My wife is one of the nation's top tax Lawyers...

[brooklynite]

Last night, we were discussing Congress' request for Trump's tax returns

1. On the one hand, the law is clear that Congress has a right to request any citizen's tax returns.

2. On the other hand, there is a legal understanding that requests for information must be in furtherance of a legislative purpose.

3. On the other, other hand, the Courts have generally given Congess broad leeway is defining what legislative purpose means.

[ananda]

1. I consider impeachment a legislative purpose!

!!!

[treestar]

5. +1

It is one of their proper purposes

[Joe941]

52. This.

[uponit7771]

64. +1

[safeinOhio]

2. We are about to see if

this is a land of laws or a land of trump.

[Eyeball_Kid]

19. Exactly. It's a moment of monumental importance.

If rulings protect Trump, then the Constitution will inevitably unravel into a system in which the Executive Branch will become superior to the other two branches, and will be able to overrule any legislation or Court decision, based upon a newly developing precedent.

In other words, Trump will have initiated a REVOLUTION in which the nation abandons the Constitution in favor of Unitary Executive Rule. This would mean that the Chief Executive can overrule ANY legal decision by Congress or the Judicial Branch. Trump then becomes a dictator.

This possibility is real, and it's in our collective faces. The nation is one or two decisions away from authoritarian rule and the abolition of elections as a legitimate mechanism for the transfer of power.

[pangaia]

39. You are 100% right.

I've been afraid of this since Nov 2016.

[Beartracks]

51. All Americans must remember when voting: Republicans are OK with that. n/t

[hlthe2b]

3. Yes, all true. It appears that the Ways and Means Chair has crossed t's and dotted i's on this.

Is your wife opposing this?

[brooklynite]

11. Why would she do that?

[hlthe2b]

13. You didn't provide any context for the discussion, so that's why I asked.

As a tax lawyer, she could have been expressing a deep concern that tax returns remain private. I certainly don't believe that to be the case with those holding the highest offices, but I guess it is a position.

[brooklynite]

18. She's not that kind of tax lawyer...

She does tax implications of corporate financial transactions.

[FakeNoose]

4. Good info, thanks!

Now we wait and see.

[eShirl]

6. does oversight count as a legislative purpose?

guessing yes

[hughee99]

20. It would certainly if the purpose was to investigate the IRS.

It’s a harder sell if the purpose is to “oversee” the tax returns of specific individuals.

From the sounds of Rep. Neal’s statement the other day, it seemed like he was doing it to ensure people’s trust in the IRS, but it doesn’t seem like that’s really the intention.

[KPN]

21. My thought exactly. How could it not be?

[plimsoll]

36. Probably, but the emolument clause is most applicable.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.


I think the problem may be that Trump didn't accept "present[s], Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever" from the strict legal definitions of "King, Prince, or foreign State." The interactions always seem to be with quasi criminal organizations with connections to the Russian government, but not actually part of it.

I don't think the framers really considered that a foreign state could wind up being a shell corporation for a criminal enterprise. The law they are invoking seems to date from the Teapot Dome scandal, essentially the last time we had an administration that was a cover for corporate corruption.

[UniteFightBack]

7. But is says the IRS SHALL ....shall furnish....doesn't that kinda change things? It's not shall

furnish for xyz reason...it's just flat out you ask and then the IRS Shall....right? Doesn't that one specific word make all the difference??????

[LiberalFighter]

43. That is how I read it and I how understand the legal meaning.

[kentuck]

58. Could the "Secretary" be held in contempt of Congress if he does not obey the will of the Congress?

I would think so.

[TheBlackAdder]

8. Last night, someone on Rachel's show said it was to verify IRS is properly handling Pres returns.

.

The returns would not be made public.

.

[onenote]

9. Question: did Neal err in sending the request to the IRS rather than Mnuchin

I know why Neal sent it to the IRS Commissioner not Mnuchin -- but the statute on its face states that upon written request, "the Secretary" shall furnish the committee with the asked for returns.

