Chip Taylor

Speaking of economic development tax incentives

and the Cuno decision, Paul Caron reports:

The House Judiciary Committee yesterday held a joint hearing on Economic Development and the Dormant Commerce Clause: The Lessons of Cuno v. Daimler Chrysler and Its Effect on State Taxation Affecting Interstate Commerce. Here is a list of the witnesses (with links to their testimony):

+ Bruce Johnson (Ohio Lietenant Governor)

+ Michele R. Kuhrt (Director of Taxes and Financial Administration, The Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, OH)

+ Walter Hellerstein (University of Georgia School of Law)

+ Edward A. Zelinsky (Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University)

I've read articles by both Hellerstein and Zelinsky on the topic. Hellerstein holds largely the same view as Enrich, the plaintiffs' attorney: incentives are a violation of the dormant commerce clause. Zelinsky, if memory serves, thinks the courts should butt out of this particular state tax issue.

I would imagine that both Johnson and Kuhrt are in favor of incentives. I'll be interested to read what they all had to say to the committee.

I'm not surprised to see Congress showing interest in this issue.