FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT MAY 18, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK

Honora ble Virg inia M. Herna

ndez Covington, United States District Judg e for the * Middle District of Florida, sitting by designation. [ P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 11693

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 2 - 2 2 7 1 5 - CV - A SG U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s M O U N T SI N A I M ED I CA L CEN TER O F F L O R I D A , I N C ., D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ay 18, 2007) B ef ore B IR C H and P R Y O R , C i rc ui tJudg es , and C O V IN G T O N , D i stri ctJudg e. * B IR C H , C i rc ui tJudg e:2

T h e is s u e p r e s e n te d in th is c a s e is a q u e s tio n o f f ir s t im p r e s s io n f

o rth is C i r c ui t : a r e m e di c a l r e s i de nt s e l i gi bl e t o a s s e r tthe “ s tude nte xe m pt i on” f r om F e d e r a l I n s u r a n c e C o n tr ib u tio n s A c t ( “F I C A ” ) ta x a tio n f o u n d in 2 6 U .S .C . § 3 1 2 1 ( b ) ( 1 0 ) ? W e hol d tha tthe s e rvi c e s pe r f orm e d by m e di c a l r e s i de nt s a r e not c a t e gor i c a l l y i ne l i gi bl e f orthe s tude nte xe m pt i on f r om F I C A t a xa t i on. A s a r e s u lt, w e V A C A T E the s um m a ry j udgm e nta nd R E M A N D f orf ur the rpr oc e e di ngs c ons i s t e ntw i th thi s opi ni on. I . B AC KG RO UN D O n 18 S e pt e m be r2002, P l a i nt i f f /A ppe l l e e U ni t e d S t a t e s of A m e r i c a f

i l e d a one - c ountc om pl a i nta ga i ns tD e f e nda nt/A ppe l l a ntM ountS i na i M e di c a l C e nt e rof F l ori da, Inc. (“ M ou ntS i nai ”) al l egi ng thatthe Int ernal R evenue S ervi ce (“ IR S ”) h a d is s u e d a n e rr o n e o u s r e f u n d to M o u n t S in a i in th e a m o u n t o f $ 2 ,4 5 0 ,1 7 7 .3 2 . T he r e f und ha d be e n f

orF I C A t a xe s pa i d a nd w i thhe l d byM ountS i na i f or p a y m e n ts m a d e to m e d ic a l r e s id e n ts p a r tic ip a tin g in M o u n t S in a i’s G r a d u a te M e di c a l E duc a t i on P r ogr a m ( “ G M E P ” ) f orthe t a x y e a r s 1996 thr ough 1999. T he IR S had ref

un ded these t axes t o M ou ntS i nai i n 2 00 0 and 20 01 and h ad i ncl ud ed am o u n t s attri b u t ab l e t o b o th th e em p l o yer an d em p l o yee p o rt i o n s o f F IC A t ax es. I n r e s pons e t o the gove rnm e nt ’ s c om pl a i nt , M ountS i na i a ns w e r e d tha tthe ta x e s w e r e p r o p e r ly r e f

u n d e d p u r s u a n t to th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n , w h ic h e x e m p ts3

fr om F IC A t axat i on “ se rvi ce [s ] perf orm ed i n the em pl oy of . . . a s choo l , col l ege, oruni ve r s i ty . . . i f

s uc h s e rvi c e i s pe r f

orm e d by a s tude ntw ho i s e nr ol l e d a nd r e g u la r ly a tte n d in g c la s s e s a t s u c h s c h o o l, c o lle g e , o ru n iv e r s ity .” 2 6 U .S .C . § 3 1 2 1 (b )(1 0 ). T h e g o v ern m en tm o v ed fo r su m m ary j u d g m en t , co n t en d i n g th at , as a m a tte ro f la w , m e d ic a l r e s id e n ts a r e n e v e re lig ib le to c la im th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t f

o u n d , a s a m a tte ro f

la w , th a t th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n to F IC A do es no ti ncl ud e m edi ca l re si dent s, and, there fore , the M ou ntS i nai m edi ca l re si dent s’ re m un er at i on s w er e s ubj ec tt o F IC A t axat i on . A cc ordi ng l y, i tgrant ed th e g o v e rn m e n t’s m o tio n f o rs u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. T h is ap p e a l f o llo w e d . I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW W e r e v ie w a n o r d e ro f

