- 8 -
Commissioner, 55 T.C. 6, 14 (1970), affd. per curiam 450 F.2d 280
(1971). Thus, the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of
the 14th Amendment do not operate as a limitation on the taxing
power of the Federal Government. See Hamilton v. Commissioner,
68 T.C. 603, 606 (1977).
In contrast, the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment
constitutes a limitation on the taxing power of the Federal
Government. The Due Process Clause provides protection against
Federal discriminatory action "so unjustifiable as to be
violative of due process". Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618,
642 (1969); Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 499 (1954); Ward v.
Commissioner, 608 F.2d 599 (5th Cir. 1979), affg. per curiam T.C.
Memo. 1979-39. Further, the Due Process Clause of the 5th
Amendment has been held to incorporate guaranties analogous to
those of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. See
Regan v. Taxation With Representation, 461 U.S. 540, 542 n.2
(1983); Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636, 638 n.2 (1975);
Johnson v. Robison, 415 U.S. 361, 364-365 n.4 (1974); Bolling v.
Sharpe, supra at 499.
In evaluating whether a statutory classification violates
equal protection, we generally apply a rational basis standard.
See Regan v. Taxation With Representation, supra at 547. We
apply a higher standard of review (i.e., strict scrutiny) only if
it is found that the statute (1) impermissibly interferes with
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011