Comments on: Harvard Law Professor, Lawrence Tribe, On the Legality of Taxation of AIG Bonuses http://www.pappasontaxes.com/index.php/2009/03/19/harvard-law-professor-lawrence-tribe-on-the-legality-of-taxation-of-aig-bonuses/ Pappas on Taxation Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:09:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Professor Lawrence Tribe has Change of Heart on Legality of AIG Bonus Tax http://www.pappasontaxes.com/index.php/2009/03/19/harvard-law-professor-lawrence-tribe-on-the-legality-of-taxation-of-aig-bonuses/comment-page-1/#comment-976 Professor Lawrence Tribe has Change of Heart on Legality of AIG Bonus Tax Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:14:06 +0000 http://blog.pappastax.com/?p=3540#comment-976 [...] is a follow up post to my recent posts Harvard Professor, Lawrence Tribe, on the Legality of Taxation of AIG Bonuses and Is Congress’ Plan to RetroactivelyTax AIG Bonuses [...] is a follow up post to my recent posts Harvard Professor, Lawrence Tribe, on the Legality of Taxation of AIG Bonuses and Is Congress’ Plan to RetroactivelyTax AIG Bonuses

]]> By: Peter http://www.pappasontaxes.com/index.php/2009/03/19/harvard-law-professor-lawrence-tribe-on-the-legality-of-taxation-of-aig-bonuses/comment-page-1/#comment-892 Peter Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:48:57 +0000 http://blog.pappastax.com/?p=3540#comment-892 PD, thanks for the input. I agree, the bill Tribe describes isn't a simple matter of taxing JUST the AIG bonuses. Doing more than that, might not get the votes. I will check out the Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co case. PD, thanks for the input.

I agree, the bill Tribe describes isn’t a simple matter of taxing JUST the AIG bonuses.

Doing more than that, might not get the votes.

I will check out the Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co case.

]]> By: PD Shaw http://www.pappasontaxes.com/index.php/2009/03/19/harvard-law-professor-lawrence-tribe-on-the-legality-of-taxation-of-aig-bonuses/comment-page-1/#comment-891 PD Shaw Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:04:18 +0000 http://blog.pappastax.com/?p=3540#comment-891 My bias is that I think Professor Tribe is describing a perfect bill whose probability of being implemented through a political process is close to nil. There are also due process clause issues for retroactive litigation, takings clause issues, and equal protection issues. I also wonder if any of the discussion in Baily v. Drexel Furniture Co., a Lochner era case, remains relevant. My bias is that I think Professor Tribe is describing a perfect bill whose probability of being implemented through a political process is close to nil. There are also due process clause issues for retroactive litigation, takings clause issues, and equal protection issues. I also wonder if any of the discussion in Baily v. Drexel Furniture Co., a Lochner era case, remains relevant.

]]>