Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:21:47.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2010

Ann Mumford
Ann Mumford
Affiliation:
Queen Mary University of London
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Tax Policy, Women and the Law
UK and Comparative Perspectives
 , pp. 193 - 220
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

‘Developments in the Law: Corporations and Society’. Harvard Law Review, 117(7) (2004), 2169–2295.CrossRef
‘The Myth of Context in Politics and Law’. Harvard Law Review, 110(6) (1997), 1292–1309.CrossRef
Abramovitz, M.Taxes Are a Woman's Issue: Reframing the Debate. (New York, NY: Feminist Press at the City University of New York, 2007).Google Scholar
Abreu, A. ‘Tax Counts: Bringing Money-Law to LatCrit’. Denver University Law Review, 78 (2000), 575–93.Google Scholar
Ahlander, N. R. and Bahr, K. S.. ‘Beyond Drudgery, Power, and Equity: Toward an Expanded Discourse on the Moral Dimensions of Housework in Families’. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57(1) (1995), 54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alba, R. M.Offshore Centres of Latin America and the Caribbean: The Need for a Level Playing Field in the Search for Integrity. Twenty First International Symposium on Economic Crime, Jesus College, University of Cambridge, vol. 11 (2003) (at: www.freedomandprosperity.org/alba.pdf).Google Scholar
Alldridge, P. and Mumford, A.. ‘Tax Evasion and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002’. Legal Studies, 25 (2005), 353–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alm, J., Dickert-Conlin, S. and Whittington, L. A.. ‘Policy Watch: The Marriage Penalty’. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3) (1999), 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alstott, A. L. ‘Tax Policy and Feminism: Competing Goals and Institutional Choices’. Columbia Law Review, 96(8) (1996), 2001–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alstott, A. L.No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
Alvarez, R. M. and McCaffery, E. J.. ‘Gender and Tax’. Gender and American Politics: Women, Men, and the Political Process; Social Science Working Paper 1046: California Institute of Technology, 1998 (at: www.hss.caltech.edu/SSPapers/wp1046.pdf).
Alvarez, R. M. and McCaffery, E. I.. ‘Gender and Tax’, in Tolleson-Rinehart, S and Josephson, J. J (eds.), Gender and American Politics: Women, Men, and the Political Process (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 2000), pp. 91–114.Google Scholar
Amenta, E., Bonastia, C. and Caren, N.. ‘US Social Policy in Comparative and Historical Perspective: Concepts, Images, Arguments, and Research Strategies’. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1) (2001), 213–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anne Tempel, P. W. ‘Global Standardization of Organizational Forms and Management Practices? What New Institutionalism and the Business-systems Approach Can Learn from Each Other’. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1) (2007), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, K. A. ‘Legal Integration: Theorizing the Legal Dimension of European Integration’. Journal of Common Market Studies – Annual Review, 36(2) (1998), 155–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, K. A. ‘The “Europeanisation” of Social Exclusion: British Adaptation to EU Co-ordination’. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 8(1) (2006), 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspers, P., Kohl, S., Roine, J. and Wichardt, P.. ‘An Economic Sociological Look at Economics’. Economic Sociology: The European Electronic Newsletter, 9(2) (March 2008).Google Scholar
Atkins, S. ‘The Sex Discrimination Act 1975: The End of a Decade’. Feminist Review, (24) (1986), 57–70.
Auchmuty, R. ‘Same-sex Marriage Revived: Feminist Critique and Legal Strategy’. Feminism and Psychology, 14(1) (2004), 101–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery Jones, J. ‘Are Tax Treaties Necessary?’ Tax Law Review, 53 (1999), 1–38.Google Scholar
Avi-Yonah, R. S. ‘Corporations, Society, and the State: A Defense of the Corporate Tax’. Virginia Law Review, 90(5) (2004), 1193–1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avi-Yonah, R. S.Corporate Social Responsibility and Strategic Tax Behavior. SSRN, 2006 (at: http://ssrn.com/paper=944793).
Baber, K. and Allen, K.. Women and Families: Feminist Reconstructions. (New York, NY: Guilford Press, 1992).Google Scholar
Baden, S. and Goetz, A. M.. ‘Who Needs [Sex] When You Can Have [Gender]? Conflicting Discourses on Gender at Beijing’. Feminist Review, 56 (1997), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, I. C. and Alternatives Canadian Centre for Policy, ‘Gender Budget Initiatives: Why They Matter in Canada’, Technical Paper 1, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2006.
Bala, N. and Bromwich, R.. ‘Context and Inclusivity in Canada's Evolving Definition of the Family’. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 16(2) (2002), 145–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee, S. ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’. Critical Sociology, 34(1) (2008), 51–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bank, T. W.Gender Equality as Smart Economics. (January 2002) (at: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTGENDER/0,,menuPK:336874∼pagePK:149018∼piPK:149093∼theSitePK:336868,00.html).Google Scholar
Bankman, J. and Griffith, T.. ‘Social Welfare and the Rate Structure: A New Look At Progressive Taxation’. California Law Review, 75(6) (1987), 1905–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, N. ‘Sex and the Civil Partnership Act: The Future of (Non) Conjugality?’ Feminist Legal Studies, 14(2) (2006), 241–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barmes, L. and Ashtiany, W. S.. ‘The Diversity Approach to Achieving Equality: Potential and Pitfalls’. Industrial Law Journal, 32(4) (2003), 274–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, K. and Grown, C.. Gender Impacts of Government Revenue Collection: The Case of Taxation. (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bashevkin, S. ‘From Tough Times to Better Times: Feminism, Public Policy, and New Labour Politics in Britain’. International Political Science Review/Revue internationale de science politique, 21(4) (2000), 407–24.Google Scholar
Beatson, J. ‘Has the Common Law a Future?’ Cambridge Law Journal, 56(02) (2009), 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckert, J. ‘The great transformation of embeddedness: Karl Polanyi and the new economic sociology’. Manuscript. (2006) (at: www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_dp/dp07–1.pdf).
Beneria, L. ‘Globalization, Gender, and the Davos Man’, in Mutari, E and Figart, D. M. (eds.), Women and the Economy: A Reader (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2003), pp. 312–25.Google Scholar
Bennett, C. J. ‘What Is Policy Convergence and What Causes It?’ British Journal of Political Science, 21(2) (1991), 215–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, F. ‘Policy Implications of Tax Credits’ (at: www.genet.ac.uk/workpapers/GeNet 2005 p8.pdf).
Bergmann, B. R. ‘What Policies Toward Lone Mothers Should We Aim For?’ Feminist Economics, 10(2) (2004), 240–6.Google Scholar
Berland, J. ‘On Reading “the Weather”’. Cultural Studies, 8(1) (1994), 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernburg, J. G. ‘Anomie, Social Change and Crime: A Theoretical Examination of Institutional–Anomie Theory’. British Journal of Criminology, 42 (2002), 729–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beveridge, F. ‘Building against the Past: The Impact of Mainstreaming on EU Gender Law and Policy’. European Law Review, 32(2) (2007), 193–212.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. ‘Narrating the British State: An Interpretive Critique of New Labour's Institutionalism’. Review of International Political Economy, 10(3) (2003), 455–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biswas, R.International Tax Competition: Globalisation and Fiscal Sovereignty. (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2002).Google Scholar
Bittker, B. I. ‘Federal Income Taxation and the Family’. Stanford Law Review, 27 (1975), 1389–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittker, B. I. ‘Dedication: Charles Stuart Lyon – Being an Epitome of His Letters, Marginalia, Graffiti, and Other Fugitive Scribblings’. Tax Law Review, 37 (1981), 159–92.Google Scholar
Black, A. and Brooke, S.. ‘The Labour Party, Women, and the Problem of Gender, 1951–1966’. Journal of British Studies, 36(4) (1997), 419–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, F. ‘Karl Polanyi and the Writing of the Great Transformation’. Theory and Society, 32(3) (2003), 275–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blom-Hansen, J. ‘A “New Institutional” Perspective on Policy Networks’. Public Administration, 75(4) (1997), 669–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumberg, R. L. ‘A General Theory of Gender Stratification’. Sociological Theory, 2 (1984), 23–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blundell, R. and Meghir, C.. ‘Active Labour Market Policy vs Employment Tax Credits: Lessons from Recent UK Reforms’. Institute for Labour Market Policy Evaluation Working Paper No. 1. (2002).
Blundell, R., Duncan, A., McCrae, J. and Meghir, C.. ‘The Labour Market Impact of the Working Families’ Tax Credit'. Fiscal Studies, 21(1) (2000), 75–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borison, J. ‘Alice through a Very Dark and Confusing Looking Glass: Getting Equity from the Tax Court in Innocent Spouse Cases’. Family Law Quarterly, 30 (1996), 123–72.Google Scholar
Boschken, H. L. ‘Institutionalism: Intergovernmental Exchange, Administration-centered Behavior, and Policy Outcomes in Urban Agencies’. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(4) (1998), 585–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boskin, M. J. and Sheshinski, E.. Optimal Tax Treatment of the Family: Married Couples. NBER Working Paper No. 368, 1984 (also Reprint No. r0468) (at: www.nber.org/papers/W0368.pdf).Google Scholar
Bossons, J. ‘The Value of a Comprehensive Tax Base as a Tax Reform Goal’. Journal of Law and Economics, 13(2) (1970), 327–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, T. Taxation of the Family. Tax Law Review Committee Discussion Paper No. 6 (April 2007).
