We should focus on some deleted retroactive provision to abrogate bonus contracts, which was dropped because ...(drum roll)... it would be challenged in court.
You have to love the corporate media. You really can't win. The retroactive abrogation clause should have been kept even if it was certain to be challenged, but efforts to tax the AIG bonuses are ridiculed because of the threat of litigation. Which is it?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/18/congress-invites-court-challenge-aig-taxation-plan-lawyers-say//snip
Congress Invites Court Challenge With AIG Taxation Plan, Lawyers Say
Legal scholars warn that Congress could have a tough time defending itself in court if it tries to tax away the AIG bonuses.
* * *
Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law professor, said targeting those employees through taxes would invite a valid court challenge.
"It could well trigger years of litigation," he said. "Just because a company or individual is unpopular does not mean the government can retroactively impose punitive measures against them. ... There's a host of difficult contractual and constitutional and statutory barriers that would have to be overcome by Congress." /snip
So, Fox News. Let me get this straight. It was bad for Congress to drop the retroactive bonus abrogration on the ground that it would generate years of litigation, but it is also bad for Congress to try to tax these bonuses because it will generate years of litigation.
Is it just me, but do you ever feel like you are being manipulated by the Corporate media?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
