Taxstereogram

On Thursday, June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. decided that requiring all individuals to purchase wellness insurance from a private corporation, or endure a penalty, is an unconstitutional practise of Congressional power, but if yous stare at the Patient Protection too Affordable Care Act (PPACA) for long enough, at a for certain angle, inwards a for certain light, yous tin strength out meet a taxation form, materializing higher upward the viewable details of the act. Since Congress has plenty of latitude on taxing schemes, the wellness insurance tax, previously known equally the private mandate, was left standing equally is.

This groovy invention from Chief Justice Roberts was hailed equally “A Marbury for our time”, referring to the landmark instance of 1803 where Chief Justice Marshall asserted the correct of the Court to invalidate acts of Congress if judicial review concluded that the acts are unconstitutional. The Roberts Court of 2012 is expanding the Definition of judicial review from the review of actual acts of Congress to the review of what could accept been acts of Congress, or a contextually appropriate mixture of the two. The fox hither is to know when to apparently await at the legislation too when to concentrate too apply a wall-eyed or cross-eyed technique to discern the hidden important that could accept been hidden past times the content inwards land view.

The Court began past times looking at the PPACA equally it appears to the untrained optic too declared that the Anti-Injunction Act (AIA) is non applicable to the penalization required from those who select non to obey the private mandate because said penalization is non a taxation too the AIA is entirely applicable to taxes. This was followed past times a blistering persuasion explaining that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution cannot live expanded to laissez passer on Congress the mightiness to strength people to buy the farm active inwards a exceptional shape of commerce past times imposing penalties on inactivity, which is both unnecessary too improper. However, equally the Chief Justice wrote, “[t]hat is non the halt of the matter”. While continuing to await closely at the act, it seems that what looked similar a penalization for non buying insurance to the untrained eye, is shaping upward to live “imposing a taxation on those who produce non purchase that product”. Ironically, a few pages prior to this momentous discovery, Chief Justice Roberts institute it necessary to quote John Marshall inwards Gibbons: “[T]he enlightened patriots who framed our constitution, too the people who adopted it, must live understood to accept employed words inwards their natural sense, too to accept intended what they accept said”. It seems that today’s enlightened patriots withdraw non live understood inwards the same way, too at that topographic point is no argue to assume that they genuinely intend what they say. Fair enough. At this point, it must accept been likewise belatedly to apply this realization to the AIA ruling, but non likewise belatedly to permit the private mandate live on the constitutional challenge, because Congress tin strength out taxation almost equally it pleases. Almost.

If yous yell upward almost it, applying a penalization to inactivity is only the Yin to the taxation suspension Yang. So instead of giving those who purchase insurance a taxation break, nosotros tin strength out exact a penalization from those who produce non purchase insurance. The latter has the payoff of increasing revenue without the added pace of increasing the full general taxation burden first, too has the same effect. We are all familiar amongst taxation breaks for diverse activities too the departure is entirely semantic. For example, instead of giving yous a taxation suspension for buying a fuel efficient car, the authorities could impose a penalization if yous purchase a regular car. Instead of a taxation suspension for your mortgage, yous pay a penalization if yous select non to purchase a home. Instead of getting a taxation suspension when yous accept a novel baby, the authorities could penalize yous if yous don’t. Same thing, right? Yin-Yang.

This may live past times far the most important invention introduced past times this ruling. Congress directly has a construct new, one-step, procedure to enhance revenues without explicitly raising taxes. Better than mutual depression temperature fusion too almost equally proficient equally perpetuum mobile. Who needs to torture the quondam Commerce Clause when our visionary conservative Chief Justice ready a powerful precedent for endless ways inwards which to penalize (i.e. tax) the people?