Us federal income tax law unconstitutional?

[skylineGTR_guy]

First I've heard of this, its long but interesting

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=from

 

[Solid Lifters]

Scams and crooks have been saying that for years. They get idiots and fools to stop paying their takes with phony papers, documents and such which they sell to them.

Didn't even need to watch the video. I'll take it this video is the same?

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

Scams and crooks have been saying that for years. They get idiots and fools to stop paying their takes with phony papers, documents and such which they sell to them.

Didn't even need to watch the video. I'll take it this video is the same?

well I'm still watching it, but nobody is selling anything, they are just explaining how the law came about and why its unconstitutional

 

[Solid Lifters]

well I'm still watching it, but nobody is selling anything, they are just explaining how the law came about and why its unconstitutional

Go to the end to see if they try to sell you anything, or invite you to a "private seminar." That's where they make their sales pitch.

 

[Speedy Samurai]

Yes, it is. There is no law that states you must pay federal income tax.

There's a documentary entitled America; Freedom to Fascism which discusses this. View it with a discerning eye. The information it presents when it comes to taxes and the constitution is good but it does go off on a tangent midway through.

 

[skylineGTR_guy]

Yes, it is. There is no law that states you must pay federal income tax.

There's a documentary entitled America; Freedom to Fascism which discusses this. View it with a discerning eye. The information it presents when it comes to taxes and the constitution is good but it does go off on a tangent midway through.

Yeah thats what the video is called

here is the website:
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/

 

[Omnis]

There is a law for federal income tax. However, this law is not expressed. It is implied by the necessary and proper clause that the government must collect tax in order to support the execution of constitutional powers and protect its citizens.

 

[Kylehnat]

If nobody paid income taxes, this country would crumble to the ground. That money doesn't just evaporate; it goes somewhere.

 

[Speedy Samurai]

If nobody paid income taxes, this country would crumble to the ground. That money doesn't just evaporate; it goes somewhere.

yes, it goes towards the interest on the national debt.

 

[Swift]

If nobody paid income taxes, this country would crumble to the ground. That money doesn't just evaporate; it goes somewhere.

You do recognize that this country didn't have a federal income tax until World War I, right?

 

[Danoff]

It's true, our income tax law is unconstitutional. That's ok though because most people think it should be. If it came down to it and people really thought it was wrong it would be removed quickly.

That's why it's not an argument for facism in the US.

 

[Omnis]

You guys are still calling it unconstitutional. It's not. It's implied in the constitution, as it was necessary for congress to create it during the great war.

 

[Swift]

You guys are still calling it unconstitutional. It's not. It's implied in the constitution, as it was necessary for congress to create it during the great war.

So we still have it during peace times....why? BTW, I honestly believe we're in a war right now, but that's for another thread.

 

[ledhed]

Implied powers are a long and excepted fact of US law concerning the Constitution. The " general welfare " clause of the constitution has been used for everything from social security to opening banks.
In case your confused....Article one section eight .

I'll get the specific sub section to start you out...but then you can go to find law.com and count the thousands of cases that have been upheld , every time some kook decides paying income tax is not constitutional .

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Congress passed it . It was signed into law by the President, and there you go ......its as legal as can be...you don't like it get Congress to change it .

How anyone can say its not in the constitution is beyond my ken .


But just to be DOUBLY sure the government actually passed a constitutional amendment just for the purpose of income tax .

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.

I must have spent about twenty hours of my life trying to prove them wrong ( I was picked to argue the dissent )..I have a Criminal Justice class..how that get me involved in freaking income tax ...ask my dumb ass "Dr Frankel the pain in my butt ".. why he thinks we should expand our views of law to understand the hows and the whys and the who did what...I want to go home and eat and sleep , get my friggin paper for the class and get a raise.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8

In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxvi.html) to the U.S. Constitution was ratified. It empowered Congress to tax "incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Income_tax


I used the federalist papers to form my argument against and argued unsuccesfully that it was " AGAINST the general welfare of the people of the United States to be taxed on their income and that it promoted the government into the position of a rebel army plundering the people of their just reward with no accountability to the people for the money they are stealing from them..I wish I'd saved the paper..I got an A effort and a huge laugh out if it. I think dannoff would appreciate it...thankfully my wife edited and typed it so you can read it .


