I agree it’s tough to apportion, and I usually agree with compensation for takings. But is compensation fair when the harmed class was the economic beneficiary of previous government coerced advantage which is subsequently undone?
It’s getting so complex and opaque at that point that I really would have a tough time saying one way or the other. People structure their investments based upon existing laws and regulations, and changing them to their disadvantage creating financial damage carries a cost that should be borne by those doing the changing, with that I strongly agree. Beyond that, it gets less and less clear, to me at least.