s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t d e n o v o . S e e M o rr is o n R e s ts ., Inc. v. U ni t ed S t at es , 11 8 F . 3d 15 26 , 15 28 (11th C i r. 19 97 ) ( ci t at i on om i tt ed). I I I . DI S CUS S I ON T he sol e i ss ue on appeal i s w hether the di stri ctcourterre d i n rul i ng that m e di c a l r e s i de nt s e nr ol l e d i n M ountS i na i ’ s G M E P a r e i ne l i gi bl e , a s a m a tt e rof la w , to a s s e r t th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n to F I C A ta x a tio n f o u n d in 2 6 U .S .C . § 31 21 (b)( 10 ). F I C A i m pos e s a t a x on w a ge s tha te m pl oy e r s pa y the i re m pl oy e e s f orthe pu rpose of f

un di ng the S oci al S ec uri ty T rustF un d. S ee 26 U . S . C . §§ 31 01 (a )- (b),4

3111( a ) - ( b) ; s e e a l s o M c D ona l d v. S . F a rm B ur e a u L i f e I ns . C o. , 291 F . 3d 718, 7 2 1 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 2 ) (d escri b i n g th e F IC A t ax g en eral l y); U n i t ed S t at es v . M ayo F ound. f orM e d. E duc . & R e s e a r c h, 282 F . S upp. 2d 997, 999- 1000 ( D . M i nn. 2003) ( s a m e ) . T he r e a r e , how e ve r , num e r ous r e l a t i ons hi ps tha ta r e e xe m pt e d f r om F I C A t a xa t i on by s t a tut ory e xc e pt i ons t o the de f i ni t i on of “ e m pl oy m e nt . ” 26 U . S . C . § 3121( b) . S e c t i on 3121( b) l i s t s anum be rof f orm s of s e rvi c e tha ta r e not

“ e m pl oy m e nt ” w i thi n the m e a ni ng of the s t a tut e . T he s tude nte xe m pt i on a ti s s ue p ro v i d es th at“ th e t erm ‘ em p l o ym en t ’ . . . sh al l n o ti n cl u d e . . . serv i ce[s] perf orm ed i n the em pl oy of . . . a s choo l , col l ege, or un i vers i ty . . . i f s uch servi ce i s per form ed by a s tud entw ho i s e nrol l ed and regul ar l y a tt endi ng cl as se s a tsuch s c h o o l, c o lle g e , o ru n iv e r s ity [ .]” 2 6 U .S .C . § 3 1 2 1 ( b ) ( 1 0 ) . T h e ap p lic ab le r e gul a t i ons pr ovi de tha ta n e m pl oy e e w hos e s e rvi c e s a r e “ i nc i de ntt o a nd f orthe purpos e of

pur s ui ng a c our s e of

s tudy ” ha s the s t a tus of a s tude nt . 26 C . F . R . § 31- 3121( b) ( 10) - 2( d) . T he r e gul a t i ons a l s o s t a t e tha t“ the a m ountof r e m une r a t i on f

or se rvi ce s per form ed by the em pl oyee i n the ca l endar quart er , the type of s ervi ce s pe r f orm e d by the e m pl oy e e , a nd the pl a c e w he r e the s e rvi c e s a r e pe r f orm e d a r e not m a te r ia l.” 2 6 C .F .R . § 3 1 - 3 1 2 1 ( b ) ( 1 0 ) - 2 ( b ) . C o n g ress h as am en d ed 2 6 U . S . C . § 3 1 2 1 n u m ero u s t i m es an d th ere i s a s ubs t a nt i a l a m ountof

l e gi s l a t i ve hi s t ory , da t i ng ba c k t o 1939. I n r e vi e w i ng theTh eintern e xemp tio n p ro vide d a

n e xemp tio n f

or “ servic eperf

or me d a s a n intern [] in 2 the employ

of a hospital . . . .” § 3121(b)(13) (repeale d 1965). 5 l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o ry , th e d i s tr i c tc o u r tf o u n d th a tCo n g r e s s i mp o s e d ma n d a t o ry FI CA t a xa t i on on a l l m e di c a l r e s i de nt s w he n i tr e pe a l e d the s t a tut ory e xc l us i on f or m e d ic a l in te rn s u n d e rth e “in te rn e x e m p tio n ,” f o rm e r ly f

