Revenue Bills: Where Does The Constitution Say They Originate?

The U.S. Constitution, written in 1787 and adopted in 1789, outlines that all bills concerning revenue must originate in the House of Representatives. This is known as the Origination Clause, or Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution. The Origination Clause was a compromise between small and large states, ensuring that the power of the purse is possessed by the legislative body most responsive to the people. This clause is significant as it grants the House of Representatives the initial responsibility over tax decisions and ensures that any bills concerning revenue must start in the House before moving to the Senate for amendments or approval.

Explore related products

Revenue and Finance Committee proposal on constitutional revision Volume 1972 NO. 7

$22.95

Origins and Authority of the Internal Revenue Service: Form #05.005

$35

The Supreme Court, Federal and State Taxation, and the Constitution, Second Edition

$149

Constitutional Earmarking of State Tax Revenues

$13.95

A History Of The Custom Revenue In England V1, Constitutional History: From The Earliest Times To The Year 1827 (1885)

$32.95

Constitutional Money: A Review of the Supreme Court's Monetary Decisions

$57.95 $138

Bills for raising revenue

The U.S. Constitution, which was written in 1787 and adopted in 1789, outlines that all "Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives". This is known as the Origination Clause, or sometimes the Revenue Clause, and is Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the Constitution.

The Origination Clause was a compromise between delegates from small and large states, who agreed in principle to a bicameral Congress. It was also a compromise between the British practice of having all money bills start in the House of Commons, and the American desire to allow the Senate to amend these bills. The Clause was modified in 1787 to reduce the House's power by allowing the Senate to amend revenue bills and by removing appropriation bills from the scope of the Clause.

The House of Representatives broadly interprets its prerogatives to include any "meaningful revenue proposal", based on whether a measure has revenue-affecting potential, rather than simply whether it would directly raise or lower revenues. This includes not only direct changes to the tax code but also any fees paid to the government.

The Supreme Court has a role in enforcing the Origination Clause, as it would in any question of constitutionality. The Court has held that only bills to levy taxes "in the strict sense" are subject to House origination. If a bill raises revenue to support a particular governmental program, rather than the general functions of the government, it is not subject to House origination.

Origination Clause

The Origination Clause, sometimes called the Revenue Clause, is Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution. It states that all bills for raising revenue must originate in the U.S. House of Representatives, but the U.S. Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills. The Origination Clause was derived from a British parliamentary practice that required all money bills to have their first reading and any other initial readings in the House of Commons before being sent to the House of Lords. This practice was intended to ensure that the power of the purse is held by the legislative body most responsive to the people. However, the British practice was modified in America to allow the Senate to amend these bills.

The Origination Clause was part of the Great Compromise between small and large states. The large states were unhappy with the disproportionate power of small states in the Senate, so the Origination Clause theoretically offset the unrepresentative nature of the Senate. The insertion of this clause was another device sanctioned by the Framers to preserve and enforce the separation of powers. It was also intended to ensure that persons elected directly by the people would have initial responsibility over tax decisions.

The Origination Clause applies only to bills that levy taxes "in the strict sense." A statute that raises revenue to support the general functions of the government falls into this category. However, bills for other purposes that incidentally create revenue are not subject to House origination. For example, a statute that establishes a program and raises money for the support of that program is not considered a tax in the strict sense and is therefore not subject to the Origination Clause.

The Supreme Court plays a role in enforcing the Origination Clause, as it would in any question of constitutionality. However, the Court has never resolved competing factual claims about origination by considering evidence of a bill's content at different stages in its congressional consideration. The House of Representatives may also choose to enforce its prerogative by taking no action on a disputed Senate measure or referring it to a committee.

Senate amendments

The U.S. Constitution, which was written in 1787 and adopted in 1789, states that all bills for raising revenue must originate in the U.S. House of Representatives. This is known as the Origination Clause, sometimes called the Revenue Clause, and it is Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The Origination Clause was modelled after a British parliamentary practice that required all money bills to have their first reading in the House of Commons before being sent to the House of Lords. The Clause was intended to ensure that the power of the purse is possessed by the legislative body most responsive to the people.

