Supreme Court Just Issued Sudden Surprise Verdict In Favor Of Trump!

OPINION:  This article contains commentary which may reflect the author’s opinion

A lawsuit to a 2017 tax bill that former President Donald Trump signed that aimed to limit the funding source used to pay for his signature cuts was denied by the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday.

Kathleen and Charles Moore, who tried to stop a $14,729 tax bill assessed against their investment in an offshore company, lost their case in a 7-2 ruling by the justices. The court rejected the Moores’ arguments, holding that Congress had the right to impose a one-time Mandatory Repatriation Tax (MRT) on shareholders holding a 10% stake in foreign companies that generated profits, regardless of whether those profits were received. The Moores claimed they did not realize any profits from their investment and that the collection violates their rights under the 16th Amendment. The Daily Caller reported that this ruling was made.

“The MRT—which attributes the realized and undistributed income of an American-controlled foreign corporation to the entity’s American shareholders, and then taxes the American shareholders on their portions of that income—does not exceed Congress’s constitutional authority,” the majority held.

The majority opinion’s author, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, advised readers to view the ruling narrowly. It applies, he said, to “(i) taxation of the shareholders of an entity, (ii) on the undistributed income realized by the entity, (iii) which has been attributed to the shareholders, (iv) when the entity itself has not been taxed on that income.”

“In other words, our holding applies when Congress treats the entity as a pass-through,” he continued.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), a liberal, immediately seized onto the decision, claiming that the court, which she had earlier denounced as “illegitimate,” had suddenly created a way for her proposal to tax all unrealized gains—something that Judge Brett Kavanaugh has made clear it does not do.

“Right-wing billionaires hoped an obscure legal case would blow up the tax code to avoid paying what they owe, but this effort failed at the Supreme Court. The fight goes on to tax the rich, pass a wealth tax on ultra-millionaires and billionaires, and make the system more fair,” Warren wrote on X.

“Nothing in this opinion should be read to authorize any hypothetical congressional effort to tax both an entity and its shareholders or partners on the same undistributed income realized by the entity,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated in his majority opinion, as reported by the Associated Press.

Clarence Thomas, one of the conservative justices who wrote the majority opinion in the case, disagreed with Neil Gorsuch, saying that the tax was upheld “only by ignoring the question presented.” That “income” under the Sixth Amendment “is only realized income” is something they “should not have hesitated” to say.

“Even as the majority admits to reasoning from fiscal consequences, it apparently believes that a generous application of dicta will guard against unconstitutional taxes in the future,” Thomas wrote. “The majority’s analysis begins with a list of nonexistent taxes that the Court does not today bless, including a wealth tax.”

“But, if the Court is not willing to uphold limitations on the taxing power in expensive cases, cheap dicta will make no difference,” he added.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.






Send this to a friend