Oy Yes, the Healthcare Penalty is Unconstitutional
Steven J. Willis
University of Florida - Fredric G. Levin College of Law
affiliation not provided to SSRN
November 8, 2010
Tax Notes, Vol. 129, No. 6, Nov. 8, 2010
Steven J. Willis is a professor of law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law. Nakku Chung is a licensed attorney and member of the Florida Bar. They thank Nathan C. Perry, Eric D. Penkert, M. Todd Lewis, and Jose Alicia for helpful advice and assistance.
Willis and Chung authored a report ("Constitutional Decapitation and Healthcare," Tax Notes, July 12, 2010, p. 169, Doc 2010-11669, or 2010 TNT 133-6) concluding that the penalty imposed under new section 5000A for failure to maintain minimum essential healthcare coverage (the healthcare penalty) is an unconstitutional direct or capitation tax. They respond to a letter from Prof. Calvin H. Johnson as well as to more pointed and critical commentary from Prof. Edward D. Kleinbard.
If the healthcare penalty is a tax, it is unconstitutional. It is not an excise, let alone a uniform one. It is not an income tax consistent with the 16th Amendment. It is, however, a direct tax, albeit un-apportioned. Because the apportionment requirement remains in the Constitution, Congress must follow it. Significantly, apportionment is a serious constitutional limitation, which a tax can potentially fail, as does the healthcare penalty. The requirement is neither illusory nor archaic.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 8
Keywords: Healthcare penalty, Obamacare, unconstitutional, excise tax, income tax, direct tax, apportionment, Calvin Johnson, Edward KleinbardAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: November 7, 2010 ; Last revised: November 8, 2010
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.375 seconds