In the end, isn't it up to Mnuchin, not the IRS Commissioner?

[Historic NY]

17. Pushing it up the chain...

[KPN]

23. All federal law says "the Secretary". That

doesn’t mean all transactions with a federal department are conducted directly with “the Secretary”. Most of them are conducted, carried out, and decided at the local office level via delegations of authority. Congressional requests/inquiries are typically directed to subordinate Bureau Chiefs or Directors, and in many cases directly to the appropriate regional or State executives (directors) for those bureaus.

[NurseJackie]

10. ...

[lapucelle]

22. Should the "l" in "lawyer" be capitalized?

Is it a title, like "mayor" or "duchess" or simply a noun?

Those rules have become so vague in this post-Trump-tweeting reality we now live in.

[KPN]

24. lol ... or is it LOL?

[lapucelle]

25. Next thing you know, people will be capitalizing the "d" in "donor".

[NurseJackie]

29. Oh, I certainly hope not. That would be just TOO pretentious!

Next thing you know, people will be capitalizing the "d" in "donor".

Oh, I certainly hope not. That would be just a little TOO transparently pretentious and unnecessary.

[lapucelle]

32. ...

[Tipperary]

40. I wonder if the "Lawyer" knows she is being written about here.

Personally, I would not like that. But of course, every one is different.

Edit to capitalize lawyer, lol.

[LanternWaste]

63. "Too pretentious?" Challenge accepted!

I'm guessing a Thursday post will give us an anecdote about tea with the queen. Or maybe, Tea with the queen.

[NurseJackie]

65. We are amused!

[MineralMan]

30. Huh? What's that about?

[karynnj]

12. Doesn't the Congress also have oversight responsibility?

When the tax cuts passed, including more real estate breaks, Trump claimed the tax cut would not help him.

[dchill]

14. They could investigate legally required divestiture.

[Raven123]

15. Kind of like firing the FBI Director

On one hand the President has the legal authority to do so.

On the other hand there is an understanding that he (or she) will do for reasons that serve the Country, and not to prevent investigation of criminal activity.

[kentuck]

16. Protecting our national security...

Last edited Sat Apr 6, 2019, 11:53 AM - Edit history (1)

...could (should) be a legislative purpose.

[MyOwnPeace]

27. Fixed it!

SHOULD be......a legislative purpose!

Unfortunately, for the past few years it was not.

[dlk]

26. I Would Say Uncovering Self-Dealing by the President is a Critical Legislative Purpose

So is money laundering and bribery by foreign governments, while neglecting to pay any taxes on the income. There is a very long list of legitimate legislative purposes for the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee requesting Trump's personal and business returns. My money is on Richie Neal.

[mgardener]

28. We all realize

That this all could have been avoided if..
The REPUBLICANS had done their damn jobs and demanded Trump release his taxes when he became the nominee.
Just like Hillary and Tim Caine did

[kentuck]

31. Why didn't they do that?

It seems they were operating under some grand illusion of a marketplace where big businessmen are granted reprieves from following the rules of everyone else? The people's right to know whether or not their leaders are in bed with foreign interests was ignored by the Republican Party.

[jmowreader]

37. Probably because the KGB has blackmail photos on all of them

[stillcool]

47. the GOP does not follow...

any rules, they just make them for everybody else.

[LiberalFighter]

45. By then it was too late.

They should pushed for all of their candidates to release them. When he became the nominee they were stuck with him. But they didn't care.

[DFW]

33. It all depends on how they define a "legislative" purpose.

I would think that in connection of a few House members proposing laws further restricting Presidents from conducting self-enriching schemes while in office, that would be an easy enough "legislative purpose" to put forward.

[Wellstone ruled]

34. So,we have a double standard at play.

The previous Chairman,Congressman Brady,pull the Returns on 31 people who worked at the IRS when the Rethugs attacked that agency. Golly gee willickers,I guess if you belong to a certain Political Party you are protected differently than others.