Boyd, S. B.Challenging the Public/Private Divide: Feminism, Law, and Public Policy (University of Toronto Press, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, S. B. ‘Family, Law and Sexuality: Feminist Engagements’. Social and Legal Studies, 8(3) (1999), 369–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, S. B. and Young, C. F. L.. ‘Feminism, Law, and Public Policy: Family Feuds and Taxing Times’. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 42(4) (2004), 545–82.Google Scholar
Bradford, D.et al. ‘The Incidence and Allocation Effects of a Tax on Corporate Distributions’ (NBER Working Paper, 1981).
Bradley, M., Schipani, C. A., Sundaram, A. K. and Walsh, J. P.. ‘The Purposes and Accountability of the Corporation in Contemporary Society: Corporate Governance at a Crossroads’. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62(3) (1999), 9–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braithwaite, J.Markets in Vice, Markets in Virtue (Oxford University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
Brazer, H. E. ‘The Report of the Royal Commission on Taxation’. Journal of Finance, 22(4) (1967), 671–83.Google Scholar
Brazier, A. ‘The Fiscal Maze: Parliament, Government and Public Money’. Parliamentary Affairs (Hansard Society), 60(2) (16 March 2007), 346–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, M., Duncan, A., Shephard, A. and Suarez, M.. ‘Did Working Families’ Tax Credit Work? The Impact of In-work Support on Labour Supply in Great Britain'. Labour Economics, 13(6) (2006), 699–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, K. and Parkes, D.. ‘Queering Legal Education: A Project of Theoretical Discovery’. Harvard Women's Law Journal, 27 (2004), 89–136.Google Scholar
Brooks, N.‘The Irrelevance of Conjugal Relationships in Assessing Tax Liability’ Tax Units and the Tax Rate Scale (1996) (at: http://law.harvard.edu. http://law.harvard.edu).
Brudney, V. ‘The Independent Director – Heavenly City or Potemkin Village?’ Harvard Law Review, 95 (1982), 597–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brush, L. D. ‘The Curious Courtship of Feminist Jurisprudence and Feminist State Theory: Smart on the Power of Law’. Law and Social Inquiry, 19(4) (1994), 1059–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budlender, D.The South African Women's Budget Initiative. Meeting on Women and Political Participation: 21st Century Challenges, United Nations Development Programme, New Delhi, India. Edn. BPN 2.166166 (24–26 March 1999) (at: http://iggi.unesco.or.kr/web/iggi_docs/02/952310746.pdf).Google Scholar
Budlender, D. ‘The Political Economy of Women's Budgets in the South’. World Development, 28(7) (2000), 1365–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budlender, D., Elson, D., Hewitt, G. and Mukhopadhyay, T.. Gender Budgets Make Cents: Understanding Gender Responsive Budgets. Gender Responsive Budget Initiatives (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2002).Google Scholar
Budlender, D., Sharp, R. and Allen, K.. How to Do a Gender-sensitive Budget Analysis: Contemporary Research and Practice (Commonwealth Secretariat, 1998).Google Scholar
Bulmer, S. J. ‘New Institutionalism and the Governance of the Single European Market’. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(3) (1998), 365–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burghes, L., Clarke, L. and Cronin, N.. Fathers and Fatherhood in Britain. (London: Family Policy Studies Centre, 1997).Google Scholar
Burk, M. ‘A Feminist Tea Party?: Time to Start Righting the Tax System's Wrongs’. Ms Magazine, 17 (2007) (at: www.msmagazine.com/spring2007/afeministteaparty.asp).Google Scholar
Burns, N. ‘Finding Gender’. Politics and Gender, 1(01) (2005), 137–41.Google Scholar
Burton, M. ‘Responsive Regulation and the Uncertainty of Tax Law’. eJournal of Tax Research, 5(1) (July 2007), 71–104.Google Scholar
Butler, J. ‘Merely Cultural’. Social Text, 52/53 (1997), 265–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, D. M. ‘Progressive Taxation Revisited’. Arizona Law Review, 37 (1995), 739–89.Google Scholar
Cain, P. A. ‘Heterosexual Privilege and the Internal Revenue Code’. University of San Francisco Law Review, 34 (2000), 465–94.Google Scholar
Cain, P. A. ‘Federal Tax Consequences of Civil Unions’. Capital University Law Review, 30 (2002), 387–408.Google Scholar
Cain, P. M. ‘Taxing Lesbians’. Southern California Review of Law and Women's Studies, 6 (1996–7), 471.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. L. ‘The State and Fiscal Sociology’. Annual Review of Sociology 19 (1993), 163–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, A. ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct’. Business and Society, 38(3) (1999), 268–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, A. M. ‘Income-tax Allowances and the Family in Great Britain’. Population Studies, 6(3) (1953), 218–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, K. L. M. ‘Canadian Tax Reform and Henry Simons’. Journal of Law and Economics, 11(2) (1968), 231–42.Google Scholar
Castles, F. G. and Flood, M.. ‘Divorce, the Law and Social Context: Families of Nations and the Legal Dissolution of Marriage’. Acta Sociologica, 34(4) (1991), 279–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çeagatay, N. ‘Gender Budgets and Beyond: Feminist Fiscal Policy in the Context of Globalisation’. Gender and Development, 11(1) (2003), 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, W. ‘Women, Childcare and Taxation’. Kings' College Law Journal, 10 (1999), 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherry, R. ‘Rational Choice and the Price of Marriage’, in Moe, K. S. (ed.), Women, Family, and Work: Writings on the Economics of Gender (London: Blackwell, 2003).Google Scholar
Chow, E. N. L. and Berheide, C. W.. ‘The Interdependence of Family and Work: A Framework for Family Life Education, Policy, and Practice’. Family Relations, 37(1) (1988), 23–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, J. and Trivedi, V. U.. ‘The Effect of Friendly Persuasion and Gender on Tax Compliance Behavior’. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(2) (2003), 133–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, M. B. E. ‘A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance’. Academy of Management Review, 20(1) (1995), 92–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, E. S. ‘Good Reasons to Stop Avoiding Taxes’. Law and Social Inquiry, 24(2) (1999), 517–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, E. S. and Cook, J.. ‘Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining Durability and Change’. Annual Reviews in Sociology, 25(1) (1999), 441–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clement, K. ‘Environmental Auditing for Industry: A European Perspective’. European Environment, 1(3) (1991), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. H. ‘The New Institutional Economics’. American Economic Review, 88 (1998), 72–4.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. ‘Where the Action is: On the Site of Distributive Justice’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 26(1) (1997), 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colinvaux, R. P. ‘Income Tax Liability of Married Women’. Modern Law Review, 11(3) (1948), 346–7.Google Scholar
Collins, P. ‘It's All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation’. Hypatia (1998), 62–82.
Conaghan, J. ‘Reassessing the Feminist Theoretical Project in Law’. Journal of Law and Society, 27(3) (2000), 351–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, R. W. ‘The Big Picture: Masculinities in Recent World History’. Theory and Society, 22(5) (1993), 597–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, K. ‘The Power of Sociological Ideas’. Sociological Perspectives, 34(2) (1991), 115–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copelon, R. ‘International Human Rights Dimensions of Intimate Violence: Another Strand in the Dialectic of Feminist Lawmaking’. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law, 11 (2003), 865–76.Google Scholar
Cornell, D. ‘Review: Sexual Difference, the Feminine, and Equivalency: A Critique of MacKinnon's Toward a Feminist Theory of the State’. Yale Law Journal, 100(7) (1991), 2247–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornwall, A. ‘Whose Voices? Whose Choices? Reflections on Gender and Participatory Development’. World Development, 31(8) (2003), 1325–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotterrell, R.Seeking Similarity, Appreciating Difference: Comparative Law and Communities. Comparative Law in the Twenty-First Century. Örücü, E and Harding, A, (eds.), vol. 4. (The Hague: Kluwer, 2002).Google Scholar
Cotterrell, R.Law, Culture and Society: Legal Ideas in the Mirror of Social Theory (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006).Google Scholar
Coutts, J. A. ‘Income Tax Liability of Married Women’. Modern Law Review, 12(1) (1949), 110–12.Google Scholar
Crawford, B. J. ‘Outsourcing Intimacy: The Taxation of Powers of Attorney’ (2007) (at: http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1397&context=lawfaculty).
Crawford, B. J. ‘Tax Avatars’. Utah Law Review (2008), 793–833 (at: http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1549&context=lawfaculty).
Crawford, C. and Freedman, J.. ‘Small Business Taxation: A Special Study of the Structural Issues Surrounding the Taxation of Business Profits of Owner Managed Firms’. Prepared for the Report of a Commission on Reforming the Tax System for the 21st Century, Chaired by Sir James Mirrlees (21 April 2008) (at: www.competition-law.ox.ac.uk/tax/documents/Dimensions_Tax_Design_MR2008.pdf, or www.ifs.org.uk/mirrleesreview/press_docs/small_businesses.pdf, at 22–3, on the IFS website).
Creedy, J. and Gemmell, N.. ‘Corporation Tax Buoyancy and Revenue Elasticity In the UK’. Economic Modelling, 25(1) (2008), 24–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cretney, S. M.Family Law in the Twentieth Century (Oxford University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Crowther, B. ‘Viewing What Comes Naturally: A Feminist Approach to Television Natural History’. Women's Studies International Forum, 20(2) (1997), 289–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. ‘Gender Mainstreaming in Theory and Practice’. Social Politics, 12 (2005), 433–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. and Clavero, S.. Contemporary Family Policy: A Comparative Review of Ireland, France, Germany, Sweden and the UK (London: Institute of Public Administration, 2002).Google Scholar
Daunton, M.What Is Income? Studies in the History of Tax Law, Tiley, J (ed.) (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004), pp. 3–14.Google Scholar
Davies, H., Joshi, H. and Peronaci, R.. ‘Forgone Income and Motherhood: What Do Recent British Data Tell U?’ Population Studies, 54(3) (2000), 293–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dearden, L. ‘PBR Analysis: Childcare Strategy’ (December 2004) (at: www.ifs.org.uk/publications/3196).
