Power to tax is unlimited, then?Reader comment on: Early Thoughts on the ObamaCare Ruling Submitted by Amarsir (United States), Jun 28, 2012 11:24 People have been saying for months that "if it was called a tax it would be OK." So I don't blame Roberts for not wanting to play a vocabulary game. Bad laws can still be Constitutional (though I'm beginning to doubt that the opposite will ever be ruled, ever again.) But, how did "non-participation in commerce" become a valid basis for taxation? As I understand it: Indirect tax is based on an event, like an excise or an estate tax. Haven't they therefore decided that a non-event is defined as a "taxable event"? That strikes me as a worse case of double speak than which word is used. Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing. Other reader comments on this item
Comment on this item |
ADVERTISEMENT |