However, the Origination Clause also permits the Senate to propose or concur with amendments to these bills, as in the case of other bills. This power to amend revenue-raising bills has deprived the Origination Clause of much practical significance. The Senate's ability to amend was added to the Origination Clause in 1787 as part of the Great Compromise between small and large states. The large states were unhappy with the disproportionate power of small states in the Senate, so the ability of the Senate to amend revenue bills was a concession to the larger states.

There have been several legal challenges to the Senate's ability to amend revenue-raising bills. In United States v. Norton (1875), the Court interpreted the provisions of criminal law by reference to the Origination Clause's use of the term "revenue", concluding that the Origination Clause applies only to bills that levy taxes "in the strict sense". Similarly, in United States v. Munoz-Flores (1990), the Court found that if a bill with a revenue-raising provision originates in the House, the Origination Clause does not prevent the Senate from removing that provision and substituting another in its place. In Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., the Court again found no constitutional impediment to the Senate amending a bill that originated in the House, as the amendment was germane to the bill's subject matter and not beyond the Senate's power to propose.

Despite these rulings, the Court has never resolved competing factual claims about origination by considering evidence of a bill's content at different stages in its congressional consideration.

Explore related products

The Federalist Papers (Dover Thrift Editions: American History)

$7.14 $8

A Discussion of the Constitutionality of the Act of Congress of March 2, 1867, Authorizing the ... 1874 Leather Bound

$16.95

Revenue Laws Study Committee Report to the 1999 General Assembly of North Carolina (Classic Reprint)

$31.27

Civil rights enforcement in the Office of Revenue Sharing

$9.99

Constitutional History of the American Revolution, Volume II: The Authority To Tax (v. 2)

$24.85

Liberal Suppression: Section 501(c)(3) and the Taxation of Speech

$37.99 $58.99

House of Representatives

The U.S. Constitution, which was written in 1787 and adopted in 1789, outlines that all "Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives". This is known as the Origination Clause, or sometimes the Revenue Clause, and is Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the Constitution.

The Origination Clause was influenced by British parliamentary practice, which dictated that all money bills must have their first reading in the House of Commons. This was to ensure that the power of the purse was held by the legislative body most responsive to the people. The American version of this clause was modified to allow the Senate to amend these bills.

The House of Representatives, therefore, has the authority to originate revenue measures exclusively. This was part of the Great Compromise, which agreed to allow equality in the Senate, regardless of a state's population, and to allow representation in the House based on a state's population. The Origination Clause was also a device to preserve and enforce the separation of powers.

The House of Representatives considers a bill to be a "meaningful revenue proposal" if it has revenue-affecting potential, whether that be raising or lowering revenues directly. This includes direct changes to the tax code, and any fees paid to the government.

The Supreme Court has a role in enforcing the Origination Clause, as it would in any question of constitutionality.

Constitutionality

The U.S. Constitution, specifically the Origination Clause (also known as the Revenue Clause), outlines that all bills concerning revenue must originate in the House of Representatives. This clause, found in Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the Constitution, was adopted in 1789 and modelled after British parliamentary practice, which dictated that all money bills must first be introduced in the House of Commons.

The Origination Clause was a compromise between small and large states during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, addressing concerns about the respective powers of the House of Representatives and the Senate. It was designed to ensure that the power of the purse is held by the legislative body most responsive to the people, giving them a powerful tool to address grievances and implement measures.

However, the Origination Clause does not prevent the Senate from amending these revenue bills. The Senate may propose or concur with amendments, as long as the bill's primary purpose remains raising revenue. This ability to amend was added later in 1787, reducing the House's power and allowing the Senate to make changes as long as they don't alter the fundamental nature of the bill.

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting and enforcing the Origination Clause, as with any question of constitutionality. The Court has considered whether a bill's content at different stages of its congressional consideration should be examined, but generally, it has limited its factual inquiry, citing respect for Congress.

The determination of what constitutes a "bill for raising revenue" has evolved through practice and precedent. While it applies to bills that levy taxes in the strict sense, it does not include bills that incidentally create revenue to support specific programs. The House of Representatives broadly interprets its prerogatives to include any meaningful revenue proposal, considering not only direct changes to the tax code but also fees paid to the government.

Frequently asked questions