Opinion ID: 450781
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Origination Clause

Text: 14 The Bodays and Clements also contend that the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA), Pub.L. No. 97-248, 96 Stat. 324, which added section 6702 to the Internal Revenue Code, was unconstitutionally enacted. Appellants argue that although the bill originated in the House, the Senate completely amended the content of the bill, thus violating article I, section 7 of the United States Constitution. Their contention is without merit. 15 Article I, section 7, clause 1 requires that [a]ll Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. We have not previously decided whether TEFRA was constitutionally enacted. A number of district courts, however, have held TEFRA's enactment constitutional. 3 For example, in Frent v. United States, 571 F.Supp. 739, 742 (E.D.Mich.1983), appeal dismissed, 734 F.2d 14 (6th Cir.1984), the court held that TEFRA was constitutionally enacted, reasoning that nothing in article I, section 7 states that the Senate may not amend revenue raising bills by substituting the text of those bills. Frent, 571 F.Supp. at 742. As long ago as 1911 the Supreme Court addressed a similar contention to that raised by appellants. The Court stated: 16 It is contended in the first place that this section of the act is unconstitutional, because it is a revenue measure, and originated in the Senate in violation of Sec. 7 of Article I of the Constitution, providing that all bills for the raising of revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills. The history of the act is contained in the Government's brief, and is accepted as correct, no objection being made to its accuracy. 17 This statement shows that the tariff bill, of which the section under consideration is a part, originated in the House of Representatives and was there a general bill for the collection of revenue. As originally introduced, it contained a plan of inheritance taxation. In the Senate the proposed tax was removed from the bill, and the corporation tax, in a measure, substituted therefor. The bill having properly originated in the House, we perceive no reason in the constitutional provision relied upon why it may not be amended in the Senate in the manner which it was in this case. The amendment was germane to the subject-matter of the bill and not beyond the power of the Senate to propose. 18 Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107, 142-43, 31 S.Ct. 342, 345-46, 55 L.Ed. 389 (1911). 19 We conclude that TEFRA was constitutionally enacted. 20 AFFIRMED.