The Supreme Court explicitly protects race-neutral tax statutes from disparate-impact challenges.

Evidence

A rule that a statute designed to serve neutral ends is nevertheless invalid, absent compelling justification, if in practice it benefits or burdens one race more than another would be far reaching and would raise serious questions about, and perhaps invalidate, a whole range of tax, welfare, public service, regulatory, and licensing statutes that may be more burdensome to the poor and to the average black than to the more affluent white. — Dorothy A. Brown, The Whiteness of Wealth, 550

Categorization

• BMF: Not a fiction match; this is direct legal text. But the concept of institutionalized neutral rules that shield structural harm resonates with the engineered system in Parable of the Sower where ostensibly neutral law codifies hierarchy.
• XREF: connects to: Washington v. Davis made discriminatory intent a prerequisite for equal-protection race claims. — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 1038