Please cite to the original publication
Raymer v. Trefry (1921, Mass.) 132 N. E. 19o, seems to be a case where there is too little analysis on the part *of the law makers and too much on the part of the court. The question at issue was whether the salary of a Harvard professor was "income derived from property" within the language of the Massachusetts Income Tax Amendment of 1915. That Amendment empowered the legislature to impose an income tax, with different rates upon "income derived from different classes of property," and with a lower rate upon "income not derived from property" than upon "income derived from property." A uniform rate, however, was required upon "income from the same class of property." The plaintiff claimed that a tax statute was unconstitutional because it taxed his salary, which he regarded as income not derived from property, at a higher rate than income derived from property, and specifically at a higher rate than income from annuities; such taxation, he contended, was not permissible under the grant of power contained in the Amendment. The Court held, however, that the Statute was constitutional, since the plaintiff's salary was "income derived from property."
Date of Authorship for this Version
A Professor’s Salary as Income from Property, 31 Yale Law Journal 318 (1922)