In the case of Congress, it did in that there is the separation of power, however, there is the US Constitution demands the president to send a copy of his/her tax records to the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, but, when it comes to Congressional subpoenas there need to be specific needs that can only be obtained from the tax records of the president that no other method of obtaining that information can provide.
I do believe the decision-making courts can satisfy Congressional requests because in the case of Trump there is no other method to obtain the information needed to resolve the issues at hand, namely "pass-through" banking at Deutsche Bank.
What I don't understand is why the Supreme Court bothered taking either of these cases in the first place, except, for the politics. The Supreme Court laid out rules to follow. As if the lower courts actually needed rules.
I think it is noteworthy to examine the current regulation regarding "Pass Through" banking. This is the FDIC of April 1995.
The FDIC is joining other federal regulators (click here) in urging U.S. financial institutions to immediately establish and maintain policies and procedures designed to guard against the possible improper or illegal use of "payable through" accounts. Also called "pass through" accounts or "pass by" accounts, these generally are checking accounts marketed to foreign banks that otherwise would not have the ability to offer their customers access to the U.S. banking system. The attached FDIC guidelines provide more information about these accounts as well as suggested internal controls and procedures....
This memo pertains to methodologies used in foreign banks to obtain access to monies for use in American banks.
In the case of Trump, the uniqueness of the Deutsche Bank records is that it is Russian oligarchs and NOT RUSSIAN BANKS that are providing the monies to Trump that will be accounted for and paid back through Deutsche Bank. Deutsche Bank is the only bank that carries this type of account for at least one American, namely Donald John Trump. That is a specific need by the US House Finance Committee to understand the mechanism of Deutsche Bank to allow monies from a Russian oligarch (private partner) to flow into an American's hands WHILE protecting that American from the leverage of the country of Russia to perform deeds that will compromise the USA national security.
Russian oligarchs are no different than any person of Russian citizenship, in that they are susceptible to the power demands of the country of Russia. It is very easy to make the delineation that when accepting loans from Russian oligarchs through Deutsche Bank is no different than accepting monies from Russia.
Then there is the real possibility that the Russian oligarch is simply a front for Russian government money.
January 21, 2020
A Russian government-controlled bank (click here) deposited at least half a billion dollars into the American subsidiary of Deutsche Bank around the time that the bank lent Trump his most scrutinized loans, according to exclusively obtained confidential bank records. As Trump received loans from the subsidiary, DBTCA, totaling over $360 million, Gazprombank sent $511 million in cash to DBTCA to be dispersed however the Russian bank directed.
Additionally, DBTCA had deep liabilities to the Russian government in 2013, according to the documents acquired by Forensic News. The documents show that financial entities in Russia were owed nearly $3 billion by the subsidiary in October 2013....
So, the information the House Finance Committee is looking for is unique and can only be satisfied by subpoenaing records belonging to Donald John Trump and making it illegal for any of this to exist in secret with leverage payable only by actions of a compromised federal official that happens to be president today.
As a reference in regard to confidentiality (no press leaks):
TITLE 26 / Subtitle F / CHAPTER 61 / Subchapter B / § 6103 (click here)
26 USC 6103: Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information
Text contains those laws in effect on July 8, 2020
From Title 26-INTERNAL REVENUE CODESubtitle F-Procedure and AdministrationCHAPTER 61-INFORMATION AND RETURNSSubchapter B-Miscellaneous Provisions
