A Supreme Court dispute over a $15,000 IRS bill may be aimed at a never-enacted tax on billionaires

[justaprogressive]

The couple from Redmond, Washington, claim they had to pay the money because of their investment in an Indian company from which, as Charles Moore, 62, said in a sworn statement, they “have never received a distribution, dividend, or other payment.”

But significant parts of the story they have told to reach this point seem at odds with public records.

The Moores are the public face of a high court case backed by business and conservative political interests that could call into question other parts of the U.S. tax code and rule out a much-discussed but never-enacted tax on wealth. The case is set for arguments on Dec. 5.

The Moores are the latest example of plaintiffs whose lawsuits seem to simply be exercising their legal rights, but whose cases are backed by others with enormous amounts of money or a consequential social issue at stake. The Moores sought help from the anti-regulatory Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Underscoring the case’s importance at a recent Heritage Foundation event, lawyer Paul Clement said, “The constitutionality of a wealth tax may well be decided in the context of this case.”

[link:https://dnyuz.com/2023/10/15/a-supreme-court-dispute-over-a-15000-irs-bill-may-be-aimed-at-a-never-enacted-tax-on-billionaires/|

There seem to be a lot of these "wolf in sheep's clothing" cases coming up on the SC docket...for some reason...

[Stargazer99]

1. The wealthy, poor babies afraid they might have to go to a food bank to eat

Heard the expression the rich never have enough? How about helping the country that ALLOWED you to become so well to do? Asking too much, heh?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

2. Right wing activist court at it again