Retroactive Taxation
What are the constitutional arguments against retroactive taxation from an originalist and/or constructionist perspective (ie the only standards of constitutional interpretation that matter)?
I understand the moral arguments against retroactive taxes. They are obvious and should go without saying.
But how do conservative legal scholars argue against them from a constitutional perspective? What in the document specifically disempowers the government from enacting them?
I've heard people mention ex post facto, but ss far as I can tell, ex post facto only applies to criminal punishments, not fiscal policy. Since taxes aren't punishment (or legally aren't considered a form of punishment, even though we all know good and well that many taxes exist simply to punish the successful) that doesn't seem to help much.
I understand the moral arguments against retroactive taxes. They are obvious and should go without saying.
But how do conservative legal scholars argue against them from a constitutional perspective? What in the document specifically disempowers the government from enacting them?
I've heard people mention ex post facto, but ss far as I can tell, ex post facto only applies to criminal punishments, not fiscal policy. Since taxes aren't punishment (or legally aren't considered a form of punishment, even though we all know good and well that many taxes exist simply to punish the successful) that doesn't seem to help much.