Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (465308)	3/20/2009 1:37:13 PM
From: brushwud	Respond to of 1578342

Tax laws often apply to the year they are passed. It's constitutional to cut tax rates ex post facto or increase deductions which would reduce taxes, but it would be an unconstitutional ex post facto law to impose a higher tax rate March 20 on income received on March 15.

To: combjelly who wrote (465308)	3/20/2009 1:37:56 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578342

Correct. But taxes for this year have not been levied yet. Tax laws often apply to the year they are passed. I think you mean "assessed". But normally, when tax law is changed during the year, it is for transactions AFTER the date of enactment. So, for example, they normally would not change the tax law in March and have it apply to transactions that occurred in January. Rather, they change the law in March and have it apply to transactions occurring on April 1 or thereafter, something like that. I can't think of a situation where legislation in March affected transactions dated prior to March. Tax rates and other items that are part of the self-assessment process do get changed, however, as the assessment happens at year end as you suggested. That is different from just creating a new tax retroactively as Congress has done and that will surely be shot down.