Timeline for Can Congress, or any other body, subpoena the President's tax records?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2019 at 23:26 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @StephanS The only way to deny that the tax records given to the banks are accurate is to admit to a serious felony, bank fraud, that exists under state law as well as federal law. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 23:19 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @StephanS You are missing an organization you can sue for tax records. Most of the subpoenas are directed at banks that Trump did business with, to whom he voluntarily disclosed his returns, and to his accountants. nytimes.com/2019/09/16/nyregion/trump-tax-returns-cy-vance.html | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 23:18 | comment | added | User37849012643 | @ohwilleke In the context, it's the State New York, and the subject is tax returns, which means if you're looking to subpoena duces tecum an organization it would be the IRS, and the IRS files state subpoenas in file 13, then they'll send you back a letter citing section 6103 of the federal tax code. Unless I'm missing an organization that you can try to subpoena for tax records other than the individual, and the IRS. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 23:02 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @StephanS The key point, however, is that these aren't subpoenas or court orders directed at a President. They are only about a President. Very different. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 22:25 | comment | added | User37849012643 | I mean a subpoena is a court order and it's isn't like we haven't seen Presidents reject court orders outright (cough cough Andrew Jackson). My main point is I think what could happen to the President for outright not comply is burry. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 22:20 | comment | added | User37849012643 | @ohwilleke Clinton had his Subpoena retracted because he volunteered, and U.S. v. Nixon would probably fit better, but what I'm trying to get that is we really haven't seen what penalties there are if a President just refuses to compile with a subpoena after their motion to quash is denied, well other then the 1807 treason trial of his former vice president, Aaron Burr but that was hundreds of years ago. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 15:03 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @StephanS I'm not sure that's true. There is U.S. v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones that are precedents. And, a subpoena of the President's tax returns is usually not a subpoena personally directed at the President. It is ultimately not the President's to comply with or not. A President may seek to intervene as a third-party to quash the subpoena but that is very different from trying to impose civil or criminal liability upon the President personally, or trying to hold the President in contempt of court. Presidents have lost opposing third-party subpoenas of all sorts. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 8:22 | comment | added | User37849012643 | @ohwilleke to add to your point is we really don't know what happens if a President is to outright refuse a subpoena. | |
| Sep 20, 2019 at 6:59 | vote | accept | user27343 | ||
| S Sep 19, 2019 at 23:33 | history | suggested | life-on-mars |
geo context
|
|
| Sep 19, 2019 at 23:30 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Sep 19, 2019 at 23:33 | |||||
| Sep 19, 2019 at 21:01 | comment | added | ohwilleke | The short answer is unequivocally yes. | |
| Sep 19, 2019 at 18:49 | answer | added | User37849012643 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 19, 2019 at 17:14 | answer | added | David Siegel | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 19, 2019 at 16:54 | answer | added | user6726 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 19, 2019 at 16:18 | history | asked | user27343 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |