As the courts wrestle with various challenges to the Corporate Transparency Act, Congress is also taking an interest. Last week, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 736 which would allowcompanies formed or registered before January 1, 2024, to submit beneficial ownership information to FinCEN by January 1, 2026, instead of by January 1, 2025, as required under the current statute. The bill passed the House with overwhelming bipartisan support by a vote of 408 to zero. The next day, Senator Tim Scott introduced a companion bill in the Senate, S. 505.

A Two Thousand Year Old Explanation For Why Student Loan Forgiveness Is Inequitable

I have just finished reading books 1-5 of Ab Urbe Condita (From the Founding of the City) by the Roman historian Titus Livius (aka Livy) who lived and wrote in the first century B.C.E. This famous retells the history of Rome from its founding until 9 B.C.E. in 142 books, only a portion of which survive completely. One of the great pleasures of reading the ancients is the realization that as Qoheleth observed long ago "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun". Ecclesiastes 1:9.

In the early days of the Roman republic, citizens were expected to serve in the military at their own expense. In 406 B.C.E., however, the Roman Senate decided to curry the favor of plebeians by paying soldiers out of the public treasury:

decerneret senatus, ut stipendium miles de publico acciperet, cum ante id tempus de suo quisque functus eo munere esset (the senate resolved that a soldier should receive a stipend from the public treasury, when before that time whoever served did so at his own expense).

Many of plebeians thought this a great boon since, according to Livy, their property would not be diminished whilst they served in Rome's numerous wars. Their elected Tribunes, however, discerned otherwise. First, they asked:

unde enim eam pecuniam confici posse nisi tributo populo indicto? (where will the state be able to get the money except by levy on the people (i.e., taxes)? 

Thus, it was understood, at least by some, two thousand years ago that the governments do not create wealth. Rather, governments take wealth from the many and redistribute to a chosen few.

But redistribution was not the only problem. The proposal was fundamentally inequitable: 

neque id, etiamsi ceteri ferant, passuros eos, quibus iam emerita stipendia essent, meliore condicione alios militare, quam ipsi 
militassent, et eosdem in sua stipendia inpensas fecisse et in aliorum facere (Even if others should suffer it, those who had earned their discharge by service would not endure that others should serve on better terms than themselves - to have paid their own expenses and to pay the expenses of others).

In other words, some citizens were being forced to pay twice - once for themselves and then again for others.