What most people don't understand about income taxSubmitted by juliusbragg on Sun, 03/21/2010 - 21:25
If Congress creates a "Church Attendance Tax" is it unconstitutional?
ONLY if "church" means church in the ordinary sense, and "attendance" means attendance in the ordinary sense. If congress creates "Special Definitions", as they OFTEN do, and as they did in Title 26, the Income Tax Code, THEN the special definitions are of major importance.
For example, if "Church" was defined as:
- "For the purpose of this section, 'church' includes any Federally established Church or Religious service."
then you would see how the code made sense, and was in FACT NOT unconstitutional, as it only applied to Federal Churches.
Well, as you can imagine, the same thing happened with "Income"
The Supreme court defined "Income" as "Profit or gain from corporate activity".
Well, people were making a lot of money on dividends and other (indirect) means from shares of corporate stock. When congress tried to tax it, many people fought that this dividend did not "derived from corporate activity", and it was simply a profit from investing, and therefore not "INCOME" as defined.
This is what led to the 16th Amendment. (Remember what "INCOME" means as you read the text of the 16th)
- 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.
This is why your tax forms asks you to list your "wages, tips, and other remuneration" instead of simply asking for your "Income"
THAT IS PART 1,
the second part of Income Tax:
If the Income Tax were a tax on your labor, it would be a "Direct Tax", since it is a tax on the activity of Privileged Corporations, thus avoidable, it is an indirect tax.
However, when they do tax your labor (as they always do) it is a "Direct Tax". What does the Constitution say about Direct Taxes?
It says that Direct taxes, AND REPRESENTATION shall be apportioned among the states (of the Union).
YOu should note that the District of Columbia does NOT HAVE REPRESENTATION!!!! This is because they are NOT A state...
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?????
Because, if they DONT HAVE REPRESENTATION, that means that the section of the Constitution that CLEARLY STATES:
- "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states"
DOES NOT APPLY!
SO, if they DONT HAVE REPRESENTATION, then they ARE ALLOWED to direct tax!
Which is why, Title 26 defines "State" as the District of Columbia,
and "United States" as the District of Columbia and other Federal zones (where that section of the Constitution also does not apply)
and why you are :
- Treated as residing in the District of Columbia
if you live in one of the 50 states.
(remember "United States" and "States" is defined as the District of COlumbia at (9)and (10) of this same section)
the third way to pay income tax, is by voluntarily gifting a tax to the U.S.
Of course the W-2, W-4, 1099, 1040, etc are all "Gift Tax" or "Estate Tax" forms.
The point is, if you continue to think "Income tax" is unconstitutional, you will get nowhere.
If you continue to think that "Income" means anything you trade your labor for, you will get nowhere.
If you continue to think that Congress has the authority to lay a Direct tax on you, you will get nowhere.