Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (3)
- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2)
- Taxation (2)
- United States (2)
- Wealth tax (2)
-
- 527 organizations (1)
- Affordable Care Act (1)
- Campaign finance (1)
- Churches (1)
- Coal (1)
- Commerce Clause (1)
- Congressional practice (1)
- Constitution Welfare clause (1)
- Constitutional law--United States. (1)
- Constitutional restraint (1)
- Cuno (1)
- DaimlerChrysler Corp. (1)
- Dividends (1)
- Equality--Economic aspects (1)
- Exempt organizations (1)
- FECA (1)
- Federal Election Campaign Act (1)
- Federal income tax (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fiscal policy (1)
- Fundamental rights (1)
- Health insurance (1)
- IRC (1)
- IRS (1)
- Income distribution (1)
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Tax Law
Brief Of Amicus Curiae Tax Professors In Support Of Respondent In Moore V. United States, Donald B. Tobin, Ellen P. Aprill
Brief Of Amicus Curiae Tax Professors In Support Of Respondent In Moore V. United States, Donald B. Tobin, Ellen P. Aprill
Faculty Scholarship
Petitioners in Moore v. United States have argued to the Supreme Court that the word “incomes” in the Sixteenth Amendment authorizes only the taxation of “realized” income. Thus, they assert, a repatriation tax (referred to as MRT) in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is invalid because it taxes unrealized gains. While other briefs in the case explain that, as properly understood, the tax at issue taxes only realized gains, this brief counters the petitioners’ Sixteenth Amendment argument. It explains that economists, accountants, and lawyers in the early twentieth century all defined income in broad terms, embracing the definition of …
The Income Tax, The Constitution, And The Unrealized Importance Of Helvering V. Griffiths, Lawrence Zelenak
The Income Tax, The Constitution, And The Unrealized Importance Of Helvering V. Griffiths, Lawrence Zelenak
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Moore v. United States, for the purpose of deciding whether the realization doctrine remains a constitutional limitation on Congress's ability to impose an unapportioned income tax, as the Court held in its famous 1920 decision in Eisner v. Macomber. Although it is natural to look to 1920 and Macomber as the cause of today's uncertain scope of the congressional power to tax income, what did not happen in the Court's 1943 decision in Helvering v. Griffiths is as significant as what did happen in 1920. the presence of Moore on the Court's docket …
The Constitutionality Of A National Wealth Tax, Dawn Johnsen, Walter Dellinger
The Constitutionality Of A National Wealth Tax, Dawn Johnsen, Walter Dellinger
Faculty Scholarship
Economic inequality threatens America’s constitutional democracy. Beyond obvious harms to our nation’s social fabric and people’s lives, soaring economic inequality translates into political inequality and corrodes democratic institutions and values. The coincident, relentless rise of money in politics exacerbates the problem. As elected officials and candidates meet skyrocketing campaign costs by devoting more and more time to political fundraising—and independent expenditures mushroom—Americans lose faith and withdraw from a system widely perceived as beholden to wealthy individuals and corporate interests.
The United States needs innovative approaches to help rebuild foundational, shared understandings of American democracy, the American Dream, and opportunity and …
The Constitutionality Of A National Wealth Tax, Dawn Johnsen, Walter E. Dellinger Iii
The Constitutionality Of A National Wealth Tax, Dawn Johnsen, Walter E. Dellinger Iii
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Catalogs, Alex Stein, Gideon Parchomovsky
The Great And Mighty Tax Law: How The Roberts Court Has Reduced Constitutional Scrutiny Of Taxes And Tax Expenditures, Linda Sugin
The Great And Mighty Tax Law: How The Roberts Court Has Reduced Constitutional Scrutiny Of Taxes And Tax Expenditures, Linda Sugin
Faculty Scholarship
This article compares National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius – the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the individual mandate in Obamacare as a tax, with Arizona Christian Schools v. Winn – the Supreme Court’s decision denying standing to taxpayers with an Establishment Clause challenge to a state tax credit. It argues that these cases aggravate a growing tension between the economic and legal analyses of taxation by reducing the legal significance of economic analysis in constitutional cases. It suggests that Arizona Christian Schools was a truly radical decision because it conceptualized tax expenditures as private action immune from constitutional attack, …
“Early-Bird Special” Indeed!: Why The Tax Anti-Injunction Act Permits The Present Challenges To The Minimum Coverage Provision, Neil S. Siegel, Michael C. Dorf
“Early-Bird Special” Indeed!: Why The Tax Anti-Injunction Act Permits The Present Challenges To The Minimum Coverage Provision, Neil S. Siegel, Michael C. Dorf
Faculty Scholarship
