Congressional Committee’s Request for the President’s Tax Returns Under 26 U.S.C. § 6103(f )
The provisions in 26 U.S.C. § 6103 protecting confidentiality of tax returns prohibited the Department of the Treasury from complying with a request by the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee for the President’s tax returns. The text of section 6103(f ), the statutory exception under which the request was made, does not require the Committee to state any purpose for its request. But Congress could not constitutionally confer upon the Committee the right to compel the Executive Branch to disclose confidential information without a legitimate legislative purpose. Under the facts and circumstances, the Secretary of the Treasury reasonably and correctly concluded that the Committee’s asserted interest in reviewing the Internal Revenue Service’s audits of presidential returns was pretextual and that its true aim was to make the President’s tax returns public, which is not a legitimate legislative purpose.
During the prior Congress, Chairman Neal, who was then the Commit-tee’s Ranking Member, repeatedly urged the Committee to invoke section 6103(f ) to make the President’s tax returns “available to the public,” declaring that “Committee Democrats remain steadfast in [their] pursuit to have [President Trump’s] individual tax returns disclosed to the public.” H.R. Rep. No. 115-309, at 8 (2017) (dissenting views); H.R. Rep. No. 115-73, at 8 (2017) (dissenting views). Before the midterm elections, Chairman Neal (as well as other members of his party) promised that, if they won a majority in the House, then the Chairman would wield his authority to demand the President’s tax returns.
After becoming Chairman, he followed up on this promise by request-ing that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) disclose the President’s tax returns. In lieu of his prior focus on making the returns public, he asserted that the Committee required six years of President Trump’s tax returns because it was “considering legislative proposals and conducting over-sight related to our Federal tax laws, including, but not limited to, the extent to which the IRS audits and enforces the Federal tax laws against a President.” April 3 Neal Letter at 1. To that end, Chairman Neal claimed that “t is necessary for the Committee to determine the scope of any such examination and whether it includes a review of underlying business activities required to be reported on the individual income tax return.” Id. The Chairman did not explain why, if the Committee were sincerely interested in understanding how the IRS audits presidential tax returns, he needed to review President Trump’s tax returns for many years before his presidency. Nor did the Chairman request any information concerning the IRS’s actual policies or practices governing presidential audits or the audit histories for any President other than President Trump.
In view of these marked discrepancies in the public record, Treasury, quite reasonably, concluded that Chairman Neal had not articulated the real reason for his request. The Chairman’s request that Treasury turn over the President’s tax returns, for the apparent purpose of making them public, amounted to an unprecedented use of the Committee’s authority and raised a serious risk of abuse. As you explained, Treasury was committed to complying with the law, but under the circumstances, it questioned whether the Chairman’s request was lawful. Accordingly, you requested this Office’s advice about whether Treasury should fulfill the request. See Letter for Steven A. Engel, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, from Brent J. McIntosh, General Counsel, Department of the Treasury at 1 (May 2, 2019).
https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1173756/download
Here's the part I like -
The request "raised a serious risk of abuse". Damned straight it did.
Opinions | OLC | Department of Justice
Everyone knows the OLC is compromised. DOJ at the higher levels is next to worthless now, what a President!https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1173756/download
Here's the part I like -
The request "raised a serious risk of abuse". Damned straight it did.
Opinions | OLC | Department of Justice
https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1173756/download
Here's the part I like -
The request "raised a serious risk of abuse". Damned straight it did.
Opinions | OLC | Department of Justice
https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1173756/download
Here's the part I like -
The request "raised a serious risk of abuse". Damned straight it did.
Opinions | OLC | Department of Justice
It was always about circumventing the confidentiality of individual tax returns and reveling them to the public despite Trump's (who has not lost rights shared by any other citizen simply by being elected President) choice to keep them confidential.
Is this kind of stuff newsworthy anymore? Trump is above the law. Nobody is going to do anything about it.
They want his tax returns so they can try to smear him and spread gossip over his tax returns.
They have zero legitimate reason to have access to them. The Supreme court won't allow this to happen!
Every defeat that the communist democrats suffer is newsworthy. It's something to celebrate.
They want his tax returns so they can try to smear him and spread gossip over his tax returns.
They have zero legitimate reason to have access to them. The Supreme court won't allow this to happen!
Trump's DOJ doesn't think Trump should have to release his taxes. Now, that is a surprise.
They want his tax returns so they can try to smear him and spread gossip over his tax returns.
They have zero legitimate reason to have access to them. The Supreme court won't allow this to happen!
SIAP. Why must Trump reveal his taxes?
https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1173756/download
Here's the part I like -
The request "raised a serious risk of abuse". Damned straight it did.
Opinions | OLC | Department of Justice
He said he would during the campaign. People voted for him with that assurance.
Personal responsibility. Responsibility to his constituents. Responsibility to everyone.
But no. You'll play the victim card to excuse Trump from all responsibility, even when he lies in your face.
His promise to release his taxes didn't play a part in my vote, but it's certainly something I take issue with now because he stood in front of the country (and the world) and said he would release them. So I don't give two rats behinds if his taxes are sterile clean or they are a disaster. He lied over and over with his promises and has zero credibility in my eyes.
Congress determines what tax information can be shared with the public and nobody else... The precedent is clear and the law requires no justification for seeking the tax returns...
The Constitution limits what congress is allowed to do. If you want to put congress in charge of everything then get rid of the Constitution.
The Constitution limits what congress is allowed to do. If you want to put congress in charge of everything then get rid of the Constitution.
Congress determines what tax information can be shared with the public and nobody else... The precedent is clear and the law requires no justification for seeking the tax returns...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?