Remarks on the Meaning of "Income"
by Jim Davies
Amendment 16 says only: "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" and so fails to define the term "income". A whole mess of confusion has followed - and even preceded its apparent 1913 ratification.
Its other major terms are defined elsewhere in the Constitution; for example "congress" is the subject of the whole of Article 1 and "apportionment" is explained in Article 1 Section 9. But "income" itself, by far the most important term used, is not. Given that Amendment 16 is said to be the clause enabling the whole of the trillion dollar a year "income tax", that omission may be highly significant.
Read more here.
Conclusion
Usage of the term "income" is very far from uniform and unambiguous, so it should not be used in law without a definition and only a new Amendment can legally produce one. Since in Subtitle A of Title 26 it has been so used anyway, that Subtitle - the entire alleged "income tax" - is based upon a literally meaningless term and is, therefore, void.
Amendment 16 says only: "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" and so fails to define the term "income". A whole mess of confusion has followed - and even preceded its apparent 1913 ratification.
Its other major terms are defined elsewhere in the Constitution; for example "congress" is the subject of the whole of Article 1 and "apportionment" is explained in Article 1 Section 9. But "income" itself, by far the most important term used, is not. Given that Amendment 16 is said to be the clause enabling the whole of the trillion dollar a year "income tax", that omission may be highly significant.
Read more here.
Conclusion
Usage of the term "income" is very far from uniform and unambiguous, so it should not be used in law without a definition and only a new Amendment can legally produce one. Since in Subtitle A of Title 26 it has been so used anyway, that Subtitle - the entire alleged "income tax" - is based upon a literally meaningless term and is, therefore, void.
posted by The Freedom Fellowship at
1:28 AM
1 Comments:
Well, ...umm..
it seems in 1913? or so the sixteenth amendment was written into the constitution.
It contained some words...among them were ...wages salaries tips.
and the word "Income".
...and then the govt proceeded to collect an unnapportioned capitation tax which was(illegal)
however some people soon figured out that this was unconstitutional. And soon after there came unto the supreme court...several cases (ya'll know-em') which henceforth defined the words "Income" and "wages salaries tips.
And then we (congress)had a problem...and the amendment had to be re-written in 1956 or so!!!(after it was pointed out that it was unconstitutional as it was written)
So it got re-written and the words wages salaries and tips were removed!!!
So there it is folks...
The word Income was re-written into the constitution AFTER having been defined (by the supreme court) as Corporate profit!!!
...and there have SINCE been no (supreme court) decisions after 1956 that have re-defined the word "Income"
Income is not what you think it is!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home