o u n d in § 3 1 2 1 ( b ) ( 1 3 ) . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M ountS i na i M e d. C tr . of F l a . , I nc . , 353 F . S upp. 2d 1217, 12 23 -27 (S . D . F l a. 20 05 ). S peci fi ca l l y, the di stri ctcourtfoun d thatm edi ca l 2 r e s i de nt s ha ve a l w a y s be e n c ove r e d by the S oc i a l S e c ur i ty A c t , i d. a t1224- 28, a nd thatM ou ntS i nai ’ s posi t i on vi ol at ed the rul es of st atut ory c on struct i on . Id. at 1228- 29. T he di s tr i c tc our tr e l i e d on the S i xth C i r c ui t ’ s r e f us a l t o e xpa nd the i nt e rn e xe m pt i on t o r e s i de nt s i n S t . L uke ’ s H os pi t a l A s s oc i a t i on of C l e ve l a nd v. U ni t ed S t at es , 33 3 F . 2d 15 7 (6th C i r. 19 64 ), as w el l as C on gres s’ s e nsui ng re peal o f th e in te rn e x e m p tio n . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t d e c lin e d to f o llo w M in n e s o tav . A p f e l, 151 F . 3d 742 ( 8th C i r . 1998) , a nd U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M a y o F ounda t i on, 282 F . S upp. 2d 99 7, tw o cas es w here i n cou rt s had concl ud ed thatthe re si dent s qual i fi ed as s tude nt s . M ountS i na i , 353 F . S upp. 2d 1229. O n appe a l , M ountS i na i a s s e r t s tha tw e s houl d notc ons i de rl e gi s l a t i ve hi st ory bec ause the stud entexem pt i on i s unam bi gu ou s. A l t ernat i vel y, M ou ntS i nai p o s its th a t e v e n if

th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n is a m b ig u o u s , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t f a ile d to c o n s id e rth e c o m p le te le g is la tiv e h is to ry in d e r iv in g c o n g r e s s io n a l in te n t.6

S peci fi ca l l y, M ou ntS i nai cont ends thatal tho ug h the i nt ern exem pt i on w as el i m i nat ed, m edi ca l re si dent s w er e perm i tt ed t o ass ertother e xem pt i on s a nd that r e ve r s i ng the di s tr i c tc our tw oul d notr e nde rthe or i gi na l i nt e rn e xe m pt i on superf l uo us. M oreover, M ou ntS i nai ar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourt ’ s rul i ng w as c ontr a ry t o the gove rnm e nt ’ s r e gul a t i ons a nd gui da nc e . C ons e que nt l y , M ount S i nai se eks are vers al of the di stri ctcourt ’ s rul i ng and a remand for afa ctual i nq ui ryi nt o w hether M ou ntS i nai ’ s r es i dent s qual i fyfor the stud entexem pt i on . In r e s pons e , the gove rnm e nta r gue s tha tthe s tude nte xe m pt i on c a nnot , a s a m a tt e rof l a w , appl y t o m e di c a l r e s i de nt s . I t s a r gum e nt s a r e l a r ge l y ba s e d on the l e gi s l a t i ve hi s t ory , s truc tur e , a nd i nt e ntof the s tude nte xe m pt i on, the i nt e rn e xe m pt i on, a nd r e la te d p r o v is io n s o f

th e I n te rn a l R e v e n u e C o d e . W e a gr e e w i th M ountS i na i tha tthe di s tr i c tc our ti m pr ope r l y r e l i e d on l egi sl at i ve hi st ory w i tho utfi rs tdet erm i ni ng w hether the l angu age of the st atut e w as am bi gu ou s. S ee Co n s u me rPr o d . Sa f e ty Co mm’ n v . G TE Sy l v a n i a , I n c . , 4 4 7 U . S. 102, 108, 100 S . C t . 2051, 2056 ( 1980) ( “ [ T ] he s t a r t i ng poi ntf ori nt e rpr e t i ng a s t a tut e i s the l a ngua ge of the s t a tut e i t s e l f

