements, before, underline before, they are signed? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for that question. We 

have had an opportunity to talk about this. I have certainly paid 

very close attention to the keen level of interest you and other 

members, not only of this committee but of Congress, have on this 

issue. I think that certainly, in the digital era in which we live, 

citizens have an expectation for availability of information at all 

levels, including how government pursues these issues. 

I commit to, if confirmed for this position, doing everything I can 

to work with you and with this committee as we look to ensure the 

greatest level of confidence and information. I commit to making 

this a chief priority. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am not going to flog this any further. I know 

a nomination hearing is not the time to get into specifics, but it 

will be shortly, because this is a prerequisite. If we want to have 

a new bipartisan coalition for America’s trade agenda and the ability to create high-skilled, high-wage jobs in tough global markets— 

I can tell you, I had town hall meetings it seems like a few days 

ago on Oregon’s south coast, in Coos Bay and Curry County, and, 

as I made my way through town meetings, people would bring this 

issue up. 

They would say, ‘‘I know you all are talking.’’ They are not into 

all the details about the Ts: TPP, TPA, TTIP. They say, ‘‘We want 

to know what’s going on. It is not acceptable to just negotiate stuff 

in a bunch of hearing rooms in Washington, DC and then tell us 

we’re supposed to be for it.’’ So today is not a day for going into 

further detail, but that day will come shortly, and we will need 

more specifics. 

On the issue of China retaliation and enforcement, as you know, 

the committee held a hearing on trade enforcement recently and 

how to ensure that U.S. companies, farmers, ranchers, and workers 

get the benefit of the bargain from the trade rules on the books. 

This too goes right to the heart of what the trade debate is going 

to be about, because people often come up to me, and they know 

I have been a supporter of all the major trade agreements. 

They say, ‘‘Why in the world would you be talking about a new 

trade agreement if you are not going to enforce the laws on the 

books?’’ So we have put a significant effort here into these issues, 

and you heard me say to Senator Landrieu, I think, some of our 

effort to beef up enforcement has already borne fruit, because we 

were pleased about the effort with respect to Korea. 

An additional enforcement challenge that was highlighted at our 

recent enforcement hearing is that our companies are increasingly 

subject to retaliation by China and others when they stand up for 

their rights, using U.S. trade laws, or help the U.S. Government 

take enforcement action at the World Trade Organization. 

Now, if you are confirmed as the deputy responsible for China 

trade matters, how would you, working in collaboration with the 

General Counsel, work to ensure that there is a strong enforcement 

effort in light of this growing problem? You may also know about 

the problem in Oregon with respect to SolarWorld, one of our leading solar manufacturers, where there are high-skill, high-wage jobs 

13 

being cyber-hacked. So this enforcement issue with respect to 

China and retaliation, this is priority business. How would you respond? 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Well, Mr. Chairman, I agree that China is priority number one. I think priority number one in this is ensuring 

we have enforcement, and adequate enforcement, of existing agreements. I have spent, in my career, 20 years engaging on issues related to China trade, including spending a lot of time on the 

ground in China trying to find new ways to enforce rights that 

exist, to close loopholes, and to try to ensure that innovative American companies and others can succeed in that market. 

So I am committed to working with this committee, if confirmed, 

and with the whole of the administration to focus on that priority. 

I think it starts with enforcement of existing agreements, it starts 

with forging new agreements in critical areas like protection of 

trade secrets and enforcement, and I think it requires being diligent in every bilateral and multilateral negotiation. 

Let me say on the issue of retaliation, I have certainly seen and 

I share your sense that there is a growing, not only risk, but occurrence, of retaliation that many U.S. companies face when they 

raise issues affecting China. I think that makes it increasingly imperative that the full weight and force of the U.S. Government be 

placed on these issues, because many U.S. companies cannot be or 

are not in a position to be forward-leaning. 

Finally, let me say that I think there is an opportunity to create 

some partnerships with like-minded trade partners in other parts 

of the world, as we did on the indigenous innovation in China 

issue, so that it is not simply the U.S. standing up on these issues 

but finding our allies, because ultimately fair trade—and fair trade 

in China—is dependent upon collective activity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me turn now to intellectual property. As you 

heard Senator Hatch say, and in my view very appropriately so, 

this is a very significant part of our focus here. I have long been 

a supporter of policies like section 230. This was a law that Congressman Chris Cox and I wrote together on a bipartisan basis that 

many have said really was the legal foundation for the investment 

in social media, because, prior to that law that Congressman Cox 

and I wrote, you could have a website or a blog held liable for 

something that was posted on it. 

Of course, the website owner or the blog could not have any idea 

where it was coming from or who was controlling it. That law ensured that the website and the blog would not be held secondarily 

liable. I have been told that you would not have had investment 

in social media without that law, because investors would not have 

been willing to put money into social media without having that security that they would not be held secondarily liable. 