Deech, R. ‘The Case against Legal Recognition of Cohabitation’. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 29(2–3) (2008), 480–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delphy, C. and Leonard, D.. ‘A Materialist Feminism Is Possible’. Feminist Review, (4) (1980), 79–105.
Demleitner, N. V. ‘A Response to Mathias Reimann: More, More, More But Real Comparative Law’. Tulane European and Civil Law Forum, 11 (1996), 73–83.Google Scholar
Dennis, J. M. ‘The Lessons of Comparable Worth: A Feminist Vision of Law and Economic Theory’. UCLA Women's Law Journal, 4 (1993), 1–36.Google Scholar
Dequech, D. ‘The Demarcation between the “Old” and the “New” Institutional Economics: Recent Complications’. Journal of Economic Issues, 36(2) (2002), 565–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devereux, M., Griffith, R., Klemm, A., Thum, M. and Ottaviani, M.. ‘Corporate Income Tax Reforms and International Tax Competition’. Economic Policy (2002), 449–95.
Dingeldey, I. ‘European Tax Systems and their Impact on Family Employment Patterns’. Journal of Social Policy, 30(04) (2001), 653–72.Google Scholar
Dodd, Jr., , E. M. ‘For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees?’ Harvard Law Review, 45(7) (1932), 1145–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, J. ‘In Defense of the Discourse: Materialist Feminism, Postmodernism, Poststructuralism… And Theory’. TDR (1988–) 33(3) (1989), 58–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drenth, A., Knijn, T. and Lewis, J.. ‘Sources of Income for Lone Mother Families: Policy Changes in Britain and the Netherlands and the Experiences of Divorced Women’. Journal of Social Policy, 28(04) (2000), 619–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driver, S. and Martell, L.. ‘New Labour, Work and the Family’. Social Policy and Administration, 36(1) (2002), 46–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,DTI. ‘Gender Analysis of Expenditure Project’ (Final Report) (July 2004) (at: www.womenandequalityunit.gov.uk/research/gender_analysis.pdf).
Duncan, S. and Edwards, R.. ‘Lone Mothers and Paid Work – Rational Economic Man or Gendered Moral Rationalities?’ Feminist Economics, 3(2) (1997), 29–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, E. ‘The Conjugal Family’, in Emile Durkheim on Institutional Analysis, ed. and trans. Traugott, M (Chicago, IL and London: University of Chicago Press, 1978), pp. 229–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, R.Liberalism (orig. pub.), Public and Private Morality, Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) (Cambridge University Press, 1978), in J. Nida-Rumelin and W. Vossenkuhl (eds.), Ethische und Politische (Cambridge, MA: Walter de Gruyter, 1998).Google Scholar
Eggertsson, T. ‘The Old Theory of Economic Policy and the New Institutionalism’. World Development, 25(8) (1997), 1187–1203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggertsson, T. ‘Rethinking the Theory of Economic Policy: Some Implications of the New Institutionalism’, in Nelson, J. M., Tilly, C. and Walker, L. (eds.), Transforming Post-communist Political Economies (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 1997), pp. 61–79.Google Scholar
Ehrenreich, B. and Hochschild, A.. Global Woman: Nannies, Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy (New York, NY: Metropolitan Books, 2003).Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. ‘Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review’. Academy of Management Review (1989) 57–74.
Eissa, N. and Liebman, J. B.. Labor Supply Response to the Earned Income Tax Credit (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellwood, D. T. ‘The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements’. National Tax Journal, 53(4) (2000), 1063–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellwood, D. T. and Liebman, J. B.. ‘The Middle-class Parent Penalty: Child Benefits in the US Tax Code’, in Poterba, James M (ed.),Tax Policy and the Economy (Boston, MA: MIT Press, 2001).Google Scholar
England, K.Who Will Mind the Baby?: Geographies of Childcare and Working Mothers (London: Routledge, 1996).Google Scholar
Epstein, R.Simple Rules for a Complex World (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Ergas, Y.Child-care Policies in Comparative Perspective an Introductory Discussion. Lone-Parent Families: The Economic Challenge (Paris: OECD, 1990).Google Scholar
Erhel, C. and Zajdela, H.. ‘The Dynamics of Social and Labour Market Policies in France and the United Kingdom: Between Path Dependence and Convergence’. Journal of European Social Policy, 14(2) (2004), 125–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erturk, Y. ‘Considering the Role of Men in Gender Agenda Setting: Conceptual and Policy Issues’. Feminist Review, 78 (2004), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espeland, W. N. and Stevens, M. L.. ‘Commensuration as a Social Process’. Annual Review of Sociology, 24 (1998), 313–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagan, E. D. ‘Recent and Contemporary Theories of Progressive Taxation’. Journal of Political Economy, 46(4) (1938), 457–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahey, T. ‘The Family Economy in the Development of Welfare Regimes: A Case Study’. European Sociological Review, 18(1) (2002), 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fallan, L. ‘Gender, Exposure to Tax Knowledge, and Attitudes Towards Taxation; An Experimental Approach’. Journal of Business Ethics, 18(2) (1999), 173–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, P. and Lyal, R.. EC Tax Law (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Fedeli, S. and Forte, F.. ‘Joint Income-tax and VAT-chain Evasion’. European Journal of Political Economy, 15(3) (1999), 391–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feenberg, D. R.The Tax Treatment of Married Couples and the 1981 Tax Law. Working Paper No. 872 (Cambridge, MA, USA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1983) (at: www.nber.org/papers/w0872.pdf).Google Scholar
Fellows, M. L. ‘Rocking the Tax Code: A Case Study of Employment-related Child-care Expenditures’. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 10 (1998), 307–95.Google Scholar
Fischl, R. ‘A Woman's World’. Buffalo Law Review, 52 (2004), 659–78.Google Scholar
Fitch, H. G. ‘Achieving Corporate Social Responsibility’. Academy of Management Review, 1(1) (1976), 38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folbre, N. ‘Blowing the Whistle on Poverty Policy’. Review of Social Economy, 61(4) (2003), 479–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fontana, M. ‘Modelling the Effects of Trade on Women, at Work and at Home: Comparative Perspectives’. Economie international, 99(2004), 49–80.Google Scholar
Franke, J. ‘Political Evolution of EMAS: Perspectives from the EU, National Governments and Industrial Groups’. European Environment, 5(6) (1995), 155–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, J. and NBOER. How Well Do Foreign Exchange Markets Function: Might a Tobin Tax Help? (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankenberg, G. ‘Stranger than Paradise: Identity and Politics in Comparative Law’. Utah Law Review, (1997), 259–74.
Fredman, S. and Spencer, S.. ‘Beyond Discrimination: It's Time for Enforceable Duties on Public Bodies to Promote Equality Outcomes’. European Human Rights Law Review, 6 (2006), 598–606.Google Scholar
Freedman, J. ‘Why Taxing the Micro-business Is Not Simple – A Cautionary Tale from the “Old World”’. Journal of the Australasian Tax Teachers Association (2006) (at: http://search.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/JATTA/2006/5.html).
Freedman, J. ‘Interpreting Tax Statutes: Tax Avoidance and the Intention of Parliament’. Law Quarterly Review, 123 (2007), 53–90.Google Scholar
Fried, B.The Progressive Assault on Laissez Faire: Robert Hale and the First Law and Economics Movement (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
Friedman, L. ‘Is there a Modern Legal Culture?’ Ratio Juris, 7(2) (1994), 117–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friese, A., Link, S. P. and Mayer, S.. ‘Taxation and Corporate Governance’. SSRN (2006) (at: http://ssrn.com/paper=877900).
Fuchs, V. R. ‘Women's Quest for Economic Equality’. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(1) (1989), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furubotn, E. G. and Richter, R.. Institutions and Economic Theory: The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics (Dearborn, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gammie, M. ‘Taxing Capital Gains –Thoughts from the UK’. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 23(2) (2000), 309.Google Scholar
Ganghof, S. ‘Globalization, Tax Reform Ideals and Social Policy Financing’. Global Social Policy, 5(1) (2005), 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, G. and Mitchell, D.. ‘Globalization, Government Spending and Taxation in the OECD’. European Journal of Political Research, 39(2) (2001), 145–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelardi, A. M. G. ‘The Influence of Tax Law Changes on the Timing of Marriages: A Two-country Analysis’. National Tax Journal, 49(1) (1996), 17–30.Google Scholar
Gemici, K. ‘Karl Polanyi and the Antinomies of Embeddedness’. Socio-Economic Review, 6 (2008), 5–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, S. ‘Globalizing Rights?’, in Globalizing Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1999 (Oxford University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Giddens, A. ‘Living in a Post-traditionalist Society’, in Beck, U (ed.), Reflexive Modernisation: Politics, Tradition, and Aesthetics in Modern Social Order (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Giddens, A. ‘Risk and Responsibility’. Modern Law Review, 62(1) (1999), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginn, J., Street, D. and Arber, S.. Women, Work, and Pensions (Buckingham: Open University Press, 2001).Google Scholar
Ginsburg, N.Divisions of Welfare: A Critical Introduction to Comparative Social Policy (London: Sage, 1992).Google Scholar
Glass, J. and Fujimoto, T.. ‘Housework, Paid Work, and Depression among Husbands and Wives’. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35(2) (1994), 179–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glennon, L. ‘Strategizing for the Future through the Civil Partnership Act’. Journal of Law and Society, 33(2) (2006), 244–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gornick, J. C. ‘Gender Equality in the Labour Market: Women's Employment and Earnings’. Gender and Welfare State Regimes, (1999) 210–42.CrossRef
Gottfried, H. ‘Beyond Patriarchy? Theorising Gender and Class’. Sociology, 32(03) (2000), 451–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graetz, M. J. ‘Implementing a Progressive Consumption Tax’. Harvard Law Review, 92(8) (1979), 1575–1661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grbich, J. ‘Taxation Narratives of Economic Gain: Reading Bodies Transgressively’. Feminist Legal Studies, 5 (1997) 131–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. and Griffith, M.. ‘Globalization and Its discontents’. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944--) (2002), 49–68.
