Analysis of Uniformity Clause Law

[Cpt Banjo]

The Congressional Research Service has written an analysis of the constitutionality of linking tax benefits to geographical variations on the cost of living:

http://taxprof.typepad.com/files/crs-he ... ormity.pdf

I came across a law review article several years ago (which I can't seem to locate now) in which the author argued that variations in the application of tax law among the federal circuit courts of appeals violated the Uniformity Clause -- e.g., you can't have the 2d and 9th Circuits applying different rules to a particular issue. To avoid this problem, he suggested having a single intermediate appeals court handle all tax appeals. I don't necessarily believe that a court would buy this argument (try persuading the 9th that they have to follow the 2d's prior opinion), but it's an interesting point.

[SteveSy]

Ptasynski is one of the most egregious examples of the Supreme Court violating its duty to follow the constitution and prevent an over zealous government. That case along with Wickard v. Filburn have set a horrible standard. A standard that will be used to provide the government with unconstitutional powers beyond compare.

The constitution doesn't say uniformity only applies as long as congress isn't discriminating. It simply says all indirect taxes must be uniform, furthermore the founders never once mentioned such a provision. The courts have made the constitution almost meaningless at this point. I wouldn't doubt that giving CA, or any State drowning in red ink, a tax holiday wouldn't even violate the uniformity clause at this point considering the courts verbal acrobatics used in Ptasynski. Hopefully the country will swing hard the other way next election or the government will do enough to go over the line to where people decide its hopeless and it's time to start over.