So I am very interested in these policies with respect to what is 

needed to encourage growth and innovation in the digital economy. 

I think, as we have talked about going back to those early laws 

that Congressman Cox and I wrote, I think this is a completely bipartisan kind of concern. 

I feel strongly that our country ought to oppose proposals that 

would undermine the fundamental architecture and openness of 

the Net. As you know—we talked about it—there are some who are 

14 

concerned that your views on intellectual property do not take into 

account the balance required to preserve free speech and innovation and the economic dynamism of the Internet. 

I think it would be helpful to just have on the record your description of your perspective here on these policy issues that would 

ensure that the Internet remains an open platform for speech and 

commerce and the engine of economic growth and job creation that 

has been a priority of mine—I note I am joined here by Senator 

Thune. He and I have teamed up on another major initiative with 

respect to data flows and digital goods, so why don’t you give us 

your position on IP, if you would. 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. All right. Mr. Chairman, I think your question 

is absolutely the right one. I think it follows up, importantly, on 

a conversation that you and I had in your offices after I had been 

nominated for this position. 

Certainly, I want to be clear in saying that, as someone coming 

out of the technology industry, I believe it is critically important for 

us to not only foster, but encourage, the growth and openness of 

the Internet. Indeed, the type of digital commerce, the digital trade 

issues that you and Senator Thune and others have worked together on, are dependent upon that platform. 

I believe that, in the area of intellectual property protection, the 

U.S. has committed to supporting the type of provisions that exist 

in U.S. law that provide for a balanced protection of recognizing 

the link between intellectual property protection and innovation, 

but also the type of exceptions and limitations that exist in U.S. 

law ensuring that the type of social media and other commerce 

that you were addressing with Senator Cox in the Communications 

Decency Act are also carried forward as fundamental values of the 

U.S. I commit to working with you, working with Senator Hatch, 

working with the administration, to ensure that that proper balance is struck and is reflected in our trade negotiations. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask you one other question, and then I 

will turn to my friend from South Dakota. Now, our understanding 

is your portfolio will include Asia, services, investment, and intellectual property and innovation. So that is a pretty big portfolio. 

You are not going to be sitting around reading paperbacks up there 

at this job. Also, with negotiations over the TPP, that will certainly 

consume a good chunk of your time. 

Why don’t we just wrap up this portion, and then I am going to 

go to my friend from South Dakota for his questions. Give us your 

sense of what the big opportunities are for American firms in Asia, 

and then the challenges, sort of a quick overview: opportunities, 

challenges. 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Sure. For Asia, I would say it really breaks 

down into sort of three things. One, I think we have a unique position of opportunity to try to be the leader in striking the new 

forward-looking trade agreements with our partners in Asia that 

really ensure that the kind of values and the openness and the opportunities for innovators in America exist in that region. I think 

it is particularly important for us to be, as we are in TPP and elsewhere, stepping up to the plate and showing that kind of futureoriented trade, including in areas like digital trade. 

15 

I think the second priority in Asia, even for the region, is always 

the same, back to China, which is, with China, we have to work 

regionally to ensure that the U.S. influence on trade policy addresses some of the practices that we have seen in China that can be 

most harmful to American innovators, job creators, and workers 

trying to gain access to that market. 

So I think that is finally, at the end of the day then, the challenge for the region, which is to make sure that every tool that we 

have existing for enforcement, whether it is our bilateral agreements, whether it is multilateral agreements through the WTO and 

elsewhere, that we are using those vigorously to enforce rights, to 

establish the kind of conduct that is necessary, and really to be a 

leader going forward. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Thune? 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Holleyman, as the chairman noted, these are issues that he 

and I have worked together on extensively. I know you have already plowed some of the ground with regard to digital trade, 

cross-border data flows, things that we have a great interest in. I 

would also like to maybe ask this question a slightly different way. 

There is a suggestion that has come from some other nations 

around the world in the wake of the NSA surveillance disclosure 

that countries ought to attempt to create their own national or regional Internet networks. 

I am just curious about your thoughts with regard to keeping the 

Internet as an open platform for business, information, and education, and how a regional network that treated U.S. companies 

differently than other companies around the world and websites 

within the network, whether or not that would constitute a new 

form of trade barrier. So just overall give us what your thoughts 

are with respect to that issue, because that is something that we 

hear being discussed by other countries. 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Senator Thune, I absolutely do believe that 

things like that can be significant barriers to trade, and not only 

significant barriers to trade, but they can really undermine the 

fundamental underpinnings of the cloud-computing model and 

where we are headed. 

