President Joe Biden’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans faces a new challenge thanks to the Supreme Court’s ruling to accept a 16th Amendment case.

On Monday, the court agreed to take Moore v. United States, a case that may see Congress pass a federal estate tax, like the one Biden launched. Only 4 votes are needed for the nine-member court to take up a specific case, but the court does not disclose how the justices vote on petitions.

The question before the justices is whether the 16th Amendment, which gives Congress the power to “collect and collect taxes on the source of revenue,” allows the federal government to tax unrealized gains.

Although the case, brought by Charles and Kathleen Moore, demanded situations of a Trump-era tax law provision, the petition suggested the justices use it to prevent Democrats from implementing a primary policy proposal, a federal estate tax, before it can become law and prevent them from doing so in the future.

Ari Glogower, an expert in federal tax law and a law professor at Northwestern, told Newsweek that while the court deserves to rule strictly on the tax in question, rather than “speculative” tax reforms that may or may not pass, the case may also have important implications for long-term legislation as well as the existing source of income tax structure.

“Broad participation may bring unprecedented uncertainty and instability to the tax system, and may undermine the fundamental constitutional strength of Congress to tax the source of revenue as provided for in the Sixteenth Amendment,” Glogower said.

The dispute concerns the $14,729 the Moores had to pay in additional taxes under a 2017 Republican tax law that imposed a one-time “mandatory repatriation tax” on taxpayers who own at least 10 percent of a foreign corporation. The Moores, who owned 11 percent of an Indian farm machinery business when the Trump-era provision went into effect, argue that the tax is unconstitutional because their partial ownership is not considered “income” under the 16th Amendment.

However, mentioning Biden’s proposal, as well as the bill introduced by Senators Ron Wyden and Elizabeth Warren, the Moores implored the Supreme Court to take up the case before Congress passes a federal estate tax.

In the review move, the Washington couple argued that the justices had “every reason” to “resolve the constitutional factor of realization now, when their ruling can tell lawmakers and avoid a primary constitutional confrontation in the future. “

The Biden administration has proposed implementing a minimum tax of 25 on the richest 0. 01 of Americans, who, according to White House estimates, pay an average annual tax rate of 8 and double the tax rate on capital gains from 20 to 39. 6Array.

“This minimum tax would make the wealthiest Americans no longer pay a lower tax rate than teachers and firefighters,” a February White House fact sheet said.

But if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the Moores and limits the scope of Congress’ tax powers, Biden’s plan would be dead when it comes and the resolution could simply “provide an injunction to big business in the amount of about one-third of a trillion dollars,” according to Glogower.

“This would be a boon to the most sensible, as the provision in question in this case was signed into law through a Republican-led Congress as part of a reform package that already included historic tax cuts for corporations and wealthy individuals,” he said.

The debate over the constitutionality of wealth taxes is not new, nor are efforts to close the loophole that allows some wealthy investors to pay taxes on their investments.

“How can you pay taxes for something they didn’t give you?”Becky Quick, co-host of MSNBC’s Squawk Box, asked Wednesday. “It would possibly be your price if you pay it today, but if you don’t pay it today, you may also have zero. “

But Quick co-host Joe Kernen noted that the query wouldn’t be so black and white if it “has discovered a company . . . And he hasn’t sold an inventory in thirty years and is now borrowing for billions of dollars. “

Kernen has proposed imposing an admission tax on those wealthy investors, but CNBC’s Robert Frank argued that this would possibly not be enough to cope with the lagoon’s capacity.

“Jeff Bezos just bought a $5 million yacht, but this year he made $39 billion in profit on his Amazon inventory, so he’s just not successful with that money,” Frank said.