Radical tax reform, the Constitution, and the conscientious legislator

Article Abstract:

Erik M. Jensen's contention that two proposals for income tax reform, the flat tax and the unlimited savings allowance tax, would violate the Direct-Tax Clauses of the Constitution is wrong on two counts. First, a conscientious legislator could conclude that neither reform proposal is a direct tax requiring apportionment. Second, either proposal could be validly regarded as forms of income tax permissible under the 16th amendment.

Analysis, Criticism and interpretation, Income tax, Jensen, Erik M.

---

Taxation and the Constitution

Article Abstract:

The direct tax clauses of Article I of the US Constitution should be strictly interpreted so as not to impede tax reform. These clauses require that direct taxes be apportioned according to population, but if literally applied they could cause poor states to pay more than rich states. A historical review of relevant case law suggests that the efforts of legal scholars to revive a broad reading of the clauses is misguided.

Tax law, Demographic aspects, Tax incidence

---

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: The original understanding of the Takings Clause and the political process. The curious resurrection of custom: beach access and judicial takings
• Abstracts: The many faces of mediation confidentiality. Mediation and the Constitution
• Abstracts: Creating competition policy: Betty Bock and the development of antitrust institutions. The quality of appointments and the capability of the Federal Trade Commission
• Abstracts: Rethinking personal jurisdiction and choice of law in multistate mass torts. Innovation in the interstices of the final judgment rule: a demurrer to Professor Burbank
• Abstracts: What the poor owe the rich. Electricity markets: should the rest of the world adopt the United Kingdom's reforms?

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.