A | WASHINGTON -- Charles and Kathleen Moore are about to have their day in the Supreme Court over a $15,000 tax bill they contend is unconstitutional.The couple from Redmond, Washington, claim they had to pay the money because of their investment in an Indian company from which, as Charles Moore, 62, said in a sworn statement, they “have never received a distribution, dividend, or other payment.”But significant parts of the story they have told to reach this point seem at odds with public records.The Moores are the public face of a high court case backed by business and conservative political interests that could call into question other parts of the U.S. tax code and rule out a much-discussed but never-enacted tax on wealth. The case is set for arguments on Dec. 5. The Moores are the latest example of plaintiffs whose lawsuits seem to simply be exercising their legal rights, but whose cases are backed by others with enormous amounts of money or a consequential social issue at stake. The Moores sought help from the anti-regulatory Competitive Enterprise Institute.Underscoring the case's importance at a recent Heritage Foundation event, lawyer Paul Clement said, "The constitutionality of a wealth tax may well be decided in the context of this case.”Details of the Moores' involvement with the company, initially called KisanKraft Machine Tools Private Limited, were first reported by Tax Notes, which caters to tax professionals. The public documents are filings with the Indian government.At issue in the case is a provision of the 2017 tax bill enacted by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed by then-President Donald Trump. The law applies to companies that are owned by Americans, but do their business in foreign countries. It imposes a one-time tax on investors' shares of profits that have not been passed along to them, in order to offset other tax benefits. The measure is expected to generate $340 billion in tax revenues.The Moores, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and conservative think tanks, contend that the provision violates the 16th Amendment, which allows the federal government to impose an income tax on Americans.The $15,000 tax bill was for the Moores' share of KisanKraft's profits."If you haven’t received any income, how can you be required to pay income taxes?” Charles Moore asks in a video posted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.But far from being a passive investor with no influence over the company, Moore, who worked at Microsoft during his career in software development, served on KisanKraft's board of directors for five years.“The story the Moores told about Charles' involvement with KisanKraft is directly at odds with the fiduciary responsibilities of an individual holding a board seat for an Indian company,” Mindy Herzfeld, a professor of tax practice at the University of Florida law school, wrote in Tax Notes.And there are other indications of Moore's more extensive involvement with KisanKraft than his testimony indicated. The company paid for his travel to India four times and he made at least two investments beyond the $40,000 stake he put up in 2006.Moore also was prepared to invest an another roughly $250,000. That money was ultimately returned by KisanKraft, along with 12% interest.One other inconsistency is that while the Moores say they jointly invested the money, only Charles Moore's name appears in company documents.The couple and their lawyers did not disclose any of that information in legal filings in three different federal courts, including the Supreme Court.