Greenwood, R. and Hinings, C. R.. ‘Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing together the Old and the New Institutionalism’. Academy of Management Review, 21(4) (1996), 1022–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greer Litton, F. and Murry, V. M. ‘Gender and Families: Feminist Perspectives and Family Research’. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(4) (2000), 1160–72.Google Scholar
Grofman, B. ‘Arend Lijphart and the New Institutionalism’, in Crepaz, Markus M. L, Koelble, Thomas A and Wilsford, David (eds.), Democracy and Institutions: The Life Work of Arend Lijphart (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000).Google Scholar
Grofman, B. and Wittman, D.. The Federalist Papers and the New Institutionalism (New York, NY: Agathon Press, 1989).Google Scholar
Grosser, K. and Moon, J.. ‘Gender Mainstreaming and Corporate Social Responsibility: Reporting Workplace Issues’. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(4) (2005), 327–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Group, C. P. A.Welfare Benefits and Tax Credits Handbook, 9th edn (London: Child Poverty Action Group, 2007/2008).Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, Å., M. Davies and Svensson, E. M.. Exploiting the Limits of Law: Swedish Feminism and the Challenge to Pessimism (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007).Google Scholar
Hakim, C. ‘Five Feminist Myths about Women's Employment’. British Journal of Sociology, 46(3) (1995), 429–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, P. A. and Taylor, R. C. R.. ‘Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms’. Political Studies, 44(5) (1996), 936–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P. A. and Taylor, R. C. R.. ‘Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms’, in Soltan, Karolet al. (eds.), Institutions and Social Order (Dearborn, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1998).Google Scholar
Harberger, A. ‘The Incidence of the Corporation Income Tax’. Journal of Political Economy, 70(3) (1962), 215–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harbury, C. D. and Hitchens, D.. ‘Women, Wealth and Inheritance’. Economic Journal, 87(345) (1977), 124–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, A. P. ‘Race and Essentialism in Feminist Legal Theory’. Stanford Law Review, 42(3) (1990), 581–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, P.Income Tax in Common Law Jurisdictions: From the Origins to 1820. (Cambridge University Press, 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A.The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights (London: Harrison & Sons Ltd, 1948).Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. ‘Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals’. Harvard Law Review, 71 (1957), 593–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A.The Concept of Law, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Hartmann, H. I. ‘The Family as the Locus of Gender, Class, and Political Struggle: The Example of Housework’. Signs, 6(3) (1981), 366–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslanger, S. ‘Feminism in Metaphysics: Negotiating the Natural’, in Fricker, M and Hornsby, J (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Feminism in Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
Hasseldine, J. and Hite, P. A.. ‘Framing, Gender and Tax Compliance’. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(4) (2003), 517–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, J. and Ruud, P.. ‘Family Labor Supply with Taxes’. American Economic Review, 74(2) (1984), 242–8.Google Scholar
Hennessy, R.Materialist Feminism and the Politics of Discourse (New York, NY: Routledge, 1993).Google Scholar
Hennessy, R. and Ingraham, C.. Materialist Feminism: A Reader in Class, Difference, and Women's Lives (London: Routledge, 1997).Google Scholar
Herz, M. ‘Judicial Textualism Meets Congressional Micromanagement: A Potential Collision in Clean Air Act Interpretation’. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 16 (1992), 175–82.Google Scholar
Hewitson, G. J.Feminist Economics: Interrogating the Masculinity of Rational Economic Man (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1999).Google Scholar
Himmelweit, S. ‘The Experience of the UK Women's Budget Group’. Contribution to International Workshop on Gender Auditing of Government Budgets (2000) (at: www.e-quality.nl/assets/e-quality/publicaties/2004/presentatiesGBA/slides%20for%20FENN_Susan%20Himmelweit.pdf).
Himmelweit, S. ‘Making Visible the Hidden Economy: The Case for Gender-impact Analysis of Economic Policy’. Feminist Economics, 8(1) (2002), 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hira, A. and Hira, R.. ‘The New Institutionalism Contradictory Notions of Change’. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 59(2) (2000), 267–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, P. M. ‘Sociology without Social Structure: Neoinstitutional Theory Meets Brave New World’. American Journal of Sociology, 102(6) (1997), 1702–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochschild, A. and Machung, A.. The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home (New York, NY: Viking, 1989).Google Scholar
Holcombe, R. G. ‘Tax Policy from Public Choice Perspective’. National Tax Journal, 51(2) (1999), 359–71.Google Scholar
Hollingsworth, J. R. and Boyer, R.. Contemporary Capitalism: The Embeddedness of Institutions (Cambridge University Press, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingsworth, K., White, F. and Harden, I.. ‘Audit, Accountability and Independence: The Role of the Audit Commission’. Legal Studies, 18(1) (1998), 78–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hood, C. ‘Privatizing UK Tax Law Enforcement?’ Public Administration, 64(3) (1986), 319–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovenkamp, H. ‘First Great Law and Economics Movement’. Stanford Law Review, 42 (1990), 993–1058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, S. C. ‘History, Economics, and Anthropology: The Work of Karl Polanyi’. History and Theory, 8(2) (1969), 165–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, J. C., DeLorme, C. D., Jr. and Hill, R. C.. ‘Taxation and the Wife's Use of Time’. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 34(3) (1981), 426–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurley, S. L. ‘The Unit of Taxation Under an Ideal Progressive Income Tax’. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 4(2) (2002), 157–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurley, S. L. ‘Replies’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 72(2) (2006), 447–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Infanti, A. C. ‘The Internal Revenue Code as Sodomy Statute’. Santa Clara Law Review, 44 (2004), 763–804.Google Scholar
Infanti, A. C. ‘A Tax Crit Identity Crisis? Or Tax Expenditure Analysis, Deconstruction, and the Rethinking of a Collective Identity’. Whittier Law Review, 26 (2005), 707–821.Google Scholar
Infanti, A. C. and Crawford, B. J.. Critical Tax Theory – An Introduction. (Cambridge University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Infanti, A. C. and Crawford, B.. ‘Critical Tax Theory: An Introduction’. University of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2009–04690690 (2009) (at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1333799).
Jackson, S. ‘Why a Materialist Feminism Is (Still) Possible – and Necessary’. Women's Studies International Forum, 24(3–4) (2001), 283–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, S. and Wallschutzky, I.. ‘Tax Law Improvement In Australia and the UK: The Need for a Strategy for Simplification’. Fiscal Studies, 18(4) (1997), 445–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. ‘Law and the Leaky Woman: The Saloon, the Liquor Licence, and Narratives of Containment’. Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 19(2) (2005), 181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. C. ‘Split Income and Separate Spheres: Tax Law and Gender Roles in the 1940s’. Law and History Review, 6(2) (1988), 259–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, A. and Lenschow, A.. ‘“Greening” the European Union: What Can Be Learned from the “Leaders” of EU Environmental Policy?’ European Environment, 10(3) (2000), 109–20.3.0.CO;2-Z>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, V. ‘Rhetoric and the Law’. Diacritics, 19(2) (1989), 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahne, H. and Kohen, A. I.. ‘Economic Perspectives on the Roles of Women in the American Economy’. Journal of Economic Literature, 13(4) (1975), 1249–92.Google Scholar
Kantowicz, E. R. ‘The Limits of Incrementalism: Carter's Efforts at Tax Reform’. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 4(2) (1985), 217–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplow, L. ‘How Tax Complexity and Enforcement Affect the Equity and Efficiency of the Income Tax’, in Slemrod, J (ed.), Tax Policy in the Real World (Cambridge University Press, 1999).Google Scholar
Kaplow, L. and Shavell, S.. ‘Why the Legal System Is Less Efficient than the Income Tax in Redistributing Income’. Journal of Legal Studies, 23 (1994), 667–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karran, T. ‘The Determinants of Taxation in Britain: An Empirical Test’. Journal of Public Policy, 5(3) (1985), 365–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, T. A. ‘Sheltering Social Policy in The Tax Code: The Low-Income Housing Credit’. Villanova Law Review, 38 (1993), 871–931.Google Scholar
Kaye, T. A. ‘Show Me the Money: Congressional Limitations on State Tax Sovereignty’. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 35 (1998), 149–88.Google Scholar
Kendall, G. and Wickham, G.. Understanding Culture: Cultural Studies, Order, Ordering (London: Sage, 2001).Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. ‘New Approaches to Comparative Law: Comparativism and International Governance’. Utah Law Review, (1997), 545–637.
