The point of this essay is simple: a direct-consumption tax like the Forbes-Armey-Hall-Rabushka flat tax or the Nunn-Domenici USA tax is not a "tax on incomes" within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment. As a result, such a tax would be constitutional only if it were apportioned among the states on the basis of population. And since these taxes would not be apportioned-how could they be and work as they are intended to work?-they would be unconstitutional.
Taxation, Sixteenth Amendment, Direct-Consumption Tax, Constitutional Law
Place of Original Publication
84 Tax Notes 1089 (1999)
Jensen, Erik M., "Unapportioned Direct-Consumption Taxes and the Sixteenth Amendment" (2006). Faculty Publications. 270.