“The original declaration on which the case is built is full of lies,” said Reuven Avi-Yonah, an international tax expert at the University of Michigan law school.In a brief conversation with The Associated Press, Kathleen Moore said she and her husband would not discuss the case and referred questions to their lawyers. Andrew Grossman, the Moore's lead attorney, did not respond to messages seeking comment.The omissions, along with the Moores' failure to take advantage of other legal options that would have deferred, if not eliminated, their tax liability make Avi-Yonah and other experts in international tax law suspect the case was manufactured to get at a larger issue, the tax on billionaires that has been proposed by some prominent Democrats but never enacted.A wealth tax would apply not to the incomes of the very richest Americans, but their assets, like stock holdings, that now only get taxed when they are sold. “There really was no reason for the court to take it on, other than to send a signal to warn off the Congress from passing a billionaire tax," said Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.Other provisions of the tax code could be upended by the court's decision, including measures relating to partnerships, limited liability companies and other business formations, Rosenthal said.Changes to those provisions also could affect some justices' finances. Chief Justice John Roberts holds a one-eighth interest worth up to $15,000 in an Irish partnership that owns a cottage in county Limerick, Ireland, and Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, Ginni, owns a limited liability company that generated between $50,000 and $100,000 in income last year from Nebraska real estate, according to the justices' financial disclosure forms. Two other recent Supreme Court cases advanced by conservative interests also raised questions about whether facts had been manipulated to get the disputes in front of the court. One of those involved a wedding website designer in Colorado who did not want to work with same-sex couples and a public high school football coach in Washington who wanted to pray on the field.Rosenthal said that “the ugly facts matter” and that the justices could return the Moores' case to a lower court without ruling on it.Charles Moore said in his sworn statement that he agreed to invest in the company that was being formed by his friend and former colleague at Microsoft, Ravindra “Ravi” Kumar Agrawal, because he liked the business plan and trusted his friend.“Moreover, I thought KisanKraft was formed for a noble purpose and had the potential to improve the lives of small and marginal farmers in India,” Moore said. The case had already kicked up ethical questions. Senate Democrats had asked Justice Samuel Alito to step aside from the case because of his interactions with David Rivkin, another lawyer who also is representing the Moores. The Democrats said Alito had cast doubt on his ability to judge the case fairly because he sat for four hours of Wall Street Journal opinion page interviews with an editor at the newspaper and Rivkin.Alito rejected the demands in a four-page statement issued by the court in which he said there “is no valid reason” for his recusal. ___Associated Press writer Fatima Hussein contributed to this report.