Kerridge, R. ‘Jones v. Garnett (Arctic Systems): Another Way of Getting to the Same Result’. British Tax Review, 5 (2007), 591–6.Google Scholar
Kershnar, S. ‘For discrimination against women’. Law and Philosophy, 26(6) (2007), 589–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingson, C. I. ‘The Coherence of International Taxation’. Columbia Law Review, (1981), 1151–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knauer, N. ‘Heteronormativity and Federal Tax Policy’. West Virginia Law Review, 101 (1998), 129–234.Google Scholar
Kordana, K. A. and Tabachnik, D. H.. ‘Tax and the Philosopher's Stone’. Virginia Law Review, 89(3) (2003), 647–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornhauser, M. E. ‘The Rhetoric of the Anti-Progressive Income Tax Movement: A Typical Male Reaction’. Michigan Law Review, 86(3) (1987), 465–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornhauser, M. E. ‘A Taxing Woman: The Relationship of Feminist Scholarship to Tax’. Southern California Review of Law and Women's Studies, 6 (1996–7), 301–22.Google Scholar
Krause, K. ‘Tax Complexity: Problem or Opportunity?’ Public Finance Review, 28(5) (2000), 395–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudrle, R. T. ‘The OECD's Harmful Tax Competition Initiative and the Tax Havens: From Bombshell to Damp Squib’. Global Economy Journal, 8(1) (2008), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, K. ‘Sociology and the Englishness of English Social Theory’. Sociological Theory, 19(1) (2001), 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahey, K. A.Are We ‘Persons’ Yet?: Law and Sexuality in Canada (University of Toronto Press, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahey, K. A.The Benefit/Penalty Unit in Income Tax Policy Diversity and Reform (Law Commission of Canada, 2000).Google Scholar
LaLumia, S. ‘The Effects of Joint Taxation of Married Couples on Labor Supply and Non-wage Income’. Journal of Public Economics, 92(7) (July 2008), 1698–1719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamanna, M.Emile Durkheim on the Family (London: Sage, 2002).Google Scholar
Land, H. ‘The Family Wage’, Feminist Review, 6 (1980), 55–77 (at: http://staging-www.palgrave-journals.com/fr/journal/v6/n1/pdf/fr198019a.pdf).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, H. ‘Spheres of Care in the UK: Separate and Unequal’. Critical Social Policy, 22(1) (2002), 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazar, L. ‘Finance Act 1965: The Capital Gains Tax’. Modern Law Review, 29(2) (1966), 181–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazar, L. ‘Finance Act 1965: The Corporation Tax’. Modern Law Review, 29(1) (1966), 50–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leadbetter, H. ‘Gender Budgeting’ (at: www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/organisation/pfma/pfma-gender-budget.pdf).
Lee, N. ‘The New Tax Credits’. Journal of Social Security Law, 10(1) (2003), 7–52.Google Scholar
Lee, N. ‘The Effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on Taxation Policy and Administration’. eJournal of Tax Research, 2(2) (2004), 155–82.Google Scholar
Lee, O. ‘Social Theory Across Disciplinary Boundaries: Cultural Studies and Sociology’. Sociological Forum, 14(4) (1999), 547–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grand, J. ‘Implementing Stakeholder Grants: The British Case’, in Bruce Ackerman, et al. (eds.), Redesigning Distribution: Basic Income and Stakeholder Grants as Alternative Cornerstones for a More Egalitarian Capitalism (Making Social Policy Work: Essays in Honour of Howard Glennerster) (London: Verso, 2006) (at: www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/Redesigning%20Distribution%20v1.pdf#page=100).Google Scholar
Lewis, J. ‘Gender and the Development of Welfare Regimes’. Journal of European Social Policy, 2(3) (1992), 159–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, J. ‘The “Problem” of Lone Motherhood in Comparative Perspective’, in Clasen, J. (ed.), Comparative Social Policy: Concepts, Theories, and Methods (London: Blackwell Publishing, 1999).Google Scholar
Lewis, J. ‘Gender and Welfare Regimes: Further Thoughts’. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society 4(2) (2002), 160–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, J. ‘Gender and Welfare State Change’. European Societies, 4(4) (2002), 331–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lie, J. ‘Embedding Polanyi's Market Society’. Sociological Perspectives, 34(2) (1991), 219–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebert, U. ‘Europeanising Gender Mainstreaming: Constraints and Opportunities in the Multilevel Euro-polity’. Feminist Legal Studies, 10(3) (2002), 241–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippe, T. Van, and Dijk, L.. ‘Comparative Research on Women's Employment’. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1) (2002), 221–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lister, R. ‘Future Insecure: Women and Income Maintenance under a Third Tory Term’. Feminist Review, (27) (1987), 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlewood, M. ‘Tax Competition: Harmful To Whom’. Michigan Journal of International Law, 26 (2004), 411–87.Google Scholar
Livingston, M. A. ‘Radical Scholars, Conservative Field: Putting Critical Tax Scholarship in Perspective’. North Carolina Law Review, 76 (1997), 1791.Google Scholar
Livingston, M. A. ‘Reinventing Tax Scholarship: Lawyers Economists and the Role of the Legal Academy’. Cornell Law Review, 83 (1997), 365.Google Scholar
Livingston, M. A. ‘Blum and Kalven at 50: Progressive Taxation, “Globalization”, and the New Millennium’. Florida Tax Review, 4 (2000), 731–68.Google Scholar
Lloyd, G.The Man of Reason: Male and Female in Western Philosophy (London: Routledge, 1993).Google Scholar
Lombardo, E. ‘Integrating or Setting the Agenda? Gender Mainstreaming in the European Constitution-Making Process’. Social Politics, 12(3) (2005), 412–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lopez, I. F. H. ‘Institutional Racism: Judicial Conduct and a New Theory of Racial Discrimination’. Yale Law Journal, 109(8) (2000), 1717–1884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LoPucki, L. ‘The Systems Approach to Law’. Cornell Law Review, 82 (1997), 479–521.Google Scholar
Loutzenheiser, G. ‘Jones v. Garnett: High Court Gives Taxpayer the Cold Shoulder’. British Tax Review, 4 (2005), 401–11.Google Scholar
Loutzenheiser, G. ‘Income Splitting and Settlements: Further Observations on Jones v. Garnett’. British Tax Review, 6 (2007), 693–716.Google Scholar
Lovenduski, J. ‘Women and Politics: Minority Representation or Critical Mass?’ Parliamentary Affairs, 54(4) (2001), 743–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucia, C. ‘Women on Trial: The Female Lawyer in the Hollywood Courtroom’, in Fineman, M. and McCluskey, M. T. (eds.), Feminism, Media, and the Law (Oxford University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
Luenberger, D., G. Introduction to Dynamic Systems: Theory, Models, and Applications (New York, NY: Wiley, 1979).Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. ‘Law as a Social System’. Northwestern University Law Review, 83 (1988), 136–50.Google Scholar
McBarnet, D. ‘After Enron Will “Whiter than White Collar Crime” Still Wash?’ British Journal of Criminology, 46(6) (2006), 1091–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBarnet, D.Corporate Social Responsibility Beyond Law, Through Law, for Law. SSRN (2009) (at: http://ssrn.com/paper=1369305).Google Scholar
McBarnet, D. and Whelan, C.. ‘The Elusive Spirit of the Law: Formalism and the Struggle for Legal Control’. Modern Law Review, 54 (1991), 848–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCaffery, E. J. ‘Last Words (?): Towards a Feminization of Wealth’. Southern California Review of Law and Women's Studies (1996–7), 605–10.Google Scholar
McCaffery, E. J.Taxing Women (University of Chicago Press, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCaffery, E. J.Women and Taxes. NCPA Policy Report No. 250. (Dallas, TX: National Center for Policy Analysis, 2002) (at: www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st250/st250.pdf).
McCaffery, E. J. ‘Where's the Sex in Fiscal Sociology? Taxation and Gender in Comparative Perspective’. University of Southern California Law and Economics Working Paper Series (2008) (at: http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1072&context=usclwps).
McCrudden, C. ‘Mainstreaming Equality in the Governance of Northern Ireland’. Fordham International Law Journal, 22 (1998), 1696–1775.Google Scholar
MacDonald, M. ‘Gender and Social Security Policy: Pitfalls and Possibilities’. Feminist Economics, 4(1) (1998), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGlynn, C. ‘Reclaiming a feminist vision: the reconciliation of paid work and family life in European Union law and policy’. Columbia Journal of European Law, 7 (2001), 241–72.Google Scholar
McGraw, L. A., Zvonkovic, A. M. and Walker, A. J.. ‘Studying Postmodern Families: A Feminist Analysis of Ethical Tensions in Work and Family Research’. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(1) (2000), 68–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, M. ‘Feminism and Social Policy’, in Christopher, Pierson and Castles, Francis G. (eds.), The Welfare State Reader (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006).Google Scholar
MacKinnon, C. A. ‘Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: An Agenda for Theory’. Signs, 7(3) (1982), 515–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P.. ‘The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life’. American Political Science Review, 78(3) (1984), 734–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, J. D. and Walsh, J. P.. ‘Misery Loves Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2) (2003), 268–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MarksRubin, M Rubin, M. and Bartle, J. R. ‘Integrating Gender into Government Budgets: A New Perspective’. Public Administration Review, 65(3) (2005), 259–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, D. B. ‘The Taxation of Imputed Income’. Political Science Quarterly, 58(4) (1943), 514–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, R. and Calvin, L. D.. ‘A Study of Admitted Income Tax Evasion’. Law and Society Review, 13(1) (1978), 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattei, U. ‘Some Realism About Comparativism: Comparative Law Teaching in the Hegemonic Jurisdiction’. American Journal of Comparative Law, 50 (2002), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayntz, R. Mayntz, ‘New Challenges to Governance Theory’, in Bang, Henrik Paul (ed.), Governance as Social and Political Communication (Manchester University Press, 2009).Google Scholar
Mazey, S. ‘The European Union and Women's Rights’, in Hine, D and Kassim, H. (eds.), Beyond the Market: The EU and National Social Policy (London: Routledge, 1998).Google Scholar
Meehan, E. and Collins, E. ‘Women, the European Union and Britain’. Parliamentary Affairs, 49(1) (2001), 221–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menell, P. and Stewart, R.. Environmental Law and Policy (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1994).Google Scholar
Menkel-Meadow, C. ‘Exploring a Research Agenda of the Feminization of the Legal Profession: Theories of Gender and Social Change’. Law and Social Inquiry, 14(2) (1989), 289–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merton, R. ‘In Honor of Nobel Laureate, Franco Modigliani’. Journal of Economic Perspectives (1987), 145–55.
