Today I am going to discuss the constitutionality of the property tax. The Federalist Society organized today’s debate with Indiana law professor David Gamage, who co-authored why a wealth tax is definitely constitutional.
The event, entitled “Would a Wealth Tax Constitutional Model exist?” Is open to the public and takes place practically at 1:30 am CET.
I previously discussed various aspects of the property tax, from its constitutionality to its introduction of what is known as a “captivity tax”. I have also responded to counter arguments from Yale professor Bruce Ackerman.
We are very fortunate to have two highly respected people leading the event. Eileen J. O’Connor of Eileen J. O’Connor Law Firm, PLLC, will host and Robert Carney, Senior Counsel of Caplin & Drysdale, will serve as the interviewer.
As I wrote earlier, I don’t think that wealth tax is definitely constitutional and that this is a much narrower question. Like so many questions, it ultimately comes down to your standard position on such interpretative questions.
At first glance, wealth tax appears to be a “direct tax” which is contrary to the language of Article I, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution and requires that “direct taxes be apportioned among the various states”. However, I am curious to hear what Professor Gamage will learn. He writes and teaches in the field of tax law and tax policy. My focus is on constitutional law and history. So we come to this question from different academic perspectives, but that should only make this discussion more interesting. The wealth tax controversy is intriguing because it mixes tax and constitutional elements.
You can register for the event here.