. A bs e nta c l e a r l y e xpr e s s e d l e gi s l a t i ve i nt ent i on t o the contra ry , thatl angu age m ustordi nari l y be r egar ded as concl usi ve. ”) . M o r e o v e r , w e h o ld th a t th e s ta tu to ry la n g u a g e o f 2 6 U .S .C . § 3121( b) ( 10) i s nota m bi guous . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. V e a l , 153 F . 3d 1233, 1245In fac t, as interpreted by the United States Department of Trea sury, Section 3121(b)( 10) 3 contemplates a

case -by-ca se approach to determiningwhether particula r ser vices qualified for the student exemption. S ee 26 C.F .R. § 31.3121(b)(10) -2; see also Univ. of Chicag o Hosps. v. United States, No. 05-C5120, 2006 WL2631974, at *5 (N.D . I ll. Sept. 8, 2006) (analy zing Tre a sury Re gulatio n 3 1. 31 21 (b )( 10 )- 2 a nd findingthat th ere gulatio n re quire s “ a c a se -b y-c a se approach to deter

mining whether pa

rticular service s qualified for the student exemption”). 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) ( “R e v ie w o f le g is la tiv e h is to ry is u n n e c e s s a ry u n le s s a s ta tu te is i nesc apabl y a m bi gu ou s. ”) (c i t at i on s a nd i nt ernal qu ot at i on om i tt ed). B y i t s pl ai n t erm s, the stud entexem pt i on do es no tl i m i tthe types of se rvi ce s tha tqua l i f

y f orthe e xe m pt i on. W he the ra m e di c a l r e s i de nti s a “ s tude nt ” a nd w hether he i s e m pl oyed by a “ sc ho ol , col l ege, or un i vers i ty” ar e s epar at e f ac tual i nq ui ri es thatdepend on the nature of the re si dency program i n w hi ch the m edi ca l resi d en t s p art i ci p at e an d th e st atu s o f th e em p l o yer. T h o u g h t ax ex em p t i o n s “ m u st be una m bi guous l y pr ove d, ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. W e l l s F a r go B a nk, 485 U . S . 351, 354, 10 8 S . C t . 11 79 , 11 82 (198 8) (c i t at i on s om i tt ed), i tdo es no tnece ss ar i l y f ol l ow that M o u n t S in a i is , a s a m a tte ro f la w , e x c lu d e d f

r o m a tte m p tin g to p r o v e th a t its r e s i de nt s ’ s e rvi c e s qua l i f y f orthe s tude nte xe m pt i on. T he gove rnm e nt ’ s a r gum e nt 3 r e s t s l a r ge l y upon a n i nf e r e nc e dr a w n f

r om the a dopt i on a nd s ubs e que ntr e pe a l of th e s e p a r a t e i n t e rn e x e m p t i o n . As d i s c u s s e d , we d o n o tf i n d th i s i n f

e r e n c e , d r a wn f r o m le g is la tiv e h is to ry , p e r s u a s iv e g iv e n th e c le a rim p o r t o f th e s ta tu te ’s te x t. T h e g o v e rn m e n t’s a tte m p t to lo o k p a s t th e p la in la n g u a g e o f th e s ta tu te in re l i ance on the l egi sl at i ve hi st ory vi ol at es a bas i c pri nci pl e of s t atut orySee United States v. Univ. Hosp., Inc., No. 1:05-CV- 445, 2006 WL2129816, at *6-7 4 (S.D. Ohio July

26, 2006) (discussing§ 3121(b)( 6) in relation to § 3121(b)(10)) . 8 i nt e rpr e t a t i on. “ [ W ] he n the s t a tut e ’ s l a ngua ge i s pl a i n, the s ol e f unc t i on of

the court s–atl ea stw here the di sposi t i on re qu i re d b y the t exti s notabsurd–i s t o enforce i ta c c or di ng t o i t s t e rm s . ” H a r t f or d U nde rw r i t e r s I nc . C o. v. U ni on P l a nt e r s B a nk, 530 U . S . 1, 6, 120 S . C t . 1942, 1947 ( 2000) ( c i t a t i ons a nd i nt e rna l quot a t i ons om i tt ed)) . W e w i l l no tre vi ew the l egi sl at i ve hi st ory of thi s s t atut e t o cre at e a n a m bi gui ty w he r e the r e i s none . S e e R a t z l a f v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 510 U . S . 135, 147- 48, 114 S . C t . 655, 662 ( 1994) ( “ [ W ] e do notr e s or tt o l e gi s l a t i ve hi s t ory t o c l oud a st atut ory t extthati s c l ea r. ”) . I f C ongr e s s ha d w a nt e d t o m a ke m e di c a l r e s i de nt s i ne l i gi bl e f orthe s tude nt e x e m p tio n , it c o u ld h a v e e a s ily c r a f te d a s p e c if

