Coley v. State
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Brady
While I fully concur with the majority’s conclusion that income taxation is encompassed by Article I, Section 16 of the North Carolina Constitution, I am compelled to dissent as to the majority’s determination that the tax increase at issue is not retrospective. The majority holds a tax rate increase on previously completed income-producing acts is a prospective tax. The necessary conclusion which emanates from the majority’s opinion is that the act of earning income does not occur until the end of the taxable year. This result defies logic.
An “act” is defined as “a thing done or being done.”…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Young v. . Town of HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
- State v. . BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1867