Taxation-Federal Commons^™

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 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

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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

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, …