In view of the billions of dollars and enormous effort that might otherwise be wasted, the public interest will be best served if the Supreme Court of the United States decides the present challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) during its October 2011 Term. Potentially standing in the way, however, is the federal Tax Anti-Injunction Act (TAIA), which bars any “suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax.” The dispute to date has turned on the fraught and complex question of whether the ACA's exaction for being uninsured qualifies as a …
Not The Power To Destroy: An Effects Theory Of The Tax Power, Neil S. Siegel, Robert D. Cooter
Not The Power To Destroy: An Effects Theory Of The Tax Power, Neil S. Siegel, Robert D. Cooter
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s “new federalism” decisions impose modest limits on the regulatory authority of Congress under the Commerce Clause. According to those decisions, the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to use penalties to regulate interstate commerce, but not to regulate noncommercial conduct. What prevents Congress from penalizing non-commercial conduct by calling a penalty a tax and invoking the Taxing Clause? The only obstacle is the distinction between a penalty and a tax for purposes of Article I, Section 8. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (NFIB), the Court considered whether the minimum coverage provision in the Patient …
Brief Of Constitutional Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Ernest A. Young
Brief Of Constitutional Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Ernest A. Young
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Post-Cuno Litigation Landscape, Morgan Holcomb, Nicholas Allen Smith
The Post-Cuno Litigation Landscape, Morgan Holcomb, Nicholas Allen Smith
Faculty Scholarship
In 1996, Northeastern University School of Law Professor Peter Enrich wrote a groundbreaking article, in which he argued that certain state tax incentives are unconstitutional as violations of the Commerce Clause. This article begins by describing the constitutional landscape into which Enrich cast his argument, and them turns describe the litigation that Enrich’s article has generated, including the much-watched case, Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., which held the promise of resolving this dormant Commerce Clause question, only to wither away on the vine of standing. Following the discussion of Cuno, this article will turn to an exploration of the litigation that …
Regulate, Don't Eliminate, 527s, Donald B. Tobin
Regulate, Don't Eliminate, 527s, Donald B. Tobin
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Campaign Finance Disclosure And Section 527 Of The Code: A Look At The District Court's Opinion In National Federation Of Republican Assemblies, Donald B. Tobin
Campaign Finance Disclosure And Section 527 Of The Code: A Look At The District Court's Opinion In National Federation Of Republican Assemblies, Donald B. Tobin
Faculty Scholarship
This report examines the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama in National Federation of Republican Assemblies v. United States, which dealt with section 527 political organizations.
Rendering Unto Caesar Or Electioneering For Caesar--Loss Of Church Tax Exemption For Participation In Electoral Politics, Alan L. Feld
Rendering Unto Caesar Or Electioneering For Caesar--Loss Of Church Tax Exemption For Participation In Electoral Politics, Alan L. Feld
Faculty Scholarship
The restriction on church participation in political campaigns contained in the Internal Revenue Code operates uneasily. It appears to serve the useful purpose of separating the spheres of religion and electoral politics. But the separation often is only apparent, as churches in practice signal support for a particular candidate in a variety of rays that historically have not cost them their exemptions. Although the limited enforcement by the Internal Revenue Service has reflected the sensitive nature of the First Amendment values present, the federal government should provide more formal elaboration by statute or regulation. Focus on the use of funds …
An Open Letter To Congressman Gingrich, Bruce Ackerman, Akhil Amar, Jack Balkin, Susan Low Bloch, Philip Chase Bobbitt, Richard Fallon, Paul Kahn, Philip Kurland, Douglas Laycock, Sanford Levinson, Frank Michelman, Michael Perry, Robert Post, Jed Rubenfeld, David Strauss, Cass Sunstein, Harry Wellington
An Open Letter To Congressman Gingrich, Bruce Ackerman, Akhil Amar, Jack Balkin, Susan Low Bloch, Philip Chase Bobbitt, Richard Fallon, Paul Kahn, Philip Kurland, Douglas Laycock, Sanford Levinson, Frank Michelman, Michael Perry, Robert Post, Jed Rubenfeld, David Strauss, Cass Sunstein, Harry Wellington
Faculty Scholarship
We urge you to reconsider your proposal to amend the House Rules to require a three-fifths vote for enactment of laws that increase income taxes. This proposal violates the explicit intentions of the Framers. It is inconsistent with the Constitution's language and structure. It departs sharply from traditional congressional practice. It may generate constitutional litigation that will encourage Supreme Court intervention in an area best left to responsible congressional decision.
Unless the proposal is withdrawn now, it will serve as an unfortunate precedent for the proliferation of supermajority rules on a host of different subjects in the future. Over time, …