Document Type
Article
Media Type
Text
Abstract
Unlike criminal laws, the ex post facto constitutional protection does not extend to civil tax matters. Nor are the words "fairness" or "equity" found anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code. Even as this is written, Congress is debating major tax changes, some of which may be retroactive. Should taxpayers be required to plan their financial affairs always subject to pending tax legislation or legislation that hasn't even yet been proposed? The Carlton case is one of the most egregious examples of taxpayer abuse in this area.
First Page
77
Last Page
92
Publication Date
11-1-1995
Department
Other
ISSN
0734-1490
Language
eng
Publisher
Northern Illinois University Law Review
Recommended Citation
Domsky, Ronald Z.
(1995)
"Retroactive Taxation: United States v. Carlton -- The Taxpayer Loses Again!,"
Northern Illinois University Law Review: Vol. 16:
Iss.
1, Article 5.
Suggested Citation
Ronald Z. Domsky, Retroactive Taxation: United States v. Carlton -- The Taxpayer Loses Again!, 16 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 77 (1995).
