NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE O ur Constitution gives Congress the exclusive right (subject to a president’s veto) to impose taxes on the American people. The right of a country to make its own tax law is an important aspect of sovereignty. These United States were founded upon this principle. Taxation without representation prompted the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution.

Sovereignty means respecting the right of each country to make its own rules. However, the Biden administration, as reflected in a recent article by former Treasury officials Natasha Sarin and Kimberly Clausing, in defending its efforts to enact a Global Tax Code advances a novel explanation of sovereignty and the Constitution: that the agreement negotiated by the administration expands American sovereignty by giving Congress the freedom to choose higher tax rates.

The fact the Biden administration feels it necessary to craft a formal agreement with the rest of the world to impose minimum-tax rates proves that not all countries prefer higher taxes. Forcing other countries to enact one’s own policy preferences in order to make it easier to enact those policies at home is not sovereignty but imperialism.

The Biden administration’s drive for a Global Tax Code, starting with major corporations, violates our Constitution. By colluding with foreign nations, it aims to do what Congress has refused to do: increase taxes on U.S. firms’ domestic profits. The administration has proposed trillions of dollars of tax hikes in its annual proposed budgets, but a Congress controlled by Democrats in the administration’s first two years rejected most of those proposals. The administration responded by asking voters to elect a Congress supporting tax increases. Instead, Republicans pledging to oppose tax hikes gained control of the House.

Rather than respect this decision by the American people, Treasury Secretary Yellen is trying to circumvent the elections and the Constitution by colluding with foreign powers to raise taxes on American companies by having those other countries raise taxes on profits earned in America. She openly boasts that the agreement leaves congressional Republicans with no choice but to raise taxes on American companies because, otherwise, other countries will seize those taxes. The Godfather might call this an offer Congress cannot refuse.

Sarin and Clausing misleadingly claim that the agreement merely allows a country like France to tax the French subsidiary of a U.S. company to prevent shifting profits out of France. But the agreement does much more. It purports to give the right to France to tax American companies’ domestic U.S. profits, as well as those of all its “undertaxed” foreign subsidiaries, as long as the company has any subsidiary in France. France would claim this right if America’s tax rate is below the agreed minimum, or America’s tax credits are not structured to France’s liking, or if America allows its companies access to other countries’ tax breaks. The amount France may seize can be many times the French subsidiary’s total revenue let alone profit.

It is true that from time immemorial, France could (in theory) tax or seize assets from French subsidiaries of American companies on any grounds. But it has not done so because every previous president would have retaliated harshly. Yellen is not only refraining from promising to retaliate but actively encouraging such action.

Do Democrats want to set the precedent that if Congress refuses a future Republican president’s request to repeal tax provisions beloved by Democrats, like green-energy tax credits, requesting foreign powers to effectively do so is legitimate?

Sarin and Clausing claim that the Global Tax Code would increase federal tax revenue because companies would have less incentive to book profits outside the U.S. They ignore the recent conclusion of Congress’s nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) that the agreement would cost the United States over $50 billion, even if Congress decided to raise taxes on American companies in order to comply, and $100 billion otherwise because foreign countries raising taxes on American companies will be credited against U.S. taxes.

Sarin and Clausing can disagree with JCT, but their dismissal of JCT scores as arguments by “Republican lawmakers” is disingenuous. And if JCT’s score is so unreasonable, Treasury should share its own scores instead of refusing requests from Congress to do so.

Another argument made by Sarin and Clausing is that this deal reduces the competitive disadvantages faced by U.S. companies because of competitors in low-tax or no-tax jurisdictions. But if the U.S. and Europe impose a higher tax burden on companies than other competitive parts of the world to partially fund their unsustainable budgets, does that then give us the right to gang up on other countries? And if Sarin and Clausing are concerned about companies within the U.S. that don’t have access to profit-shifting to reduce their tax burden, an easy solution to that would be to simplify our tax code to level the playing field against their multinational competitors — but that is only possible if we retain control over our own tax code.

In addition, Sarin and Clausing want us to be upset that “companies pay effective tax rates on their profits . . . lower than that of many middle-class families.” But this is a false comparison. As Milton Friedman wrote, “corporate officials may sign the check, but the money that they forward to Internal Revenue comes from the corporation’s employees, customers or stockholders.” Not only that, to the extent that individuals own corporate stock, and to the extent that stockholders bear the benefits of lower corporate-tax rates, the corporate tax is only the first layer — they must additionally pay capital-gains tax (20 percent if long term) and/or dividend taxes (at their ordinary-tax rate of up to 37 percent). Plus, for wealthier shareholders, there is an additional 3.8 percent net-investment tax imposed by the Affordable Care Act. State taxes too will also kick in.

The authors allege that Republican concerns about sovereignty and the Constitution are just a subterfuge to hide their real motivations. Accusing members of Congress of not even believing their own arguments reflects the contempt for Congress shown by Yellen’s Treasury in circumventing Congress and instead asking foreign countries to impose tax increases on American income if Congress refuses to do so.

Aharon Friedman is a director and senior tax counsel at the Federal Policy Group and formerly served as senior adviser and senior tax counsel at the Treasury Department and the Committee on Ways and Means. Joshua Rauh is the Ormond Family Professor of Finance at Stanford’s Graduate School of Business and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.