Mieszkowski, P. ‘Tax Incidence Theory: The Effects of Taxes on the Distribution of Income’. Journal of Economic Literature (1969), 1103–24.
Millar, J. ‘From Wage Replacement to Wage Supplementation: Benefits and Tax Credits’, in Millar, J. (ed.), Understanding Social Security (Bristol: Policy Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Mintz, J. ‘The Corporation Tax: A Survey’. Fiscal Studies, 16(4) (1995), 23–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, H.Intolerable Inquisition?: Reflections on the Law of Tax (London: Stevens, published under the auspices of Hamlyn Trust, 1981).Google Scholar
Montanari, I. ‘From Family Wage to Marriage Subsidy and Child Benefits: Controversy and Consensus in the Development of Family Support’. Journal of European Social Policy, 10(4) (2000), 307–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, B. ‘Setting an Agenda for the Study of Tax and Black Culture’. University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review, 21 (1999), 779–94.Google Scholar
Morck, R. ‘Why Some Double Taxation Might Make Sense: The Special Case of Inter-corporate Dividends’. NBER Working Paper (2003).
Morck, R. ‘How to Eliminate Pyramidal Business Groups – The Double Taxation of Inter-corporate Dividends and Other Incisive Uses of Tax Policy’. NBER Working Paper (2004).
Morgan, K. J. ‘The Politics of Mothers’ Employment: France in Comparative Perspective'. World Politics, 55(2) (2003), 259–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, A. ‘Marketing Working Mothers: Contextualizing Earned Income Tax Credits within Feminist Cultural Theory’. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 23(4) (2001), 411–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, A. ‘Inheritance in Socio-political Context: The Case for Reviving the Sociological Discourse of Inheritance Tax Law’. Journal of Law and Society, 34(4) (2007), 567–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mumford, A. ‘Towards a Fiscal Sociology of Tax Credits and the Fathers’ Rights Movement', Social and Legal Studies, 17(2) (2008), 217–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, L. and Nagel, T.. The Myth of Ownership (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musgrave, R. ‘Theories of Fiscal Crises: An Essay in Fiscal Sociology’, in Aaron, H. J and Boskins, M. J (eds.), The Economics of Taxation (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1980), pp. 316–90.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. ‘Rawls on Justice’. Philosophical Review (1973), 220–34.
Naumann, I. K. ‘Childcare and Feminism in West Germany and Sweden in the 1960s and 1970s’. Journal of European Social Policy, 15(1) (2005), 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nee, V. ‘Sources of the New Institutionalism’, in Brinton, M. C. and Nee, V. (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Sociology (New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 1998).Google Scholar
Neff, D. K. ‘Married Women's Labor Supply and the Marriage Penalty’. Public Finance Review, 18(4) (1990), 420–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelken, D. ‘Disclosing/Invoking Legal Culture: An Introduction’. Social and Legal Studies, 4(4) (1995), 435–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelken, D. ‘Comparing Legal Cultures’, in Sarat, A (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Law and Society (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004).Google Scholar
Nelson, J. A. ‘Tax Reform and Feminist Theory in the United States: Incorporating Human Connection’. Journal of Economic Studies, 18(5–6) (1991), 11–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, J. A.Feminism, Objectivity, and Economics (London: Routledge, 1996).Google Scholar
Newth, J. T. ‘Divorce and Separation’. Simon's Tax Briefing (12 June 2006), 5–6.Google Scholar
Ngugi, J. M. ‘Forgetting Lochner in the Journey from Plan to Market: The Framing Effect of the Market Rhetoric in Market-oriented Reforms’, Buffalo Law Review, 56 (2008), 1–97.Google Scholar
Nicholson, L. ‘Feminism and Marx: Integrating Kinship with the Economic’. Praxis International, 4 (1985), 367–80 (at: www.ceeol.com).Google Scholar
Nolan, B. and Smeeding, T. M.. ‘Ireland's Income Distribution in Comparative Perspective’. Paper Prepared for the 28th General Conference of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth. Cork, Ireland: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University (2004) (at: www.iariw.org/papers/2004/smeeding.pdf).
,Note. ‘Income Tax Liability of Married Women’. Modern Law Review, 10(2) (1947), 198–203.Google Scholar
,Note. ‘California Prohibits Gender-based Pricing’. Harvard Law Review, 109(7) (1996), 1839–44.Google Scholar
O'Connor, J. S., Orloff, A. S. and Shaver, S.. States, Markets, Families: Gender, Liberalism and Social Policy in Australia, Canada, Great Britain and the United States (Cambridge University Press, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD. ‘Evaluation of DFID's Policy and Practice in Support of Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment’, August 2006 (at: www.oecd.org/dataoecd/52/38/37390142.pdf).
OECD. ‘European Community (2007), DAC Peer Review: Main Findings and Recommendations’, 2007) (at: www.oecd.org/document/0/0,3343,en_2649_34603_38897408_1_1_1_1,00.html).
Okin, S. ‘Justice and Gender: An Unfinished Debate’. Fordham Law Review, 72 (2003), 1537–67.Google Scholar
Oldman, O. and Temple, R. ‘Comparative Analysis of the Taxation of Married Persons’. Stanford Law Review, 12(3) (1960), 585–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Riordan, T. and Jordan, A.. ‘Institutions, Climate Change and Cultural Theory: Towards a Common Analytical Framework’. Global Environmental Change, 9(2) (1999), 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orloff, A. ‘Gender in the Welfare State’. Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1) (1996), 51–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orviska, M. and Hudson, J.. ‘Tax Evasion, Civic Duty and the Law Abiding Citizen’. European Journal of Political Economy, 19(1) (2003), 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, J. ‘Personal Taxation, Social Security and Financial Arrangements within Marriage’. Journal of Law and Society, 13(2) (1986), 241–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascall, G.Social Policy: A Feminist Analysis (London: Tavistock Publications, 1986).Google Scholar
Pearson, R. ‘Feminist Responses to Economic Globalisation: Some Examples of Past and Future Practice’. Gender and Development, 11(1) (2003), 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pemberton, H. ‘Taxation and Labour's Modernisation Programme’. Contemporary British History, 20(3) (2006), 423–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, B. G.Institutional Theory in Political Science: The ‘New Institutionalism’ (London: Continuum, 2005).Google Scholar
Pettit, B. and Hook, J.. ‘The Structure of Women's Employment in Comparative Perspective’. Social Forces, 84(2) (2005), 779–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philipps, L. ‘Taxing the Market Citizen: Fiscal Policy and Inequality in an Age of Privatization’. Law and Contemporary Problems, 63(4) (2000), 111–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philipps, L. ‘Tax Law and Social Reproduction: The Gender of Fiscal Policy in an Age of Privatization’, in Cossman, Brenda and Fudge, Judy (eds.), Privatization, Law, and the Challenge to Feminism (University of Toronto Press, 2002).Google Scholar
Philipps, L. and Condon, M.. ‘Transnational Market Governance and Economic Citizenship: New Frontiers for Feminist Legal Theory’. Thomas Jefferson Law Review 28 (2005), 105–50.Google Scholar
Phillips, M. ‘Reappraising the Real Entity Theory of the Corporation’. Florida State University Law Review, 21 (1994), 1061–1123.Google Scholar
Picciotto, S.International Business Taxation (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1992).Google Scholar
Picciotto, S. ‘Constructing Compliance: Game Playing, Tax Law, and the Regulatory State’. Law and Policy, 29(1) (2007), 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. ‘The New Politics of the Welfare State’. World Politics, 48 (1996), 143–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pigou, A. ‘The Report of the Royal Commission on the British Income Tax’. Quarterly Journal of Economics (1920), 607–25.
Plantenga, J. and Hansen, J.. ‘Assessing Equal Opportunities in the European Union’. International Labour Review, 138(4) (1999), 351–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polanyi, K.The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. (London: Beacon Press, 2001).Google Scholar
Polanyi, K. and Pearson, H. W.. The Livelihood of Man (New York, NY: Academic Press, 1977).Google Scholar
Polikoff, N. D. ‘Ending Marriage as We Know It’. Hofstra Law Review, 32(1) (2003), 201–32.Google Scholar
Pollack, M. A. ‘The New Institutionalism and EC Governance: The Promise and Limits of Institutional Analysis’. Governance, 9(4) (1996), 429–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollack, S. D. ‘Tax Complexity, Reform, and the Illusions of Tax Simplification’. George Mason Independent Law Review, 2 (1994), 319–58.Google Scholar
Power, M. ‘Auditing and Environmental Expertise: Between Protest and Professionalisation’. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 4(3) (1991), 30–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Power, M.The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification (Oxford University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
Pudrovska, T. and Ferree, M. M.. ‘Global Activism in “Virtual Space”: The European Women's Lobby in the Network of Transnational Women's NGOs on the Web’. Social Politics, 11(1) (2004), 117–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radaelli, C. ‘Harmful Tax Competition in the EU: Policy Narratives and Advocacy Coalitions’. Journal of Common Market Studies, 37(4) (1999), 661–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raes, F. ‘What Can We Expect from Gender Sensitive Budgets? Strategies in Brazil and in Chile in a Comparative Perspective’. Network Women in Development Europe (WIDE) (2006) (at: www.eurosur.org/wide/home.htm).
