波洛克诉农民贷款信托公司(1895)案的判决是否符合现行的税收原则?

Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln IV
{"title":"波洛克诉农民贷款信托公司(1895)案的判决是否符合现行的税收原则?","authors":"Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln IV","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3814973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The foundation of the modern tax system in the United States is based on the 16th Amendment passed in 1909. The Amendment was Congress’s response to the Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895). Pollock held that an income tax levied on the US population based on “dividends, royalties, and rents” was unconstitutional. Because of this, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company was a key case in the history of taxation and tax law in the United States. Theoretically, the key question is whether a tax on property is the same as “dividends, royalties, and rents” arising from that property. Understanding the reasoning of this case illuminates key concepts in taxation, the history of taxation, and has implications on Constitutional history and interpretation.","PeriodicalId":254768,"journal":{"name":"Legal History eJournal","volume":"294 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Was Polllock V. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co (1895) Decided Consistently with Existing Tax Principles?\",\"authors\":\"Charles Edward Andrew Lincoln IV\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3814973\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The foundation of the modern tax system in the United States is based on the 16th Amendment passed in 1909. The Amendment was Congress’s response to the Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895). Pollock held that an income tax levied on the US population based on “dividends, royalties, and rents” was unconstitutional. Because of this, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company was a key case in the history of taxation and tax law in the United States. Theoretically, the key question is whether a tax on property is the same as “dividends, royalties, and rents” arising from that property. Understanding the reasoning of this case illuminates key concepts in taxation, the history of taxation, and has implications on Constitutional history and interpretation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":254768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal History eJournal\",\"volume\":\"294 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legal History eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3814973\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal History eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3814973","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国现代税收制度的基础是1909年通过的第16修正案。该修正案是国会对波洛克诉农民贷款信托公司案(157 U.S. 429(1895))的回应,该案在重审后得到确认(158 U.S. 601(1895))。波洛克认为,对美国人征收“股息、特许权使用费和租金”的所得税是违宪的。正因为如此,波洛克诉农民贷款信托公司案是美国税收和税法史上的一个关键案例。从理论上讲,关键问题是财产税是否等同于由该财产产生的“股息、特许权使用费和租金”。理解这个案例的推理阐明了税收的关键概念,税收的历史,并对宪法的历史和解释有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Was Polllock V. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co (1895) Decided Consistently with Existing Tax Principles?
The foundation of the modern tax system in the United States is based on the 16th Amendment passed in 1909. The Amendment was Congress’s response to the Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895). Pollock held that an income tax levied on the US population based on “dividends, royalties, and rents” was unconstitutional. Because of this, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company was a key case in the history of taxation and tax law in the United States. Theoretically, the key question is whether a tax on property is the same as “dividends, royalties, and rents” arising from that property. Understanding the reasoning of this case illuminates key concepts in taxation, the history of taxation, and has implications on Constitutional history and interpretation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信