PDA

View Full Version : Constitutionality of Income tax




unklejman
10-05-2007, 01:27 PM
I made the statement that income taxes are unconstitutional, and some one responded:


Income tax is by definition "Constitutional". The SC has had the authority to decide Constitutionality since 1803.

One may not like the SC's decision, but claiming that dislike is sufficient to declare a law "un-Constitutional" when the SC has declared that law "Constitutional" is absurd.

I really am not knowledgeable on the subject to argue. I'm doing research right now but it's a lot to sort through. Anyone have a response to that?

Chester Copperpot
10-05-2007, 02:40 PM
I can help you a bit.

"Income Tax" is by definition Constitutional.. But thats a very broad statement because an income tax can and has been many different things.

To be specific: The "Income Tax" that is authorized by the 16th Ammendment is an Excise tax on corporate profit. The original name of this tax is the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909. Later renamed to the Corporate Excise Tax of 1913.

Also: Supreme Court has ruled that wages and salaries cannot be taxed without apportionment.

To understand things like the 16th ammendment better when you see the word "Income" read 'corporate profit' instead.. and you'll understand it more..

ALso Look up the Brushaber Supreme Court Case. If you have any other questions, Ill be happy to explain things to you further

unklejman
10-05-2007, 03:21 PM
To be specific: The "Income Tax" that is authorized by the 16th Ammendment is an Excise tax on corporate profit. The original name of this tax is the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909. Later renamed to the Corporate Excise Tax of 1913.

Also: Supreme Court has ruled that wages and salaries cannot be taxed without apportionment.

To understand things like the 16th ammendment better when you see the word "Income" read 'corporate profit' instead.. and you'll understand it more..


I don't see where you get corporate profit from. It reads pretty clear to me:

Sixteenth Amendment
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Is it because of the supreme court ruling that specifically "wages" and "salaries" can't be taxed without apportionment (distribution or allotment in proper shares according to wikipedia). Which ruling was that by the way?

I guess I'm not really connecting all of this.

USPatriot36
10-05-2007, 03:45 PM
As long as the American people believe the Income Tax is acceptable and the Feds have the guns and prisons and are willing to use them, there is little to be achieved by arguing about the legality. Hundreds or maybe thousands of good people have been thrown into jail over this issue.

Gilby
10-05-2007, 04:00 PM
The federal government has the power to tax privileged activities and entities. The 16th amendment does not change that, it only corrects a supreme court case, and clarifies that income can be used to determine the amount of the excise tax.

Privileged activities would include corporate activity, activities involving the crossing of federal borders, receiving payment from the US treasury, and similar. Making a living is not a privileged activity, therefore it can not be constitutionally taxed.


As long as the American people believe the Income Tax is acceptable and the Feds have the guns and prisons and are willing to use them, there is little to be achieved by arguing about the legality. Hundreds or maybe thousands of good people have been thrown into jail over this issue.

That is the unfortunate reality. Doesn't really matter if it's unconstitutional. As long as there isn't enough mainstream resistance to such taxation, you're going to have a struggle to adhere to the real law.

Kregener
10-05-2007, 04:15 PM
If you are looking for your..."answers" here on this Forum, then I am dubious about your real....agenda.

There is only a TON OF FRIGGIN' MATERIAL AVAILABLE on the internet for you to find your..."answers".

Here, THIS (http://www.devvy.com/notax.html) should not lead to overload to get you started.

:rolleyes:

unklejman
10-06-2007, 01:24 PM
If you are looking for your..."answers" here on this Forum, then I am dubious about your real....agenda.
:rolleyes:

Oh please tell me what you think my agenda is?

Thanks for your link though.

monkeyman
10-07-2007, 02:16 AM
Check out 'Freedom to Facisim', you should be able to find it online and Dr paul is also on it. It explains a great deal on the topic.

OptionsTrader
10-07-2007, 02:24 AM
I made the statement that income taxes are unconstitutional, and some one responded:

I really am not knowledgeable on the subject to argue. I'm doing research right now but it's a lot to sort through. Anyone have a response to that?

In 1895, the supreme court ruled that taxes on income was unconstitutional. Only after the constitution was ammended was taxation of income allowed (16th).

Cjays
10-07-2007, 08:02 AM
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes...
To me, this allows the Congress to impose an income tax, but it doesn't obligate them. However, even if Congress was obligated, there are no particulars in the amendment, so Congress could cut it back to nearly nothing without breaking any obligations.

Gilby
10-07-2007, 10:36 AM
To me, this allows the Congress to impose an income tax, but it doesn't obligate them. However, even if Congress was obligated, there are no particulars in the amendment, so Congress could cut it back to nearly nothing without breaking any obligations.
The power to tax the incomes of who? The amendment does not add taxing powers to subjects that were not taxable before.

Tratzman
10-07-2007, 10:57 AM
As I understand it, the right to sustain yourself through honest labor is a natural right. Natural rights are not taxable under the Constitution.

Besides, there is no law that requires us to pay an income tax. There is dispute on whether or not the gov't has a right to levy an income tax, but there is no actual black-and-white law that requires us to pay it. 'Freedom to Fascism' pretty much makes that perfectly clear. Nobody can point to a law that requires us to pay an income tax, period.

Chad

Chester Copperpot
10-07-2007, 11:03 AM
I don't see where you get corporate profit from. It reads pretty clear to me:

Sixteenth Amendment
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Is it because of the supreme court ruling that specifically "wages" and "salaries" can't be taxed without apportionment (distribution or allotment in proper shares according to wikipedia). Which ruling was that by the way?

I guess I'm not really connecting all of this.


Its confusing no doubt. But its all in the wording:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration,

"From Whatever Source Derived" is the key here. The way this is all explained in SCOTUS rulings is that the income has to be separated from its source. Now when you work for wages somewhere.. You dig ditches and get paid $500 a week lets say and you get taxed on THAT income, you're really getting taxed on your labor directly, because your wages and the source of those wages are not and cannot be separated. They are only derived and separated in the case of corporate income where capital OR labor (from employees) is converted into profit, because of the transferance of monies to the corporate entity.

Now, I know this might sound like nonsense to some people, but this is basically in a nutshell of what the Supreme Court has stated. And it shows that what we have in America as an 'income tax' is really a tax on corporate profits. If the ammendment was meant to be used on peoples wages it would simply have to say "Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,without apportionment..."

That is the difference

Chester Copperpot
10-07-2007, 11:12 AM
As I understand it, the right to sustain yourself through honest labor is a natural right. Natural rights are not taxable under the Constitution.

Besides, there is no law that requires us to pay an income tax. There is dispute on whether or not the gov't has a right to levy an income tax, but there is no actual black-and-white law that requires us to pay it. 'Freedom to Fascism' pretty much makes that perfectly clear. Nobody can point to a law that requires us to pay an income tax, period.

Chad

YOu are correct... The ruling is in Coppage Vs Kansas 1915.

However let us state a FACT.. CONGRESS CAN LEVY ANY TAX IT WANTS ON ANYTHING IT WANTS TO. That being said.. It is bound to do it in a particular fashion.. And the action of taxing people on their paychecks directly without apportionment is clearly not allowed by the Supreme Court.