Rai, S.Mainstreaming Gender, Democratizing The State?: Institutional Mechanisms for the Advancement of Women (Manchester University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rake, K. ‘Gender Budgets. The Experience of the UK's Women's Budget Group’, in paper prepared for conference Gender Balance – Equal Finance (2002).
Rawlings, G. ‘Taxes and Transnational Treaties: Responsive Regulation and the Reassertion of Offshore Sovereignty’. Law and Policy, 29(1) (2007), 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J.A Theory of Justice (orig. pub. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971) (Oxford University Press, 1999).Google Scholar
Redston, A. ‘Small Business in the Eye of the Storm’. British Tax Review, 5 (2004), 566–81.Google Scholar
Redston, A. ‘Income Sharing: The Nelsonian Option’. British Tax Review, 6 (2007), 680–6.Google Scholar
Reece, H. ‘The Autonomy Myth: A Theory of Dependency’, Child and Family Law Quarterly, 20(1) (2008), 109–10.Google Scholar
Rees, T. ‘Reflections on the Uneven Development of Gender Mainstreaming in Europe’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(4) (2005), 555–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, R. S. ‘Tax Reform and Tax Incentives’. Law and Contemporary Problems, 34(4) (1969), 782–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, N. E. ‘Challenging Demography: Contributions from Feminist Theory’. Sociological Forum, 14(3) (1999), 369–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ring, D. M. ‘One Nation among Many: Policy Implications of Cross-border Tax Arbitrage’. Boston College Law Review, 44 (2002), 79–175.Google Scholar
Rittich, K. ‘Feminization and Contingency: Regulating the Stakes of Work for Women’, in Conaghan, J, Fischl, R. M and Klare, K (eds.), Labour Law in an Era of Globalization: Transformative Practices and Possibilities (Oxford University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
Roberts, R. ‘Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of stakeholder theory’. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6) (1992), 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. ‘Beyond the Public/Private Division: Law, Power and the Family’. Journal of Law and Society (1987), 61–76.
Rosenfeld, R. A. and Birkelund, G. E.. ‘Women's Part-time Work: A Cross-national Comparison’. European Sociological Review, 11(2) (2002), 111–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubery, J. ‘Gender Mainstreaming and Gender Equality in the EU: The Impact of the EU Employment Strategy’. Industrial Relations Journal, 33(5) (2002), 500–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubery, J., Grimshaw, D., Fagan, C., Figueiredo, H. and Smith, M.. ‘Gender Equality Still on the European Agenda – But for How Long?’ Industrial Relations Journal, 34(5) (2003), 477–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudd, J. ‘Ruhl's, J. B.Law-and-Society System: Burying Norms and Democracy under Complexity Theory's Foundation’. William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 29 (2004), 551–632.Google Scholar
Ruhl, J. B. ‘Complexity Theory as a Paradigm for the Dynamical Law-and-Society System: A Wake-Up Call for Legal Reductionism and the Modern Administrative State’. Duke Law Journal, 45 (1996), 849–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruhl, J. B. ‘Fitness of Law: Using Complexity Theory to Describe the Evolution of Law and Society and Its Practical Meaning for Democracy’. Vanderbilt Law Review, 49 (1996), 1406.Google Scholar
Ruhl, J. B. ‘Thinking of Environmental Law as a Complex Adaptive System: How to Clean Up the Environment by Making a Mess of Environmental Law’. Houston Law Review, 34 (1997), 933–1002.Google Scholar
Ruhl, J. B. ‘Law's Complexity: A Primer’. Georgia State University Law Review, 24 (2008), 885–911.Google Scholar
Ruhl, J. B. and Ruhl, H. J., ‘The Arrow of the Law in Modern Administrative States: Using Complexity Theory to Reveal the Diminishing Returns and Increasing Risks the Burgeoning of Law Poses to Society’, UC Davis Law Review, 30 (1997), 405–82.Google Scholar
Ruhl, J. B. and Salzman, J., ‘Mozart and the Red Queen: The Problem of Regulatory Accretion in the Administrative State’, Georgetown Law Journal, 91 (2002), 757–850.Google Scholar
Runyan, S. ‘Women in the Neoliberal Frame’, in Meyer, Mary K and Prügl, Elisabeth (eds.), Gender Politics in Global Governance (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999).Google Scholar
Sainsbury, D.Gender and Welfare State Regimes (Oxford University Press, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salinas, J. G. ‘The OECD Tax Competition Initiative: A Critique of Its Merits in the Global Marketplace’. Houston Journal of International Law, 25(3) (2003), 531–61.Google Scholar
Sanders, R.The Future of Financial Services in the Caribbean. International Tax Competition: Globalisation and Fiscal Sovereignty, London: Commonwealth Secretariat, (2002) (at: www.itio.org/documents/Speech-RonaldSanders.pdf).
Sanrichio, C. W. ‘Progressivity and Potential Income: Measuring the Effect of Changing Work Patterns on Income Tax Progressivity’. Columbia Law Review, 108 (2008), 1151–1609.Google Scholar
Sargent, L.Women and Revolution: A Discussion of the Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism (London: South End Press, 1981).Google Scholar
Savage, J. D.Making the EMU: The Politics of Budgetary Surveillance and the Enforcement of Maastricht (Oxford University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
Sawer, M. ‘Women's Ministries: An Australian Perspective’. Feminist Review, (63) (1999), 91–4.Google Scholar
Schauer, F.Playing by the Rules: A Philosophical Examination of Rule-based Decision-making in Law and in Life (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
Scholz, J. K. ‘The Earned Income Tax Credit: Participation, Compliance, and Antipoverty’. National Tax Journal, 47(1) (1994), 63–87.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. A. ‘English Economists and the State-managed Economy’. Journal of Political Economy, 57(5) (1949), 371–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, J. A. ‘The March Into Socialism’. American Economic Review, 40(2) (1950), 446–56.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. A.Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (London: Routledge, 1994).Google Scholar
Schwartz, A. and Scott, R. E.. ‘Contract Theory and the Limits of Contract Law’. Yale Law Journal, 113 (2003), 541–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, T. P. ‘Durkheim's Prediction about the Declining Importance of the Family and Inheritance: Evidence from the Wills of Providence, 1775–1985’, Sociological Quarterly (1996), 503–19.
Seligman, E. R. A. ‘The Theory of Progressive Taxation’. Publications of the American Economic Association, 8(1) (1893), 52–5.Google Scholar
Seligman, E. R. A. ‘The Income Tax’. Political Science Quarterly, 9(4) (1894), 610–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Servet, J.-M. ‘L'institution monétaire de la société selon Karl Polanyi’. Revue économique, 44(6) (1993), 1127–49.Google Scholar
Sharman, J. C. ‘Norms, Coercion and Contracting in the Struggle against “Harmful” Tax Competition’, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 60 (2006), 143–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, R. ‘Budgeting for Equality: The Australian Experience’. Feminist Economics, 8(1) (2002), 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, J. ‘Process and Constitutional Discourse in the European Union’. Journal of Law and Society, 27(1) (2000), 4–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, J. ‘The European Union and Gender Mainstreaming: Constitutionally Embedded or Comprehensively Marginalised?’ Feminist Legal Studies, 10(3–4) (2002), 213–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shurtz, N. E. ‘A Critical View of Traditional Tax Policy Theory: A Pragmatic Alternative’. Villanova Law Review, 31 (1986), 1665–1701.Google Scholar
Silver, B. A. ‘Modernizing the Revenue Rule: The Enforcement of Foreign Tax Judgments’. Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 22 (1992), 609–33.Google Scholar
Simester, A. P. and Chan, W.. ‘On Tax and Justice’. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 23(4) (2003), 711–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, J. B. ‘The Governance of the European Union: A New Institutionalist Approach’. Journal of Public Policy, 13(4) (1993), 351–80.Google Scholar
Slemrod, J. ‘Which is the Simplest Tax System of Them All’, in Aaron, H. J and Gale, W. G. (eds.), Economic Effects of Fundamental Tax Reform (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1996).Google Scholar
Smeeding, T. M. ‘Poor People in Rich Nations: The United States in Comparative Perspective’. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1) (2006), 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. K. ‘Superannuating the Second Sex: Law, Privatisation and Retirement Income’. Modern Law Review, 64(4) (2001), 519–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, I. ‘Sperber's Fashions in Science’. Social Epistemology, 6(1) (1992), 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squires, J. ‘Equality and diversity: a new equality framework for Britain?’ Unpublished paper presented at School of Public Policy, University College, London University, December (2003) (at: www.bath.ac.uk/esml/Library/pdf-files/squires.pdf).
Squires, J. and Wickham-Jones, M.. ‘New Labour, Gender Mainstreaming and the Women and Equality Unit’. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6(1) (2004), 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staudt, N. C. ‘Taxing Housework’. Georgetown Law Journal, 84 (1995), 1571–1645.Google Scholar
Staudt, N. C. ‘The Political Economy of Taxation: A Critical Review of a Classic’. Law and Society Review, 30(3) (1996), 651–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staveley, B. ‘The Quest for the Allowable Loss: Reflections on Lord Hoffmann's Approach to Ramsay’. British Tax Review, 6 (2005), 609–19.Google Scholar
Steinmo, S. ‘Political institutions and tax policy in the United States, Sweden, and Britain’. World Politics: A Quarterly Journal of International Relations, 41(4) (1989), 500–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmo, S. ‘Globalization and Taxation: Challenges to the Swedish Welfare State’. Comparative Political Studies, 35(7) (2002), 839–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmo, S. ‘The Evolution of Policy Ideas: Tax Policy in the 20th Century’. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 5(2) (2003), 206–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmo, S., Thelen, K. and Longstreth, F.. Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis (Cambridge University Press, 1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmo, S. and Tolbert, C. J.. ‘Do Institutions Really Matter?’ Comparative Political Studies, 31(2) (1998), 165–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiglitz, J. E. ‘The Contributions of the Economics of Information to Twentieth Century Economics’. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(4) (2000), 1441–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stotsky, J. G. ‘How Tax Systems Treat Men and Women Differently’. Finance and Development (1997) (at: www.worldbank.org/fandd/english/pdfs/0397/070397.pdf).