___This story has been corrected to reflect that Mindy Herzfeld is a professor of tax practice at the University of Florida law school, not director of the master's program in international tax.。 编者按：2026年上半年已经过去，RISC-V产业在标准规范迭代、高性能产品发布、应用扩展、生态适配、区域合作等方面接连取得进展。在人工智能时代，智能体拉升了CPU在数据中心的价值，为RISC-V的高性能突围带来机遇；同时，AI终端的长尾市场，也为已经在低功耗、可按需定制等需求上得到验证的RISC-V打开更多市场空间。在这一年的中场时段，《中国电子报》梳理了RISC-V产业上半年的标志性事件，邀您一起回顾来时之路，更期待未来之道。 RVA23.1完成内部评审 01 2026年1月，RISC-V Working Group宣布，RVA23.1与RVB23.1配置文件已进入内部评审期（internal review）。本次评审为期两周，自2026年1月27日起，至2026年2月11日结束。作为小版本增量更新，RVA23.1在完整继承RVA23所有内容的基础上，引入了PTE保留软件位、“双重陷阱”、监管者计数器委派、控制转移记录和服务质量标识符5个可选扩展，以较低成本增强RVA23在特定复杂场景下的能力。
B | 香港RISC-V联盟成立 02 3月20日，香港RISC-V联盟（简称HKRVA）正式成立。联盟将充分整合香港地区的独特优势，联动全球芯片设计企业、终端应用厂商、科研机构、投资机构及标准组织，构建“信息互通、资源共享、项目共推”的协作网络，推动香港地区成为全球RISC-V产业交流与合作的关键枢纽。创始成员包括港投公司、赛昉科技、香港中华煤气、中国移动香港、超聚变及开源国际，赛昉科技为联盟首届会长单位。联盟将合力推动国际联动与全球标准对接、前沿技术与应用场景探索、跨界融合与产业规模应用、专业教育与人才梯队培育四个维度的工作。 RISC-V高性能产品持续刷新基准测试记录 03 3月24日，阿里巴巴达摩院发布新一代旗舰CPU产品玄铁C950。该产品采用RISC-V架构，工作主频达3.2GHz，单核通用性能在Specint2006基准测试中突破70分，刷新全球RISC-V CPU性能纪录。玄铁团队还与全球云计算操作系统提供商Canonical宣布，将基于玄铁C950平台构建面向服务器和云场景的商业化Ubuntu解决方案，覆盖虚拟化、网络存储、数据库及AI等关键基础软件。达摩院首席科学家孟建熠在现场表示，只有推出高性能标杆产品，RISC-V才能真正抓住AI时代的机遇，与传统架构同台竞争，打开更广阔的市场。 “香山”+“如意”筑牢RISC-V生态核心底座 04 3月26日，中国科学院正式发布“香山”开源高性能RISC-V处理器系统与“如意”RISC-V原生操作系统，标志着我国主导的两大RISC-V开源根社区已然成形。
C | 据悉，“香山”包含最新一代开源RISC-V处理器核“香山·昆明湖”，实测性能达16.5分/GHz，并搭配全球首个数据中心开源片上互连网络“温榆河”，可支持256核互联，成为先进计算生态的开源共性底座。“如意”RISC-V原生操作系统（openRuyi）率先构建面向RISC-V标准与特性的统一验证平台，首次实现对RVA23高性能国际标准的操作系统原生支持。 英伟达投资SiFive 05 4月9日，RISC-V处理器IP供应商SiFive宣布完成4亿美元G轮超额认购融资，旨在加速其高性能数据中心产品路线图。
D | 本轮股权融资由Atreides Management领投，英伟达等企业和投资机构跟投。今年1月，SiFive宣布将在其高性能数据中心级解决方案中采用并集成NVIDIA NVLink Fusion，使SiFive计算平台能够利用一致性、高带宽的互连技术直接连接英伟达GPU和加速器。 Ubuntu 26.04 LTS全面支持RVA23 06 4月23日，Ubuntu 26.04 LTS正式发布（代号“Resolute Raccoon”），是Canonical第11个长期支持版本。Ubuntu 26.04 LTS将整个软件仓库的架构基线提升至RVA23规范，带来了对可伸缩向量扩展和指针掩码的强制支持，使RISC-V的执行性能更接近ARM和x86，可选扩展包括控制流完整性和向量加密。Ubuntu 26.04 LTS将以RVA23为统一长期支持基线，使RISC-V创新团队可以在混合架构环境中充分利用该平台，并为厂商从研发迈向商业量产提供平台支持。 多个RISC-V车规芯片产业组织成立 07 RISC-V正加速向车规半导体领域渗透。4月26日，中国汽车芯片产业创新战略联盟 RISC-V车规芯片专委会正式成立。专委会汇聚汽车及汽车电子、芯片设计、IP、软件工具链、制造、测试认证等全产业链核心力量，旨在推动RISC-V架构在智能汽车领域规模化落地，构建自主可控、开放协同的车规芯片技术标准与产业生态。5月21日，中电标协RISC-V工委会车规RISC-V芯片应用组揭牌成立，将深耕车规芯片研发、标准制定、生态搭建及应用推广，贯通技术研发至整车应用全链条，助推国内车规级芯片产业提质升级。 符合RVA23规范的RISC-V芯片实现量产交付 08 4月30日，进迭时空RISC-V AI CPU K3量产交付，率先实现符合RVA23规范的芯片量产。RVA23规范定义了64位处理器的一系列约束性硬件功能，旨在促进一致的软硬件接口。这些约束性功能包括用于AI工作负载的向量计算、高级安全扩展和虚拟机管理程序支持等。
E | 据悉，今年以来，奕斯伟计算、灵睿智芯、芯来科技、蓝芯算力等多家RISC-V芯片厂商均在加速推动符合RVA23规范的项目。 RISC-V服务器平台1.0规范获批 09 5月6日，RISC-V服务器平台规范1.0获批发布，定义了适配高性能RISC-V平台的统一基线标准。该规范整合多项现有成熟标准，包括RVA23架构规范、服务器级SoC要求、基于启动参考规范（BRS）实现的UEFI/ACPI启动体系、超级二进制接口（SBI）规范，以及可信根、安全启动、设备认证、基板管理控制器（BMC）管理等新一代安全基础能力。依托这套统一规范，操作系统与虚拟机监控器开发者可基于单一可移植二进制镜像完成全域适配。 openKylin成功适配RISC-V具身智能人形机器人 10 今年5月，openKylin系统驱动的具身智能人形机器人正式亮相，标志着国产开源操作系统在RISC-V架构人形机器人领域实现从技术适配到真机落地的跨越。本次适配计划以“openKylin操作系统+RISC-V架构+ROS机器人软件栈”为核心技术底座，聚焦真机环境下的系统运行、运动控制、感知交互等核心能力验证。适配过程中，OpenLoong开源社区、超睿科技、上海苦芽科技、麒麟软件、先进计算与关键软件海河实验室等成员单位提供了可验证机器人硬件本体及整机系统环境、RISC-V高性能计算平台、聚焦机器人运动控制与交互算法优化、面向机器人场景的openKylin RISC-V操作系统等核心能力，为具身智能人形机器人的产业化落地筑牢开源技术底座。
F | 作者丨张心怡 编辑丨邱江勇 美编丨马利亚 监制丨连晓东。
Current article:http://ft3mc3z.cibianpangjujiusu.cyou/bchaad/20260826/566703.html
Published on:02:30:57
