`Section 2(a)(16) USED PROPERTY- The term `used property' means--
`(A) property on which the tax imposed by section 101 has been collected and for which no credit has been allowed under section 203, and
B) property that was held other than for a business purpose (as defined in section 102(b)) on December 31, 2004.
I see the word "and" between (A) and (B) not an "or". Doesn't that mean to be considered "used" a property would have to meet both of those requirement (was held on Dec 31, 2004 AND the tax has been collected).
You are reading it wrong. In the particular case "and" is meant as as a term of inclusion.
Used property is both, not "or"
A) Property on which the [NRST] has been collected,After December 31,( i.e. from January 2005, the first day the NRST goes into effect)
and
B) property that was held prior to the NRST going into effect.
You can't very well collect NRST implemented by Section 101, that does not go into effect on January 1st 2005.
B) is a grandfather clause.
Taxes were paid out of income prior to the NRST becoming effective. "Tax once but only once" is the rule of interpretation to be used by the courts and tax authorities if you look in the bill interpretation section.
But I'm glad you point that out, gives me something to pass onto AFFT that's worth looking into, and see if they can have that changed to an "OR" for clarity with the introduction of the bill in the next session of Congress.
Of course that is what committee markup is for, but why leave all the fun to Congress Critters who are generally to lazy to read bills anyway, and will mess it up if you give then any chance to at all.