Lynnley Browning sort of misses the point of Presidio’s lawsuit against the US Government. Browning focuses on the personalities, rather than the larger constitutional question.

Presidio’s suit is an attempt to test how the tax code’s ambiguities and complexity stand up in a federal court.

It’s easy to find zero sympathy for the wealthy, however, recent tax law changes, including large corporate giveaways supported by our “populist” US Senators Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl demonstrate the problems (and opportunities) that our tax law spaghetti creates.

Growing tax code complexity simply means more opportunities for the wealthy and growing hassle for the rest of us….. Disclosure: One of Presidio’s principals is a good friend of mine.

UPDATE: Andrew Ross Sorkin takes an interesting look at a Wall Street case that NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer lost. Sorkin digs up quite a quote from a juror:

The jury was split 11 to 1 – with all but one juror prepared to acquit Mr. Sihpol of all charges. The lone juror told reporters that she was convinced of Mr. Sihpol’s guilt because she just could not believe the government would bring a case if there wasn’t something to it.

Having said all that, if Presidio did break the law, then they will deal with the consequences. It’s difficult for me, a laymen, to understand all the nuances of our tax system. Time to start over, I think.