Article I, Section 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises . . . but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Comment: Article I, Section 8 gives Congress the “Power To law and collect Taxes” without further restriction in this Section. Note that the uniformity requirement only applies to “Duties, Imposts and Excises” and not to taxes. This means that “Taxes” are treated differently than “Excises” under the Constitution, since Taxes are not required to be uniform. Those who would equate “Taxes” and “Excises” are simply wrong, and demonstrably so.
Article I, Section 9.
No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census of Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
Comment: Article I, Section 9, does not ban direct taxes, but merely says that such taxes must be “in Proportion to the Census of Enumeration”.
Amendment XVI.
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.
Comment: Whether or not Article I, Section 9 applies to income taxes, its requirement that such taxes be “in Proportion to the Census of Enumeration” is eliminated.
At this point, it is clear that the plain text of the Constitution authorizes an income tax without regard to either apportionment or the census. It is thus totally irrelevant whether such taxes are “direct” or not – it simply makes no difference whatsoever from the plain text of the Constitution.
Finally, Congress passes the tax laws according to:
Article I, Section 8.
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Summary: It is crystal clear from a reading of the Constitution that Congress has the power to tax (I.8), that “Taxes” are not the same as “Excises” (I.8), and that income can be taxed without regard to either apportionment or a census (Am.16). Congress is also authorized to draft income tax legislation (I.8). The “direct” versus “indirect” argument is simply a red herring, and not found in the Constitution itself.
The bottom line is that challenges to the income tax based on the Constitution are bogus, and demonstrably so.
7 comments:
Talk about a sheeple!
The elites will crush you when you have no more purpose to them. Open your eyes.
Sell your soul lately?
THE TAX PROTESTER FAQ
Created by Daniel B. Evans
Copyright © 2002-2004. All rights reserved. Not legal advice.
Not legal advice
Not legal advice
Not legal advice
Not legal advice
http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Govt/IRS/friv_tax_rebuts.pdf
No, I've got lots of tax protestors rotting in jail, like Irwin Schiff, Dick Simkanin, Al Thompson, Lynne Meredith, and the list goes on and on and on.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245 - Federally Protected Activities
1) This statute prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference, or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person or class of persons because of their activity as:
a) A voter, or person qualifying to vote...;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;
c) an applicant for federal employment or an employee by the federal government;
d) a juror or prospective juror in federal court; and
And your point is?
Hey just a word of encouragement Joey, I know most of what you get is the idiocy from the lunatic fringe that is circling around this carcase but there is a sane world following this too, mostly just to laugh at the nuts. I don't think they have a CLUE how much of their "traffic" and "interest" is generated by people staring at this like a bad car accident. Its nice to see a sane poster involved.
Hard Evidence:
IRS Commits Fraud Upon The Court
In making its arguments, the IRS has committed a significant fraud upon the U.S. District Court.
In an extensive footnote (see the DOJ Reply Brief, pg. 5) IRS argues that “all three branches” of government “have already responded to the anti-tax arguments” raised by WTP. IRS further states in the footnote that, “The Internal Revenue Service publishes guidance discussing all or most of plaintiff's positions on the income tax.”
In support of the government's assertion to the Court that they have answered the Petition regarding the income tax, IRS specifically cites “IRS Pub. No. 2105 (Rev. 10-2003)” which they told the Court is an IRS document titled, “The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments.”
In fact, the publication cited in the DOJ brief (i.e., publication “2105,”) is a single page, 2-sided, “tri-fold” color brochure entitled “Why do I have to Pay TAXES?” (sic)
In fact, the document put forth as evidence of the Executive Branch’s response to the WTP Petition for Redress Regarding The Federal Income Tax is a 54-page document, with:
NO cover page,
NO identified author,
NO publication date,
NO publication number,
NO catalog number, and
NO revision date.
Furthermore, and very tellingly, there are NO markings indicating it is from the Department of Treasury or the IRS, or that it is printed by the U.S. Government Printing Office.
In fact, there are NO markings, logos or any language indicating it is an official document of ANY government agency or the U.S. government at all. Beyond this, there is NO statement, in any form, claiming that the legal assertions put forth in The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments constitute the official, legal position of the United States Government.
Post a Comment