ic e x c lu s io n , a s it d id in 2 6 U .S .C . § 31 21 (b)( 6)(B ), w hi ch excl ud es m edi ca l and d ent al i nt erns and res i dent s e m pl oyed b y th e U n i t e d St a t e s f

r o m c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f

th e f e d e r a l e mp l o y me n tFI CA e xe m pt i on, a nd § 3121( d) ( 3) , w hi c h i m pos e s m a nda t ory F I C A t a xa t i on on

4 c om m i s s i on dr i ve r s , f

ul l - t i m e l i f

e i ns ur a nc e s a l e s m e n, hom e w orke r s , a nd tr a ve l i ng s a le s m e n . S e e C B S I n c . v . P r im e tim e 2 4 J o in t V e n tu r e , 2 4 5 F .3 d 1 2 1 7 , 1 2 2 8 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2001) ( “ [ I ] f

C ongr e s s r e a l l y m e a nti n § 1005( a ) ( 2) ( B ) ( i i i ) of the I m pr ove m e nt A ctt o g ra nd fa ther onl y i nv ol un t ary t erm i nat i on s r es ul t i ng fr om courtorders , then w hy di d i tsa y ‘ any t erm i nat i on ’ ? W hy no tsi m pl y s ay‘ any i nv ol un t ary9

te rm in a tio n ’ o r‘a n y te rm in a tio n r e s u ltin g f r o m c o u r t o r d e r s ’? I t c o u ld h a v e e a s ily do ne so, bu ti tdi d n ot . ”) . “ T he l angu age of the st atut e i s e nt i re l y c l ea r; and i f that is n o t w h a t C o n g r e s s m e a n t th e n C o n g r e s s h a s m a d e a m is ta k e a n d C o n g r e s s w ill have t o correc ti t . ” S ee i d. (c i t at i on om i tt ed). T he gove rnm e ntde vot e s a s ubs t a nt i a l por t i on of i t s br i e f t o a na l y z i ng the s tude nte xe m pt i on’ s r e l a t i on t o the now - r e pe a l e d i nt e rn e xe m pt i on. T he gove rnm e ntnot e s tha tC ongr e s s r e pe a l e d the F I C A e xe m pt i on f orm e di c a l i nt e rns in 1 9 6 5 . It co n ten d s th at re p ea l o f th e in tern ex em p ti o n ev id en ce s C o n g re ss ’s in te n t to b r in g a ll y o u n g d o c to r s - in - tr a in in g w ith in th e s c o p e o f S o c ia l S e c u r ity c o v e r a g e , a n d , h e n c e , F I C A ta x a tio n . T h e g o v e rn m e n t a s s e r ts it w o u ld b e h ig h ly i nc ongruous f

orC ongr e s s t o ha ve r e pe a l e d the i nt e rn e xe m pt i on f orthos e pur s ui ng a one - y e a rc our s e of

pos t - M . D . tr a i ni ng, a nd y e tc ont i nue t o e xe m ptthe s e rvi c e s of m edi ca l re si dent s a nd fe l l ow s, w ho ar e pursui ng se vera l ye ar s of tra i ni ng af t er recei v i n g th ei r M . D . d eg rees. T he gove rnm e nt ’ s a r gum e nt s w i th r e s pe c tt o the F I C A s c he m e a nd the h isto ry o f th e s ep ar ate in tern ex em p ti o n ar e u n av aili n g . F irst, th e g o v er n m en t’ s r e l i a nc e on S t . L uke ’ s , 333 F . 2d a t161, a nd C ongr e s s ’ s s ubs e que ntr e pe a l of the i nt e rn e xe m pt i on f

orthe pr opos i t i on tha tm e di c a l r e s i de nt s w e r e note l i gi bl e f orthe s tude nte xe m pt i on i s i nappos i t e . S t . L uke ’ s ne ve ra ddr e s s e d the appl i c abi l i ty of10

