1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |'A Higher Ethical Obligation?' State Revenue Execs Speak Out in Crowell's Conversations

'A Higher Ethical Obligation?' State Revenue Execs Speak Out in Crowell's Conversations

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.15.14

Crowell & Moring's state tax team traveled from coast to coast in 2013 to introduce the corporate world to 10 of the country's top state tax decision makers. In Crowell's Conversations – a monthly column appearing in Bloomberg BNA's Weekly State Tax Report – we bring you timely and candid observations from different states' commissioners and their counsel. The revenue executives discussed everything from litigation and policy-making to resources and technology to their personal careers. While the questions and responses differed in each column, a common theme last year was the core belief that the states have a higher ethical obligation to get to the "right" answer rather than to collect the most revenue. We hope you have enjoyed getting to know our friends in the state revenue departments, and we look forward to bringing you more great interviews in 2014. Below are links to the first nine interviews. 

  • Michael Bryan, Director of the New Jersey Division of Taxation (December 6, 2013).

  • Jozel Brunett, California Franchise Tax Board Chief Counsel (November 8, 2013).

  • Julie Magee, Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Revenue (August 30, 2013).

  • Tim Barfield, Secretary at the Louisiana Department of Revenue (July 19, 2013).

  • Barbara Brohl, Executive Director and John Vecchiarelli, Senior Director of the Colorado Department of Revenue (June 21, 2013).

  • Marshall Stranburg, Executive Director at the Florida Department of Revenue (May 3, 2013).

  • Peter Franchot, Comptroller of Maryland (April 12, 2013).

  • Milton Kimpson, General Counsel to the South Carolina Department of Revenue (March 15, 2013).

  • Alan Levine, Chief Counsel With the District of Columbia's Office of Tax and Revenue (February 15, 2013).

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.19.25

GAO Cautions Agencies—Over-Redact at Your Own Peril

Bid protest practitioners in recent years have witnessed agencies’ increasing efforts to limit the production of documents and information in response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protests—often will little pushback from GAO. This practice has underscored the notable difference in the scope of bid protest records before GAO versus the Court of Federal Claims. However, in Tiger Natural Gas, Inc., B-423744, Dec. 10, 2025, 2025 CPD ¶ __, GAO made clear that there are limits to the scope of redactions, and GAO will sustain a protest where there is insufficient evidence that the agency’s actions were reasonable....

View All Insights