Date of Award

2026

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.)

First Advisor

Professor Reuven Avi-Yonah

Second Advisor

Professor Richard Friedman

Third Advisor

Professor Meital Pinto

Abstract

The application of judicial review to tax legislation presents unique challenges and inconsistencies. This study contends that the proportionality doctrine, widely used in numerous legal systems, offers the best framework for reviewing the constitutionality of tax laws. By examining the implementation of proportionality in countries such as Germany, Israel, and Canada, this research argues that adopting this doctrine—excluding the Stricto Sensu sub-test—could provide a more consistent and fair method for judicial review of tax legislation. Specifically, this approach avoids the indeterminacy and subjectivity often associated with open-ended balancing, while still ensuring that tax measures serve legitimate aims and employ means that are no more restrictive than necessary. This concern is particularly acute in the tax context, where the technical complexity of the law, the high degree of legislative discretion, and the need for specialized expertise make meaningful judicial balancing especially problematic.

Download

Share

COinS