« NY Times: Pastors’ Web Electioneering Attracts IRS Review of Tax Exemption | Main | Fogg: § 6672: A Flawed Collection Device »
September 4, 2008
Infanti: Taxing Civil Rights Gains
Anthony C. Infanti (Pittsburgh) has posted Taxing Civil Rights Gains on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
In this article, I take a novel approach to the question of what constitutes a "tax." I argue that the unique burdens placed on same-sex couples by the federal and state "defense of marriage" acts (the DOMAs) constitute a tax on gay and lesbian marriages.
Classifying the DOMAs as a "tax" has important substantive and rhetorical consequences. As a tax, the DOMAs are subject to the same constitutional restrictions as other taxes. This opens them to challenge under the federal constitution's direct tax clauses and the uniformity clauses present in many constitutions. Where such constitutional challenges are unavailable or unavailing, classifying the DOMAs as a tax provides grounds for arguing that this tax on lesbian and gay families should be taken into account when assessing the justness of the distribution of the overall tax burden. On a rhetorical level, labeling the DOMAs a tax on lesbian and gay families effectively counters the notion - implicit in their current moniker - that the DOMAs are a necessary "defense" of marriage against an assault by same-sex couples. Instead, calling the DOMAs a tax may prove to be an effective means for shifting the rhetorical debate over same-sex marriage by making it clear that the DOMAs do nothing more than punish lesbian and gay families because they are different.
September 4, 2008 in Scholarship | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef00e554df0f428833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Infanti: Taxing Civil Rights Gains:
Comments
Haven't read the paper, but he should look at it the other way also: treating the tax benefits permitted same-sex married couples as a tax on opposite-sex married couples. E.g. 267 benefits.
Posted by: Apep | Sep 4, 2008 12:01:30 PM
I laughed for nearly five minutes before gathering myself sufficiently enough to be able to type this comment.
Mr. Infanti, any law can be challenged as a "tax" on the person who wishes to carry out the acts prohibited by that law but cannot do so because the law rendered it illegal?
For example:
1. Polygamists are subject to an Infanti Tax because they are not permitted to marry everyone they wish to marry.
2. Renters are subject to an Infanti Tax because they do not get the same tax benefits (i.e. mortgage interest deduction, real estate tax deduction) that home owners get.
3. Prostitutes choose to sell sex in order to make a living. Mr. Infanti gets to make his living the way he chooses, as a law professor, but the prostitute is denied the "right" to make her living the way she chooses. She is, therefore, being subjected to an unfair Infanti Tax.
This confirms what I have long suspected about the weird, wild world of academia: It is chock full of bright people with far too much time on their hands and far too much pressure to publish.
Posted by: Peter | Sep 7, 2008 7:20:37 PM