I think efforts to fight against the Balkanization of the cloud are 

good for users of the cloud, because really the way the cloud works 

is through the collective efficiencies and cost savings that come 

through allowing data to be exchanged and really bringing low-cost 

computing capacity to both citizens here and in emerging economies. That allows a level of innovation unlike anything we have 

been able to see, because it really breaks through the barriers to 

cost. 

For countries that want to break up the cloud, to Balkanize the 

cloud, I think they are doing it for misguided reasons, one of which 

is, I think that some countries believe that the economic value of 

the cloud is around hosting physical servers in their markets. 

We need to help them understand, as the U.S., that that is not 

the economic value of the cloud. We also need to help them understand that this is not just a U.S. interest, but indeed it is also an 

interest for many emerging markets where small companies and 

16 

entrepreneurs, if given the ability to use an unfettered cloud, will 

be able to grow and prosper. 

So I think we have to lead here. I think this is part of the digital 

trade agenda in TPP and TISA, TTIP, and elsewhere. If confirmed 

for this position, I commit to working closely with you and with the 

chairman to make sure that this absolute imperative for the U.S. 

moves forward. 

Senator THUNE. That would be great. Chairman Wyden and I, on 

the digital trade bill that we have introduced, designed it to really 

put additional focus and light on, as we negotiate these trade 

agreements, the importance of not having these types of protectionist barriers raised against American digital goods. If you look 

at it, there is enormous potential out there globally for American 

business and the opportunity for economic growth on levels that 

ought to make everybody interested in this issue. 

It is one of the few areas in our economy where we actually run 

a trade surplus. Do you know what I mean? It is a net-net. It has 

been a very good thing for our economy, and I hope that we will 

be able to be very clear in these negotiations that this is an issue 

on which we cannot give ground. We need to make sure that we 

keep this platform open, and I hope that that will be a high priority for you and for your colleagues at USTR. 

I want to shift gears for just a minute and talk a little bit about 

another issue that is of great importance to me, and that is agriculture and how these trade agreements impact American farmers, 

and particularly market access in Asia, which I know will be geographically under your portfolio. 

I know you have people who specialize in agriculture, and that 

may not be your specific area of interest, but I want to know if you 

could assure me and other members of the committee that you will 

insist on a TPP outcome that results in broad-based tariff elimination and meaningful market access for our agricultural producers. 

We see areas like Japan as huge market opportunities. They historically have worked very hard to limit the discussion on agricultural issues to a very narrow range, and I hope that we can make 

this a very broad-based attempt, at least, to do away with a lot of 

these tariffs and other types of barriers that they erect to our products. 

Mr. HOLLEYMAN. Senator, I understand your keen interest in 

this. We run a trade surplus in agricultural products of about $40 

billion a year. The fastest-growing market opportunities are in 

Asia—existing markets and the fastest-growing. 

I think we have an opportunity, and I will commit to working 

with my colleagues at USTR throughout the building, to ensure, 

whether it is through TPP or elsewhere, that we provide comprehensive and meaningful market access to agricultural markets, 

including Japan and elsewhere, and that we look at the type of 

SPS and other measures that are being used in some markets to 

try to block legitimate, healthy, and safe U.S. products from getting 

into those markets. It is an important part of the economy today. 

It is an important part of the economy even more going forward, 

and Asia is really a huge opportunity for us. I commit to working 

with you on that. 

17 

Senator THUNE. Well, we will look forward to continuing the dialogue on that. I mentioned Japan and also China. China is the 

number-one market for soybean exports, a very fast-growing market for corn. They are not approving, at least in a timely way, new 

biotech traits, which is something that is very troubling and could 

have a significant negative impact on our trade relationship. 

I hope that, if confirmed, you will work with your counterparts 

in China to move expeditiously on the approval of agricultural 

biotech products that have already been approved in the U.S. for 

entry into the Chinese market. They have, on some of these issues, 

been very difficult to deal with of late. Of course, that has a lot of 

implications for agricultural trade, which, as you mentioned, is another area of our economy that is a real bright spot. 

We globally have enormous opportunity through TTIP and TPP 

to really expand the reach of American agriculture and to help feed 

the world, but, in order to do that, we have to get these new technologies, these new biotech traits, approved in some of these countries. So we will look forward to working with you on that, and I 

will take your assurance that you will press on those issues and 

make that a priority. I will take that as reassurance that you will 

be very engaged on those. So, thank you. I appreciate that. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Thune. 

Mr. Holleyman, let me just highlight a couple of the points that 

Senator Thune mentioned. First, I would just want to make clear 

that opening Japan’s agricultural market is priority one for agriculture. In our State we do a lot of things well, but what we do 

best is, we grow things. You could be talking about Oregon wheat, 

you could be talking about our fruits, you could be talking about 

our vegetables. But Senator Thune is spot-on with respect to making sure that these markets in Asia are open to agricultural products. 

