I am soooooooo sick of this “lacked standing” argument!
While I am pleased that the tax credits were allowed to remain, using this “lacked standing” reasoning is becoming far too common. If the government has the police power to plunder the citizen's wealth, then the taxpayer definitely has the “standing” to know why.
>If the government has the police power to plunder the citizen’s wealth,
They do; that’s the logical outcome of Kelo v. New London.
The USSC concluded that “projections” [on increased tax revenue] are sufficient to qualify as “public use” for Imminent Domain.
The issue isn't standing to "know why". It's standing to sue in court. The taxpayers act through their votes. To sue in court you have to have some specific interest in the issue. It's a standard legal principle and is perfectly logical. Without it anyone could take anyone else to trial over anything.