A Taxing Problem

   A  columnist referred to the public release of tax returns as "a prerequisite for anyone running for the White House."
   Not so. There is no Constitutional or legal mandate that any candidate make his or her tax returns public. It has been customary since Gerald Ford voluntarily released his, following the IRS proof that Richard Nixon filed a false return. As for the writer's defense that releasing one's tax information "has become a prerequisite in the modern era," that still does not mean such action is mandatory or necessary.
   Want a dictionary definition? Merriam-Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1958 edition, uses the term "necessary" before some other action. And the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary says "necessary in advance," citing the first use in print as the year 1633.
   The U.S. Constitution of 1789 makes no mention of a candidate's tax status in listing qualifications for the office of President, since federal income taxes did not exist at the time. Not until the early 20th Century was the Internal Revenue Service established. And the tradition of presidential candidates making their tax returns public did not begin until another 50 years went by.
   Since the days of Richard Nixon, such action has been customary, so in a very general sense -- in that all other candidates do it -- it has become required by custom. It is not, however, mandated by law or by the Constitution.
   So despite all the pressure on Donald Trump to release his tax returns, he is not obligated to do so. He can legally say, "That's none of your business," which he did when asked by TV interviewer George Stephanopoulos. Trump maintains that he will release that information when he is ready, which may or may not be before the November General Election.
   Some ten years ago, Trump was ordered by a court to show his tax returns during a libel suit he filed against a reporter. But when he finally got around to submitting the forms to the court, they were "so heavily redacted they looked like a crossword puzzle," according to Tim O'Brien, the Bloomberg reporter who was the defendant in the libel suit and who saw the forms.
   Later, Trump submitted a clean copy, and the case was closed. Trump lost, since the information written by O'Brien was true, and therefore not libelous. However, a court order kept the tax information under seal, so it did not become public.
   In any case, the candidate is free to release his tax returns any time he chooses, according to an IRS spokesman. Trump claims he cannot, because they are under audit. All of them? Every year?
   Incidentally, the best defense against a libel suit is that what was printed was true. Just because a person doesn't like it does not make it libel. That principal was established in New York in 1760, when the colonial governor objected to John Peter Zenger printing the fact that the governor had a mistress. The governor was upset, and charged the editor with printing a "false libel." The defense was that the report was true, and many people knew the governor had a mistress. Therefore, it was not libel. The jury agreed.