US Income Tax - Unconstitutional

[Atrocities]

The constitution has a section in it that discusses taxes and that they have to equal and not punitive. I forget what it was called, but it meant that everyone pays the same. A flat tax.

[Phoenix-D]

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

All that says is the tax law can't vary from state to state.

[Atrocities]

Thank you. It has been some time since I read it, as I mentioned. Uniform is an interesting word though.

1. identical or consistent, as from example to example, place to place, or moment to moment: uniform spelling; a uniform building code.
2. without variations in detail: uniform output; a uniform surface.
3. constant; unvarying; undeviating: uniform kindness; uniform velocity.
4. constituting part of a uniform: to be issued uniform shoes.

What is uniform about taxes? Another example of why we need to reform the tax code. Its not uniform.

[Phoenix-D]

Just google it- there's a lot of sites that provide the text.

What cheeses me off is some of them are trying to SELL it, and right now one of those is #1 in Google ranking. WTF people? Its a legal document, not your own book!

[Gandalf Parker]

Phoenix-D said:
All that says is the tax law can't vary from state to state.

Somehow I dont see the drafters of that document meaning that.

Even if it did, you think they were saying that federal tax cant vary from state to state but state tax can? You really think thats why they put that line in?

[Baron Munchausen]

Phoenix-D said:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

All that says is the tax law can't vary from state to state.

The clause at issue is this:

Section 9, Article 4. No capitation, or other direct tax shall be laid unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

<<"Capitation" means 'head tax' or tax on individuals. Supposedly this was altered by 16th Amendment, but a Supreme Court decision claims otherwise.>>

16th Amendment

Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.

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

Notice that the 16th Amendment does not mention "capitation" -- that is, direct taxes on individuals. So, maybe the Supreme Court was right?

[Atrocities]

Thank you Baron. I was looking for a way to explain the complexities of this issue and you cut right through and nailed the crux of it.

[Phoenix-D]

Baron: first, that was for another part of the argument, not the original post. See AT's post right above that one.

Second, read Amendment 16 again. "The congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever sources derived. That overrides Section 9 article 4 prett clearly, and I'd be curious to see the Court case that says otherwise.

[Atrocities]

The thing is, does this Amendment mean "lay and collect taxes on incomes whatever sources derived" for individuals for for cooperations? I don't believe the Amendment was clear in that regard and that is one of the reasons why the Supreme Court ruled that the Amendment did not give the Government the right to levy new taxes against individuals because up to that point only cooperations were being charged an income tax.

[Phoenix-D]

From whatever sources derived is pretty clear AT, and I have yet to see a Court decision that says otherwise.