000			01716nab a2200265 c 4500
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20190308142109.0
007			ta
008			190308t2019 us ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
041			_aeng
100	1		_962506 _aEntin, Jonathan L.
245		4	_aThe constitutional challange to the new tariffs on steel and aluminium imports _c Jonathan L. Entin
260			_c2019
500			_aDisponible también en formato electrónico en la Biblioteca del IEF.
500			_aResumen.
520			_aBefore one frets about the tax owed on investment profits there must be some profits. Tariffs can reduce or eliminate some taxpayers’ profits. Some parties alleging injury from President Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum have filed suit claiming that the statute on which the chief executive relied in imposing those tariffs is unconstitutional. This article assesses the challengers’ prospects for success in claiming that Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act represents an impermissible delegation of legislative power to the chief executive. Although the lawsuit probably will fail, the plaintiffs’ arguments are not frivolous and might help to persuade Congress to reassert its constitutional power to regulate commerce with foreign nations.
650		4	_945539 _aIMPORTACION
650		4	_928302 _aARANCELES
650		4	_947467 _aINCONSTITUCIONALIDAD
650			_aESTADOS UNIDOS _942888
773	0		_9159577 _oOP 235/2019/2 _tJournal of Taxation of Investments _w(IEF)51921 _x 0747-9115 _g v. 36, n. 2, Winter 2019, p. 45-60
856			_uhttps://www.civicresearchinstitute.com/online/article_abstract.php?pid=3&iid=1367&aid=8936
942			_cART
999			_c140151 _d140151