Stretton, T.Women Waging Law in Elizabethan England (Cambridge University Press, 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stychin, C. ‘Not (Quite) a Horse and Carriage: The Civil Partnership Act 2004’, Feminist Legal Studies, 14 (2006), 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, M. C. and Edelman, L. B.. ‘Legal Rational Myths: The New Institutionalism and the Law and Society Tradition’. Law and Social Inquiry, 21 (1996), 903–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundstrom, M. ‘The Growth in Full-time Work among Swedish Women in the 1980s’. Acta Sociologica, 36(2) (1993), 139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanson, D. L. ‘Addressing a Theoretical Problem by Reorienting the Corporate Social Performance Model’. Academy of Management Review, 20(1) (1995), 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, V. and Rupp, L.. ‘Women's Culture and Lesbian Feminist Activism: A Reconsideration of Cultural Feminism’. Signs, 19(1) (1993), 32–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, G. ‘Substantive and Reflexive Elements in Modern Law’. Law and Society Review, 17(2) (1983), 239–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, K. ‘Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics’. Annual Review of Political Science, 2(1) (1999), 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, L. and Walker, A.. ‘Gender in Families: Women and Men in Marriage, Work, and Parenthood’. Journal of Marriage and the Family (1989), 845–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thuronyi, V. ‘International Tax Cooperation and a Multilateral Treaty’. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 26 (2001), 1641–81.Google Scholar
Tiley, J. ‘Aspects of Schedule A’, in Tiley, J (ed.), Studies in the History of Tax Law, vol. 1 (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004), pp. 81–100.Google Scholar
Tolbert, P. S. and Zucker, L. G. ‘The Institutionalization of Institutional Theory’, in Clegg, S. R and Hardy, C (eds.), Studying Organization: Theory and Method, London: Sage, 1999.Google Scholar
Townsend, Jr., A. ‘Global Schoolyard Bully: The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development's Coercive Efforts to Control Tax Competition’. Fordham International Law Journal, 25 (2001), 215–58.Google Scholar
Trifiletti, R. ‘Southern European Welfare Regimes and the Worsening Position of Women’. Journal of European Social Policy, 9(1) (1999), 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
True, J. ‘Mainstreaming Gender in Global Public Policy’. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 5(3) (2003), 368–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
True, J. and Mintrom, M.. ‘Transnational Networks and Policy Diffusion: The Case of Gender Mainstreaming’. International Studies Quarterly, 45(1) (2001), 27–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urry, J. ‘The Complexity Turn’. Theory, Culture and Society, 22(5) (2005), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uy, M. ‘Tax and Race: The Impact on Asian Americans’. Asian American Law Journal, 11 (2004), 7–143.Google Scholar
Valentine, S. and Fleischman, G.. ‘Ethical Reasoning in an Equitable Relief Innocent Spouse Context’. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(4) (2003), 325–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallentyne, P. ‘Hurley on Justice and Responsibility’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 72(2) (2006), 433–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ventry, D. J., Jr. ‘Saving Seaborn: Ownership as the Basis of Family Taxation’. (2009), SSRN eLibrary.
Verbeke, A. and Coeck, C.. ‘Environmental Taxation: A Green Stick or a Green Carrot for Corporate Social Performance?’ Managerial and Decision Economics, 18(6) (1997), 507–16.3.0.CO;2-1>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villagomez, E. ‘Gender Responsive Budgets: Issues, Good Practices and Policy Options’, at the conference Regional Symposium on Mainstreaming Gender into Economic Policies (NNUU Comisión Económica para Europa, 2004) (at: www.infopolis.es/web/GenderBudgets/pdf/Gender_budgets_draft.pdf).
Vogel, J. ‘European Welfare Regimes and the Transition to Adulthood: A Comparative and Longitudinal Perspective’. Social Indicators Research, 59(3) (2002), 275–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, L.Woman Questions: Essays for a Materialist Feminism (London: Routledge, 1995).Google Scholar
Waite, L. ‘Does Marriage Matter?’ Demography (1995), 483–507.
Walby, S. ‘Gender Mainstreaming: Productive Tensions in Theory and Practice’. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 12(3) (2005), 321–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warskett, G., Winer, S. and Hettich, W.. ‘The Complexity of Tax Structure in Competitive Political Systems’. International Tax and Public Finance, 5(2) (1998), 123–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wartick, S. L. and Cochran, P. L.. ‘The Evolution of the Corporate Social Performance Model’. The Academy of Management Review, 10(4) (1985), 758–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, S.Playing the State: Australian Feminist Interventions (Melbourne: Verso, 1990).Google Scholar
Wax, A. L. ‘Bargaining in the Shadow of the Market: Is There a Future for Egalitarian Marriage?’ Virginia Law Review, 84(4) (1998), 509–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, M. ‘Defining the Boundaries of Legitimate State Practice: Norms, Transnational Actors and the OECD's Project on Harmful Tax Competition 1’. Review of International Political Economy, 11(4) (2004), 787–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weedon, C.Feminist Practice and Poststructuralist Theory (London: Blackwell, 1997).Google Scholar
Weisbach, D. A. ‘Formalism in the Tax Law’. University of Chicago Law Review, 66 (1999), 860–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisbach, D. A. and Nussim, J.. ‘The Integration of Tax and Spending Programs’. Yale Law Journal, 113(5) (2004), 955–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, E. G. ‘Adam Smith's Public Economics: A Re-Evaluation’. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, 10(1) (1977), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, C. J., Schumpeter, K. P., Kapp, K. W., Williamson, O. E. and North, D. C.. ‘Post-Keynesian Institutionalism and the Anxious Society: Assessing the Evolution and Impact of Alternative Institutional Structures’, in Batie, Sandra S and Mercuro, Nicholas (eds.), Alternative Economic Structures: Evolution and Impact (London: Routledge, 2008), pp. 273–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheelock, J., Oughton, E. and Baines, S.. (2003) ‘Getting by with a Little Help from Your Family: Toward a Policy-relevant Model of the Household’. Feminist Economics, 9(1), 19–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, L. ‘Taxes and the Family: The Impact of the Tax Exemption for Dependents on Marital Fertility’. Demography (1992), 215–26.
Wikeley, N. ‘Child Trust Funds: Asset-based Welfare or a Recipe for Increased Inequality?’ Journal of Social Security Law, 11(4) (2004) (at: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/27919/).Google Scholar
Wikeley, N. ‘Child Support, Dividend Income and the Bertie Wooster Escape Clause’. Family Law, 9 (2005), 707–11.Google Scholar
Wikeley, N. ‘Child Support Reform – Throwing the Baby out with the Bathwater?’ Child and Family Law Quarterly, 19(4) (2007), 434.Google Scholar
Wikeley, N. and Young, L.. ‘Smith v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Child Support, the Self-Employed and the Meaning of “Total Taxable Profits” – Total Confusion Reigns’, Child and Family Law Quarterly, 17 (2005), 267–92.Google Scholar
Williams, D. F. ‘Tax and Corporate Social Responsibility’. Tax Journal, 913 (10 December 2007), 10.Google Scholar
Williamson, R. ‘Private Lives’. Tax Journal, 791 (2005), 17–18.Google Scholar
Williamson, R. ‘Winners and Losers among Low-income Taxpayers’. Tax Journal, (879) (2007), 19–20.Google Scholar
,Women, DFTAO and UN. ‘Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action’. United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (1995).
Woodman, F. ‘The Charter and the Taxation of Women’. Ottawa Law Review, 22 (1990), 625–90.Google Scholar
Yngvesson, B. ‘Inventing Law in Local Settings: Rethinking Popular Legal Culture’. Yale Law Journal, 98 (1988), 1689–1709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, C. F. L. ‘(In) Visible Inequalities: Women, Tax and Poverty’. Ottawa Law Review, 27 (1995), 99–128.Google Scholar
Young, C. F. L.Women, Tax and Social Programs: The Gendered Impact of Funding Social Programs through the Tax System. Status of Women Canada (2000).Google Scholar
Zelenak, L. ‘Feminism and Safe Subjects Like the Tax Code’. California Review of Law and Women's Studies, 6 (1996–7), 323–7.Google Scholar
Zey, M. and Swenson, T.. ‘Corporate Tax Laws, Corporate Restructuring, and Subsidiarization of Corporate Form, 1981–1995’. Sociological Quarterly, 39(4) (1998), 555–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Bibliography
  • Ann Mumford, Queen Mary University of London
  • Book: Tax Policy, Women and the Law
  • Online publication: 06 December 2010
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781155.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Bibliography
  • Ann Mumford, Queen Mary University of London
  • Book: Tax Policy, Women and the Law
  • Online publication: 06 December 2010
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781155.010
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Bibliography
  • Ann Mumford, Queen Mary University of London
  • Book: Tax Policy, Women and the Law
  • Online publication: 06 December 2010
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781155.010
Available formats
×