Law Commons^™

Graduate Education And The Taxation Of Tuition Reductions, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

While the legislation popularly (or unpopularly) known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was working its way through Congress, many colleges and universities were afraid that the repeal of Internal Revenue Code section 117(d), as provided in the House version of the bill, would have catastrophic effects on American graduate education. The concern was that, after repeal, graduate teaching and research assistants would be taxed on their tuition reductions, and the measure of the income would be determined using the stated tuition figure—the sticker price—for the academic institution. Section 117(d) survived, but it could come under challenge …

In Search Of Smarter Homeowner Subsidies, Matthew Rossman

Faculty Publications

Critics have long assailed the federal tax code’s principal homeowner subsidies as lucrative tax breaks for upper income households that are essentially worthless to those financially constrained from purchasing a home. This article examines the subsidies through a different lens and reveals another serious flaw. It demonstrates how the homeowner subsidies, which represent a massive federal investment in homeownership, do very little to contain and instead probably increase costs on others that result from certain types of housing choices and that other federal policies seek to remedy. These negative housing externalities include: (i) blight, deterioration, and public health risks in …

The Power To Tax, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

The Power to Tax, chapter 1 in The Powers of the U.S. Congress: Where Constitutional Authority Begins and Ends, Brien Hallett, editor: Copyright © 2016 by ABC-CLIO LLC

This is a chapter in a book intended largely for an undergraduate audience. The chapter outlines the key terms necessary for understanding the congressional power to tax under the U.S. Constitution; the history and development of our understanding of that power; and the limitations (or possible limitations) on the power.

Did The Sixteenth Amendment Ever Matter? Does It Matter Today?, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This article, prepared for a symposium on the centennial of the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, argues that the Amendment was legally and politically necessary in 1913, if there was going to be a modern income tax, and that it remains significant today. The Amendment provides that “taxes on incomes” need not be apportioned among the states on the basis of population, as would otherwise be required for direct taxes. An apportioned income tax would be an absurdity, and, if there were no Amendment, Congress could not enact an unapportioned tax on income from property, the sort of tax that …

The Tiley Trilogy And U.S. Anti-Avoidance Law, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This article examines an influential set of articles, written by Professor John Tiley in the late 1980s, about anti-avoidance doctrines developed by US courts. The trilogy of articles was written for a British audience, as part of Tiley’s efforts to resist importation of US doctrines (“bleeding chunks of alien doctrine,” as he put it) into the UK, but his ideas remain relevant to tax theorists in all countries, including the US. The article also examines the work of the Aaronson Committee, of which Tiley was a member, which successfully recommended in 2011 that the UK adopt a general anti-avoidance rule …

The Individual Mandate And The Taxing Power, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This article, prepared for a symposium at the Salmon P. Chase College of Law, Northern Kentucky University, considers whether the Taxing Clause provides an alternative constitutional basis, as some have recently argued, for the individual mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 21 - the requirement, going into effect in 214, that most individuals acquire satisfactory health insurance or pay a penalty. The article concludes that the Taxing Clause arguments are misguided. At best, the Clause can provide authority for the penalty, not for the mandate as a whole. Furthermore, the article questions whether the penalty will …

A Tax Or Not A Tax: That Is The Question, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This piece is part of the author’s probably misguided effort to take seriously the Sixteenth Amendment phrase “taxes on incomes.” The piece (in form a letter to the editor, but complete with footnotes!) responds to a reader who had noted that, because of a cap, the basic Social Security “tax” does not reach higher levels of income. Because the author had earlier argued that a tax “on” incomes should result in higher tax liability for higher-income persons, it might seem that the Social Security levy is unconstitutional (or the author just wrong). This piece makes several points: (1) The Social …

Quirky Constitutional Provisions Matter: The Tonnage Clause, Polar Tankers, And State Taxation Of Commerce, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

In Polar Tankers, Inc. v. City of Valdez, the Supreme Court in 29 struck down a City of Valdez levy that was in form a personal-property tax, but that primarily reached oil tankers using Valdez’s ports, on the ground that the levy violated the Tonnage Clause of the Constitution (“No State, shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage”). The Tonnage Clause, part of the constitutional structure intended to ensure federal primacy in regulating commerce, was once a staple of litigation, but Polar Tankers was the first Supreme Court case decided under the Clause since 1935. Polar …

Murphy V. Internal Revenue Service, The Meaning Of 'Income,' And Sky-Is-Falling Tax Commentary, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This article examines the widely noted D.C. Circuit case, Murphy v. Internal Revenue Service, where a panel twice got itself hopelessly entangled in the relationship between the meaning of “income” in the Internal Revenue Code and its meaning in the Sixteenth Amendment. At issue was whether a whistle-blower's recovery for emotional distress could be reached by the income tax. The first time around, the panel concluded that the recovery could not be taxed constitutionally because it was not income. The second time, apparently after having visited another planet, the very same panel concluded that the recovery could be taxed whether …

News Flash: The Income Tax Remains Constitutional, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.