https://nypost.com/2022/11/23/trump-blasts-supreme-court-over-tax-order/
“The Supreme Court has lost its honor, prestige, and standing, & has become nothing more than a political body, with our Country paying the price.” – Donald Trump
What a crybaby!
I am no fan of this Supreme Court but in this case, the law is clear. The House Ways and Means Committee has the explicit legal authority to review the tax returns of ANY citizen. Mr. Trump is a citizen. It is not even a close call.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Didn’t he appoint one third of those on the Court today? Then, by definition HE is just as corrupt. Or incompetent and should never be allowed to serve in any elected position. Except MAYBE, HOA director at Mar-a-Lago.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “The House Ways and Means Committee has the explicit legal authority to review the tax returns of ANY citizen.”
How, exactly, is that legal authority explicit?
LikeLike
They have the power to view the returns FOR LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE, not to look for something to leak to the press.
Violating any taxpayer’s privacy is a felony.
They have become accustomed to being able to use leaks without consequence, but that ends Jan 3.
LikeLike
The law (IRC Section 6103f) grants the authority and does not qualify the authority in any way. However, it can be argued that the general principle applies – Congress should only use its investigatory powers for legitimate legislative purposes. (As an aside, what legitimate legislative purpose is served by investigation of Hunter Biden?)
With respect to Trump’s taxes, the legitimate legislative purpose is easily discerned. He has frequently bragged about paying zero taxes on income streams supposedly in the many millions so examining his returns DOES serve a legislative purpose – identifying and closing egregious loopholes that allow the uber wealthy to avoid paying their share. And since the very Trump-friendly SCOTUS has ruled in favor of the House, it would seem your charge of “felony” is a little bit overblown.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have company, no time to look it up for you but it came up before here. It’s in the Act establishing the IRS, Disclosure of taxpayer information other than in prosecution of tax fraud is a felony.
LikeLike
I am sure that is true, but as SCOTUS has ruled Trump still has no right to block access to his returns by the House Ways and Means Committee.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And they have no right to disclose what they see, or leak it.
LikeLike
“And they have no right to disclose what they see, or leak it.”
Nobody has ever said they did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “The law (IRC Section 6103f) grants the authority and does not qualify the authority in any way.”
Not true. The first sentence of the statute, for example, states: “Returns and return information shall be confidential…”
LikeLike
Okay, sure. The returns are to be kept confidential. But we were discussing the PURPOSE of the request. There are no specific qualifications stated but a “legislative purpose” is generally assumed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “There are no specific qualifications stated…”
False. The purpose of the review cannot be to disclose confidential information.
LikeLike
And you don’t think the firebrands in the GOP won’t leak like a crab pot any tidbits from the investigations they are planning.
An aside to this conversation is the value of leaks. From either party.
We have three ways to learn what is going on in government.
It tells us directly.
It leaks to the press.
The press investigates on its own.
The only one that is probably the least partisan is #3. But even that requires skilled, experienced and well connected reporters that have years of contacts.
I know, the press is an enemy of the people…unless it is ideologically friendly to the reader. But nothing is perfect and everything is political in a democratic republic. And so long as that is the case, leaks and contacts are all we have to challenge the party line.
IMO
LikeLiked by 1 person
The privacy of tax returns is guaranteed in the tax law. Anyone violating that privacy is encouraging dishonesty in filing on a mass scale.
They should go to prison, regardless of party.
LikeLike
Only because the GOP is backing a corrupt, tax cheating, man-boy that they fear more than any other boogeyman you can come up with.
LikeLike
What does that have to do with the law guaranteeing everyone’s tax information stays confidential?
Does the law not apply to people you don’t like?
LikeLike
I was talking about the release of the returns to Congress. If they become public record because of some leak, possibly by a GOP member who is too afraid of TFG to confront him head on, then it happens.
You once again only put the negative onus on the Democrats, when in fact, both parties have been attributed for leaks.
LikeLike
Then it happens? No, then it is a felony.
LikeLike
Click to access LSB10275.pdf
LikeLike
Thanks. I notice that 26 USC 6103 gives legal authority to Congress to review any tax return, as you say, but not without restrictions. In this case, then, the SCOTUS order must be read as permitting the review, but not the violation of any of those restrictions.
This is a good example of why our government can only work if officials adhere to an honor code. Using 26 USC 6103 to obtain tax returns may be technically legal, but if the returns are subsequently mishandled then the burden would be on the taxpayer to seek redress. In other words, such mishandling would be dishonorable.
LikeLike
Any leaking of Trump’s personal tax returns would be illegal. That has always been the case. However, Trump’s privacy does not extend to protection against criminal referrals. If there is evidence in the returns of tax fraud, the committee can refer them for prosecution where they might end up legally in the public’s view.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “If there is evidence in the returns of tax fraud, the committee can refer them for prosecution where they might end up legally in the public’s view.”
That would be a dishonorable use of Congressional powers, in my view. If Congress suspects tax fraud, it doesn’t need to review the returns itself.
LikeLike
“That would be a dishonorable use of Congressional powers, in my view.”
Are you sure? Would it be “dishonorable” for Congressional investigators looking into Hunter Biden (for some legislative purpose, ha!) to turn over evidence of a crime for prosecution?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I am sure.
Hunter Biden is not relevant here, since Congress is not reviewing his tax returns.
LikeLike
Failed deflection by Mr. Roberts based on the incoming majority’s plan to investigate anything Bidne and ignore what they ran on; The economy.
LikeLike
Hunter Biden : Not relevant?
So what is the “honorable” legislative purpose of investigating the business affairs of a private citizen?
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “So what is the ‘honorable’ legislative purpose of investigating the business affairs of a private citizen?”
We can address that question when Congress actually launches such an investigation.
LikeLike
You say that as if you are blind or ignorant.
I do not vote for ignorant because that would be insulting. Blindly delusional would be where you fall on this topic. – IMO
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh that is too funny! The Supreme Court “has become nothing more than a political body.” How could that have happened I wonder?
And Karma says to Trump: “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!”
LikeLiked by 2 people