Income Tax really unconstitutional?

[ForLibertyFight]

Is the federal income tax really unconstitutional?

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.

How can we say that it isn't? I heard people arguing that it was never properly ratified but however the constitution states that they have the right to tax on our incomes. I don't really believe that arguing about the improper ratification is a strong enough argument to say we need to abolish the IRS or the income tax. I am sorry if the question seems dumb but I am only 15.

thank you

 

[kylejack]

Hey donkey, we're happy to have you!!

Anyway, there is a lot of evidence that the 16th was not properly ratified, as you mentioned, and thus is not really part of the Constitution. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixteenth Amendment gave no new power of taxation to the government.

Lastly, it can even be eliminated from a practical standpoint. Individual income tax only provides about 43% of the government's income, and if spending were returned to pre-2000 levels, it could be eliminated, and there would even be a slight reduction in the budget deficit.

 

[BLS]

Oh boy...get ready to do some learning kid.

First point...INCOME, was considered back then to be any PROFIT gained. IE..you buy a cow for $5 and sell it for $15, you have a tax on that INCOME(Profit) of $10 that you have to pay.

Labor is considered an EXCHANGE of work for money, therefore it is not an income.

 

[BLS]

Hey donkey, we're happy to have you!!

Anyway, there is a lot of evidence that the 16th was not properly ratified, as you mentioned, and thus is not really part of the Constitution. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixteenth Amendment gave no new power of taxation to the government.

Lastly, it can even be eliminated from a practical standpoint. Individual income tax only provides about 43% of the government's income, and if spending were returned to pre-2000 levels, it could be eliminated, and there would even be a slight reduction in the budget deficit.

I believe it's only 38%.

 

[billv]

I'm not sure that Ron Paul would argue it is unconstitutional. I think that's a rather weak argument. Rather the income tax is like a claim on your life, saying that you owe the government a certain portion of your labor. He also makes the claim that income taxes are unnecessary if people don't view the goverment as their source of sustenance.

 

[kylejack]

I believe it's only 38%.

I calculated it myself using the 2006 budget and found it to be 43%. If 38% is for 2007, that would just be projected and not actual.

 

[Texan4Life]

Labor is considered an EXCHANGE of work for money, therefore it is not an income.

Isn't that in a supreme court ruling also?

 

[BLS]

I calculated it myself using the 2006 budget and found it to be 43%. If 38% is for 2007, that would just be projected and not actual.

OK...I'll buy that.

 

[kylejack]

I'm not sure that Ron Paul would argue it is unconstitutional. I think that's a rather weak argument. Rather the income tax is like a claim on your life, saying that you owe the government a certain portion of your labor. He also makes the claim that income taxes are unnecessary if people don't view the goverment as their source of sustenance.

Ron Paul doesn't think the 16th was properly ratified.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZl6...aul-on-cnbc-2004-unconstitutional-income-tax/

 

[Dustancostine]

How was it not properly ratified?

 

[ForLibertyFight]

If it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court then how come the government still collects income tax?

 

[kylejack]

How was it not properly ratified?

Some state legislatures ratified slightly different text. Others ratified text that had precisely the opposite meaning. Others got logged as having ratified it though they didn't. In the last days of the administration, it was declared as having been ratified though all of these things were up in the air.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

Is the federal income tax really unconstitutional?

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.

How can we say that it isn't? I heard people arguing that it was never properly ratified but however the constitution states that they have the right to tax on our incomes. I don't really believe that arguing about the improper ratification is a strong enough argument to say we need to abolish the IRS or the income tax. I am sorry if the question seems dumb but I am only 15.

thank you

Without getting too technical the Ammendment as its been ruled.. applies to Corporate profit only. the key phrase is "from whatever source derived' This means that the profit has to be separated from the source of that profit.

IE: If you get taxed on your salary you are actually taxing the SOURCE of that salary which is your labor.. and that is unconstitutional... The corporate Income tax is not a tax on the income itself rather it is a tax upon Privilege (the corporate charter granted by the State) and to determine the amount to tax an entity on they calculate it by profit.

But citizens do not have this privilege it is a RIGHT.. and the govt is not allowed to tax people on their rights..

This is about the most condensed I can make this.. Hopefully this puts it into a better persepective for people.

I can go into more detail if anybody is interested.

 

[kylejack]

If it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court then how come the government still collects income tax?

The income tax wasn't declared unconstitutional. The ruling mentioned just stated that the 16th amendment gave no new powers of taxation.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

If it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court then how come the government still collects income tax?

There is a blatant disconnect between the Supreme Court and the lower courts.

Lower courts are not in compliance with Supreme Court decisions.. THis is why when people are allowed to bring the law into the courtroom they are usually acquitted but when they are NOT allowed to introducre law into the courtroom thy are usually found guilty of tax evasion

 

[Chester Copperpot]

The income tax wasn't declared unconstitutional. The ruling mentioned just stated that the 16th amendment gave no new powers of taxation.

Yes that is defintiely more accurate

 

[RP08]

Without getting too technical the Ammendment as its been ruled.. applies to Corporate profit only. the key phrase is "from whatever source derived' This means that the profit has to be separated from the source of that profit.

IE: If you get taxed on your salary you are actually taxing the SOURCE of that salary which is your labor.. and that is unconstitutional... The corporate Income tax is not a tax on the income itself rather it is a tax upon Privilege (the corporate charter granted by the State) and to determine the amount to tax an entity on they calculate it by profit.

But citizens do not have this privilege it is a RIGHT.. and the govt is not allowed to tax people on their rights..

This is about the most condensed I can make this.. Hopefully this puts it into a better persepective for people.

I can go into more detail if anybody is interested.

Dude... well laid out.

 

[JoshLowry]

This guy won in court about a week ago: http://consumerist.com/consumer/irs...ars-wins-in-federal-district-court-279978.php

While Cryer agrees he has income, the U.S. Attorney's office was apparently unable to prove that income equals taxable revenue.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

Isn't that in a supreme court ruling also?

COPPAGE v. STATE OF KANSAS, 236 U.S. 1 (1915)


http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=236&invol=1

 

[Dustancostine]

Without getting too technical the Ammendment as its been ruled.. applies to Corporate profit only. the key phrase is "from whatever source derived' This means that the profit has to be separated from the source of that profit.

IE: If you get taxed on your salary you are actually taxing the SOURCE of that salary which is your labor.. and that is unconstitutional... The corporate Income tax is not a tax on the income itself rather it is a tax upon Privilege (the corporate charter granted by the State) and to determine the amount to tax an entity on they calculate it by profit.

But citizens do not have this privilege it is a RIGHT.. and the govt is not allowed to tax people on their rights..

This is about the most condensed I can make this.. Hopefully this puts it into a better persepective for people.

I can go into more detail if anybody is interested.

Ok well my situation is kinda different than everyone elses. I own my own business but don't use a corporation, just a dba. How is that effected?

Thanks, Dustan