There is a powerful argument that your proposal is simply not retroactive. It is his judgment, based on what he has been able to look at thus far, it would be constitutional. Mr. Kleinbard states specifically: Taxpayers can avoid the tax completely by repurchasing shares they sold to the United States; the excise tax would be imposed not on prior bonuses, but on the taxpayer's affirmative post-enactment decision not to repurchase those shares at the same price that the shares were sold to the United States. Moreover, the timing, repurchase price and amount of shares that must be repurchased are not punitive, and are commensurate with the conduct that Congress can rationally find to be contrary to the purpose and intent of the EESA legislation that authorized the Treasury's investments. I think anyone who looks at the letter from the Joint Committee on Taxation will see that the bipartisan amendment Senator Snowe and I will be offering with respect to excessive cash bonuses is a matter that does pass constitutional muster and clearly is in the taxpayers' interest.
On the recordFebruary 4, 2009
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the constitutionality of a proposal related to tax on excessive cash bonuses.
Share
More from Ron Wyden
Jul 31, 2026
Today the Finance Committee took an important step towards common sense reforms that will protect taxpayers and modernize the IRS.
Aug 8, 2026
At a time when communities are facing health care workforce shortages, it has never been more important to invest in the next generation of health professionals. This legislation would provide families in Oregon and nationwide with the…
Aug 8, 2026
This bill gives him so much discretion that Trump can ultimately decide what countries to tariff, or what countries to exempt. And he can modify tariffs at his will.
Aug 1, 2026
Mr. Clayton is willing to say anything in defense of Donald Trump’s corruption and abuses.





