Today, our colleague Tom Shoesmith published his Client Alert titled China: Are Joint Ventures the Answer to Trump’s Trade Wars? In the Alert, Tom discusses how U.S. companies may respond to the Trump Administration’s tariff wars. This could including entering into a joint venture (JV) with a Chinese partner, enable the U.S. company to respond nimbly to changes in the global trade environment. However, Tom notes that JVs in China are subject to structural requirements and a regulatory regime unlike those found in Western countries and encourages U.S. companies to consider whether the JV should be organized in a non-People’s Republic of China (PRC) jurisdiction.
Articles Posted in Construction Generally
Transition from LIBOR to Risk-Free Rates
Recently, our colleague Trevor Wood published a Client Alert titled LIBOR and the Transition to Risk-Free Rates, discussing the Chief Executive of the UK Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) recent announcement that, because of insufficient trading in the underlying markets, the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) will no longer be supported by the FCA after 2021. Take always from the Client Alert include:
- Work continues on the transition to risk-free rates, but progress is slow—FCA has published timetable and milestones.
SCOTUS Changes Sales and Use Tax Collection Nexus
This morning, our colleagues on the State & Local Tax team published their Client Alert titled The U.S. Supreme Court Changes Sales and Use Tax Collection Nexus. In South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., the Court overrules the “physical presence” requirement as “unsound and incorrect.” Takeaways from the Court’s decision include:
- South Dakota law satisfies the Commerce Clause “substantial nexus” requirement based on the “economic and virtual contacts” with the State.
- The Wayfair decision does not prohibit the retroactive application of this new standard for Commerce Clause “substantial nexus.”
- The decision strikes a blow to the Court’s stare decisis jurisprudence.
SCOTUS Narrows Holding in America Pipe Case
Today, our colleague Mark Litvack published his Client Alert titled The Supreme Court Narrows Its Holding in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah. Takeaways include:
- The Court bars previously absent class members from bringing subsequent class actions outside the applicable statute of limitations period.
- The Court’s decision in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh cements a new limit on the filing of successive class actions.
SCOTUS: Follow-on Class Claims Time Barred Under American Pipe and Its Progeny
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in China Agritech v. Resh et al., a decision concerning the U.S. Court of Appeals’ application of the tolling rule first stated in American Pipe & Constr. Co. v. Utah and later clarified in Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. Parker. The Court was called on to answer the question
“Upon denial of class certification, may a putative class member, in lieu of promptly joining an existing suit or promptly filing an individual action, commence a class action anew beyond the time allowed by the applicable statute of limitations?”
Dynamex Test Throws a Wrench Into Business Models Relying on Independent Contractors
Today, our colleagues Paula Weber and Erica Turcios Yader published their client Upending the Gig Economy? California Supreme Court’s new Dynamex test may throw a wrench into business models that rely on independent contractors. Takeaways include
- The California Supreme Court has imposed a new test for determining who is an independent contractor or employee subject to protection under the California Wage Orders;
- The new 3-part test, which requires employers to satisfy each element of the test, will make it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors; and
- Workers who do not engage in an independent business and who do not provide services outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business will be deemed employees, even if they are free from the direction and control of the hiring entity.
Additional Source: Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles
Impacts of Trump’s Omnibus Spending Plan on Affording Housing Industry
Today, our colleagues Tom Morton and Emily Bias published their Client Alert titled Impacts of the Omnibus Spending Plan on the Affordable Housing Industry, Trump’s Omnibus Spending Plan adopts two key provisions from the proposed Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act that will strengthen and expand low-income housing credit. Takeaways include
- 2018 spending plan increases housing credit ceiling by 12.5% for next 4 years and incorporates a new “Average Income Test” to qualify for low-income housing tax credits; and
- The Average Income Test offers potential benefits to taxpayers, but open issues include whether States will adopt this option, the mechanics of application, and difficulties in monitoring compliance.
Ninth Circuit Upholds Preliminary Injury in Dormant Commerce Clause Ruling on Waste Management Enforcement in California
On May 2, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided the case of Daniels Sharpsmart, Inc. v. Smith, Director of the California Department of Public Health. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District to issue a preliminary injunction enjoining state health officials from enforcing, on an extraterritorial basis, provisions of the California Medical Waste Management Act (MWMA) against Daniels Sharpsmart, Inc., an Illinois-based corporation that “designs, develops, manufactures, markets and sells reusable sharps container systems for the disposal of needle-inclusive biohazardous medical products” (Daniels).
California Wage and Hour, and Overtime Laws Apply to Offshore Drilling Facilities
On April 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the request for an en banc rehearing in the case of Newton v. Parker Drilling Mgmt. Serv., Ltd. that was decided on February 5, 2018. In that decision, the Court of Appeals held that California’s wage and hour, and overtime laws apply to offshore drilling facilities located in offshore waters adjacent to the State of California off the coast of Santa Barbara. No Ninth Circuit judge agreed that there should be a rehearing.
Federal Appellate Courts Call Some Fouls
Recent federal court rulings illustrate how the courts are serving as an umpire sometimes restraining the government and litigants.
On April 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a ruling, in Kuehl, et al., v. Sellner, et al., affirming the District Court’s decision which held that the defendants had violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in their operation of the Cricket Hollow Zoo (a licensed facility), located in Manchester, IA. The plaintiffs, which included the Animal Legal Defense Fund, sued the Sellners alleging that the conditions in which some endangered species (lemurs and tigers) were housed in the zoo amounted to a mistreatment of these endangered species.