Originally published at: Supreme Court Decision Spares Potential Future Wealth Tax
The Supreme Court Thursday ruled not to redefine “income” — a move, pushed aggressively by Justice Neil Gorsuch during oral arguments, that would have headed off various wealth tax proposals that have gained steam on the left, and been a gift to the very wealthy and corporations. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the majority, in…
1 Like
“start the discussion” said the red link at the bottom of the story. so here I am… will the comments be open now?
16 Likes
Yeah, somebody flipped a switch.
9 Likes
“Sensing that upholding the MRT cedes additional ground to Congress, . . ." Thomas wrote
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes - Article I, §8. Apparently Justice Thomas is afraid that ceding to Congress the authority the Constitution explicitly grants to Congress will impinge on the Court’s newly assumed role as a super-legislature that cannot be questioned or challenged.
39 Likes
I suspect that @discobot was keeping track of all those disaffected with the work it was doing.
Now, it’s payback time.
9 Likes
Hi! To find out what I can do, say @discobot display help.
4 Likes
Victim of a high-tech lynching Thomas couldn’t be more cynical and arrogant in every goddamn move he makes. Enjoying lording it over every libtard, right, Clarence?
16 Likes
and yet, he’ll keep trying.
9 Likes
The fight is over the 16th amendment:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Taxes that weren’t apportioned by population (like an income tax) were unconstitutional prior to the 16th Amendment. Thomas et. al. are trying to narrow the definition of ‘income’ such that it excludes the ways wealthy people actually make their money (through things like capital gains rather than a salary). Doing so would make any form on progressive taxation on those sources of income unconstitutional.
Looks like a few of the rightwing Justices weren’t ready to blow up large swaths of the tax code yet.
25 Likes
Yes, it was enlightening and good to get the transparent views of associated justices Harlan Crow and Lenard Leo on the record.
13 Likes
making them cough up around $14,000 (on over $500,000 in gains
I hope they had to pay out the keester in attorney’s fees!
16 Likes
Speaking of taxes, a whole lot of things expiring in 2025 are going to hit ordinary folks hard. Unlike the breaks for the $$$ which were made permanent, things like the larger standard deduction and child tax credits will be gone and people are going to owing more. It will probably come as a bit surprise to most of them.
Another critical reason we need to get/keep the Dems in control where they belong.
10 Likes
His fat ass was determined to make everyone pay for every slight he received and imagined during his entire useless life. The shame and dishonor of this man, who holds the seat vacated by the towering figure of Thurgood Marshall will forever be a blight on the court.
16 Likes
That’s what I find hilarious about this story. They made $500,000 and flipped out over $14,000? Fuck these entitled fucks.
24 Likes
The giveaway to the uber rich not only capped state and local tax deductions at $10,000 (which really fucks up people in states like CA, NY and NJ) but it also eliminated deductible alimony and a whole bunch of other deductions aimed at the middle class. Why the fucking democrats aren’t playing that up as much as abortion is beyond me.
4 Likes
This is an interesting case involving an obscure provision of the Trump tax cuts. The right wing fear is that some future tax will hit unrealized gains. Having dealt with the Federal Estate tax and with local property taxes which tax unrealized gains, the idea of valuing ordinary investment assets every year is fraught. The only people who benefit are the accountants and appraisers.
Imagine I have just watched my Nvidia stock’s value explode and my $40,000 investment is worth $500,000. I am still holding the stock, but the government wants me to pay a tax based on today’s valuation. Not only am I forced to sell some part of my Nvidia stock to pay the tax but what happens if next week Apple or Microsoft find a better, cheaper chipmaker.
6 Likes
Uhhhhh, $14,000 is 14 years of nanny pay!
4 Likes
I agree, but that will not be an easy task. The 16th Amendment applies to “incomes, from whatever source derived,” and Congress has given an expansive definition to “gross income.” (see: 26 US Code §61)
5 Likes
SALT (State and Local Tax) restrictions go away - that’s a good thing. The rest of it? Not so much. Plus there are some corporate tax changes that 140 other countries have agreed to a restructuring that was done and now our side of it will go away.
It is going to be an incredibly hot mess.
This is what Sen. Warren has been on about and no one seems to notice.
Faux News reported on it. So did Bloomberg and other financial news outlets. Going through my Google search (very unscientific), HuffPost and Yahoo News are about it. WaPo only reports on what the GQP wants.
6 Likes
Do you really think someone like Pelosi is gonna bitch about income and taxes?