Second, on the matter with respect to the Internet, where Senator Thune also was commenting, I would just say that to echo 

Senator Thune’s comment, he and I wrote an op-ed article for the 

Wall Street Journal, and the heart of our op-ed was to make sure 

that concerns about surveillance do not become a stalking horse for 

digital protectionism. That was right at the heart of our article. 

So you have two Senators, one a Democrat, one a Republican, 

saying very similar things with respect to trade that you will be 

dealing with. 

Let me turn now, if I could, to your colleague for a few moments. 

First, I think it would be helpful if we could have kind of a teachin here on what somebody does at the Tax Court. Tell us what you 

see your role is as a Tax Court judge. 

Ms. PUGH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the role of the Tax 

Court judge really is to give an opportunity for taxpayers, in a prepayment forum—that is, they do not have to pay the amount that 

the IRS says that they owe first to get into Tax Court—to have a 

chance to go before a judge, to have a judge determine whether in 

fact they owe that money to the government or not. 

It is an important forum for the smaller taxpayers. The judges 

travel around the country. They do sit in Washington, but they 

travel to all 50 States so that the taxpayers do not have to travel, 

18 

so that they can have their issues heard by someone who should 

be, and hopefully is, always impartial. 

One of the other important features of the Tax Court is that 

many of the taxpayers appear without representation, so one of the 

challenges for the judges is to be able to elicit from the taxpayers 

the true facts and then make a decision based on the law as applied to the facts in the case. 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Let us also see if we can get some free 

advice here on one other tax matter. You probably read that we are 

blasting ahead full steam on tax reform. I have 9 years’ worth of 

sweat equity into putting together bipartisan bills and have worked 

with colleagues on this committee and off the committee. 

One of the central questions is the discussion about simplifying 

the code and streamlining the expenditures. I think you are aware 

that, since the last time there was tax reform, we have had something like 15,000 changes. It comes to around one for every working day for every year, year in and year out, since the last time 

there was tax reform. 

So by way of asking for some free advice, what do you think 

might be done, recognizing that the devil is obviously in the details—and in the tax code the details number in the thousands— 

to cut down on the number and thereby reduce the type of controversies that come before the Tax Court? 

Ms. PUGH. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have watched with great interest and applaud the work of this committee, and the work of Congress, in laying the groundwork for fundamental tax reform. Obviously, as you said, the devil is in the details, but simplification 

should be the goal, along with promoting economic growth and 

competitiveness. 

Simplification, from my time on the Hill, what I saw as the challenge, sometimes driven by budget constraints, would be a lot of 

the very detailed rules about who does and does not qualify. I know 

that there are, many times, very good policy reasons for drawing 

the rules as they have been drawn, but again, that is something 

to focus on. When you have very long and detailed provisions, that 

gives a greater opportunity for dispute with the IRS, and then 

those often end up before the Court. 

I might add, another thing that I think would be very helpful in 

tax reform is to make sure that, as the committee works its will— 

and I know that you are working through hearings—that we have 

the mark-ups and the legislative history so that the Court then has 

some guidance as to what Congress was thinking at the time it 

wrote the legislation if the dispute ultimately comes before the 

Court. 

The CHAIRMAN. That presumes that Congress always was actually thinking about something. Kidding aside, there has been some 

very good work done on these issues. Chairman Baucus in particular, I think, deserves enormous credit for the policy papers that 

he put out. 

At that time, I was chairman of the Energy Committee, and he 

was very gracious and consulted with us on those, so I think your 

counsel to, to the extent we can, shorten provisions and bring 

greater clarity to them, that avoids some of the headaches that 

stem from the longer provisions that are subject to multiple interVerDate Mar 15 2010 20:30 Feb 20, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\93277.000 TIMD
19 

pretations and are sort of a prescription for trouble. So, those are 

points well-taken. 

Both of you have been very cooperative. We will have additional 

questions, I know, coming to both of you from committee members. 

With that, the Finance Committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the hearing was concluded.] 

(21) 

A P P E N D I X 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD


93277001.eps
22 


93277.002
23 


93277.003
24 


93277.004
25 


93277.005
26 


93277.006
27 


93277.007
28 


93277.008
29 


93277.009
30 


93277.010
31 


93277.011
32 


93277.012
33 


93277.013
34 


93277.014
35 


93277.015
36 


93277.016
37 


93277.017
38 


93277.018
39 


93277.019
40 


93277.020
41 


93277.021
42 


93277.022
43 


93277.023
44 


93277.024
45 


93277.025
46 


93277.026
47 


93277.027
48 


93277.028
49 


93277.029
50 


93277.030
51 


93277.031
52 


93277.032
53 


93277.033
54 


93277.034
55 


93277.035
56 


93277.036
57 


93277.037
58 


93277.038
59 


93277.039
60 


93277.040
61 


93277.041
62 

Æ 


93277042.eps