the stud entexem pt i on t o m edi ca l re si dent s; i nst ea d, the courtanal yz ed w hether m edi ca l re si dent s qual i fi ed for the i nt ern exem pt i on , a di st i nctexem pt i on then foun d i n § 31 21 (b). T he fa ctthatC on gres s r epea l ed the ent i re l y s epar at e i nt ern exem pt i on i n 1 96 5 i s i rr el evantt o the qu es t i on of w hether r es i dent s m ayqu al i fy f orthe s tude nte xe m pt i on unde rthe pl a i n l a ngua ge of the s t a tut e . S e c ond, the d is tr ic t c o u r t’s c o n te n tio n – th a t ap la in r e a d in g o f th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n w o u ld have rendere d the i nt ern exem pt i on superf l uo us– i gn ores an i m po rt antdi ff er ence be tw e e n the tw o e xe m pt i ons . T he s tude nte xe m pt i on r e l i e s , i n pa r t , on the i de nt i t i e s of

the e m pl oy e e s a nd e m pl oy e r s t o de f i ne the s c ope of

the e xe m pt i on, w he r e a s the i nt e rn e xe m pt i on appl i e d t o a type of s e rvi c e . T he i nt e rn e xe m pt i on w oul d ha ve be e n s upe r f l uous onl y i f

a n i nt e rn w e r e a l w a y s a “ s tude nt ” a nd a

“ ho spi t al ” w er e a l w ay s a“ sc ho ol , col l ege, or un i vers i ty. ” A l tho ug h al l i nt erns m ay b e s tu d e n ts , n o t a ll h o s p ita ls a r e s c h o o ls , c o lle g e s , o ru n iv e r s itie s . A s a r e s u lt, i nt erpret i ng the stud entexem pt i on ac cordi ng t o i t s pl ai n l angu age does notre nd er th e f o rm e rin te rn e x e m p tio n s u p e r f lu o u s . W e r e j e c tthe gove rnm e nt ’ s a s s e r t i on tha tc our t s s houl d de f e rt o a

“ b r i g h t - l i n e ” ru l e th a tme d i c a l r e s i d e n t s c a n n e v e rb e e x e mp t e d f r o m FI CA t a xa t i on a s s tude nt s . S e e A pf e l , 151 F . 3d a t748; s e e a l s o C tr . f orF a m i l y M e d. v. U n ite d S ta te s , 4 5 6 F . S u p p . 2 d 1 1 1 5 ( D .S .D . 2 0 0 6 ) ( h o ld in g th a t m e d ic a l r e s id e n ts11

a r e n o ta u t o ma t i c a l l y i n e l i g i b l e f o rth e s tu d e n te x e mp t i o n ) ; M a y o Fo u n d . , 2 8 2 F. S upp. a t1018 ( s a m e ) . I ns t e a d, a c a s e - by - c a s e a na l y s i s i s ne c e s s a ry t o de t e rm i ne w he the ra m e di c a l r e s i de nte nr ol l e d i n a G M E P qua l i f i e s f ora F I C A t a x e xe m pt i on pur s ua ntt o the s tude nte xe m pt i on i n § 3121( b) ( 10) . S pe c i f i c a l l y , § 3121( b) ( 10) re qu i re s adet erm i nat i on as t o w hether M ou ntS i nai qu al i fi es as a “ sc ho ol , col l ege, o ru n iv e r s ity ,” a n d w h e th e rth e M o u n t S in a i r e s id e n ts q u a lif ya s “s tu d e n t[ s ].” I V . CONCL US I ON W e hol d thatthe di stri ctcourterre d i n rul i ng thatm edi ca l re si dent s e nrol l ed i n gr a dua t e m e di c a l e duc a t i on pr ogr a m s a r e pr e c l ude d, a s a m a tt e rof l a w , f r om s e e k in g to r e ly o n th e s tu d e n t e x e m p tio n to F I C A ta x a tio n in 2 6 U .S .C . § 31 21 (b)( 10 ). A cc ordi ng l y, w e VA C A TE the s um m a ry j udgm e nta nd RE MAND f orf ur the rpr oc e e di ngs c ons i s t e ntw i th thi s opi ni on.