The 1921 law was written to protect our Country from the likes of Harding,only this time the name is Trump.

[empedocles]

35. Regardless of the law - trump will never stop resisting.

[kentuck]

38. Democrats in Congress need to understand...

...that Donald Trump will do nothing unless he is forced to do it. Thats his M.O..

[AlexSFCA]

41. It's a long shot, IMO

I think if there is a court case in which IRS can be subpoenaed as part of discovery process then we got a better chance. In either case, this request is going to take a very long time going through the court system all the way to SC, we are lucky if we get his tax returns before 2020 elections but I wouldn’t count on it.

[Pepsidog]

42. Courts are not going to look at the Congress's motive for requesting his taxes. Should the court

politicize this issue it will do irreparable harm to its legitimacy. The law authorizing the release of anybody’s taxes to the Ways and Means Commiitee is clear and unambiguous. The legislative intent when passing the law was clear as well.

[octoberlib]

44. Congress was given this power due to Warren Harding and the Teapot Dome Scandal.

As long as Dems can prove a need , I'd think there'd be no problem.

[RANDYWILDMAN]

46. This is a complete joke!

His taxes should have been released before he ran. It is no joke the every candidate since Nixon has released theirs....except Trump.

This is part of his screening for the job and should have been done long ago.

The actual interest is the crimes or patterns of crimes that was decribed by his personal attorney Michael Cohen as he testified under oath before congress.

[JHB]

48. Well, "every candidate" technically speaking, but Romney's barely counts

One year and one partial, both well within the timeframe in which they could be amended after they were no longer in the spotlight.

Not to mention, it was Republican acceptance of Romney's half-assed figleaf disclosure that opened the door to Trump's blowing it off entirely with no consequences.

[Mariana]

57. The people who voted for Trump

didn't want to see his tax returns before the election. They don't want to see them now. If they do get released, and clearly show that he's a liar and/or a criminal, they won't care about that, either, and will enthusiastically vote for him again. They'll write him in if he isn't on the ballot. They'll write him in even if he's dead. It's a freaking cult.

[MichMan]

50. Not very familiar with this law, so maybe someone can clarify

Last edited Sat Apr 6, 2019, 04:04 PM - Edit history (1)

From my understanding this law allowing the House Ways & Means to request the tax returns of any American has been in place 95 years. How often has it ever been used in all that time?

Point #1 states it is clear that Congress has a right to request tax returns of any citizen. I have seen previous posts where people say there is no ambiguity because it states "shall"

My main question is regarding point #2. Does the law actually state that requests for information must be in furtherance of legislative purpose ? Who decides if they are or are not based on what criteria? It appears that these are somewhat contradictory to me.

So does congress need to supply a valid reason for asking for them or don't they?

[at140]

56. It will be used by a future right wing Congress

To expose anyone they don't like. Just like McConnell is using what Reid put in place in the Senate.

[dsc]

60. I heard on the radio yesterday that Rockefeller and Ford

both had their tax returns requested and complied under this law.

[bluestarone]

53. I wished it said SHALL release within 2 weeks!

They will play the game of, It didn't say when! THAT will be our next problem!

[Kablooie]

54. Has Congress submitted a legislative purpose?

[at140]

55. Trump is never going to make his taxes public

Because he is toast if voters see what a fraud he is.

Better chance of Trump inviting all Hondurans & Guatemalans to come to United States, get all the welfare and healthcare US citizens get.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

59. My neighbor two doors down and across the alley is a skip and trip attorney. He told me that...

... six months ago.

[Act_of_Reparation]

61. My wife is a giant lion robot made of 5 assembled mini lion robots.

[NewJeffCT]

62. On a related subject

what does your wife think they will find in Trump's tax returns that he is so desperate to cover up?

[Voltaire2]

66. My wife's mother is a hamster and her father smelt of elderberries and she said ...