Wow you dudes watched the wrong documentary......

Internal revenue code
From Wex, everyone's resource for law learning

Federal statutes pertaining to taxes that are imposed by the federal government are compiled into Title 26 of the United States Code. This title is commonly referred to as the “Internal Revenue Code” or, often by tax practitioners, as the “Code”.

The Code consists of 11 subtitles that address both substantive and procedural aspects of federal tax law. The largest subtitle of the Code is Subtitle A, which provides rules for the imposition and calculation of the federal income taxes (one of several levels of income taxes that are imposed in the United States by the federal government and by state and local governments). Other significant subtitles are Subtitle B, which governs the federal estate and gift taxes; Subtitle C, which governs the federal employment taxes and mechanics for the collection of the federal income taxes; Subtitle D, which governs the federal excise taxes; and Subtitle F, which governs the procedures and administration of the federal taxes.

No dinner and straight to bed for the lot of you !

http://www.patriotofnj.com/sys-tmpl/isthefederalincometaxlegal/
http://www.givemeliberty.org/features/taxes/19990709_xcdfr_is_income.htm

For those that dissent do so with some sense.



My question for the OP..is how can a law in the constitution..an actual ammendment itself , ever be unconstitutional ? ( Not a trick question ) .

 

[Omnis]

So we still have it during peace times....why? BTW, I honestly believe we're in a war right now, but that's for another thread.

Not sure. Ask your communist democrats. All I'm saying is that it's not unconstitutional.

 

[Swift]

Not sure. Ask your communist democrats.

I would say socialist democrats. But that's splitting hairs.

 

[Danoff]

Implied powers are a long and excepted fact of US law concerning the Constitution. The " general welfare " clause of the constitution has been used for everything from social security to opening banks.
In case your confused....Article one section eight .

Well you yourself established that it isn't in the interests of the general welfare to pass an income tax. Similarly, it violates equal protection in the consitution to tax unevenly. Furthermore, the ammendment that establishes federal income tax wasn't properly ratified.

That leads me to the conclusion that it is unconstitutional, but that if a big enough stink was made about it, it would become properly ratified and the necessary ammendments would be made to establish its constitutionality.

 

[Swift]

That leads me to the conclusion that it is unconstitutional, but that if a big enough stink was made about it, it would become properly ratified and the necessary ammendments would be made to establish its constitutionality.

Yep, so either way we're stuck paying a very stupid income tax in a very stupid way.

 

[ledhed]

Well you yourself established that it isn't in the interests of the general welfare to pass an income tax. Similarly, it violates equal protection in the consitution to tax unevenly. Furthermore, the ammendment that establishes federal income tax wasn't properly ratified.

That leads me to the conclusion that it is unconstitutional, but that if a big enough stink was made about it, it would become properly ratified and the necessary ammendments would be made to establish its constitutionality.

I got an A too dont forget....nah nah nah nah nah ...


Its NEVER been established it was not fully and legally ratified..to my knowlage.

Thats just one of the bassis the anti income tax crusaders hang their legitamcy on .

If anyone ever doubts its the law of the land they are welcome to a nice cozy jail cell. Its already been done..and peopel have forced themselves to be arrested just so they could appeal to the supreme court..no dice the arguments never pass the criteria to be considered legitamate enough to be heard.
Unless someone can show me better or different...I would REALY be interested.

I can find no supreme court decision that says the Income tax law is constitutionally valid...probibly because its IN THE CONSTITUTION AS AN AMMENDMENT ...

Because its has been established it is LAW ..the law ...and NO challenge has ever succeeded.


So what else do we want ? BLOOD ...or more taxes ? HUH ...

The only way it can be changed is by the Congress ..constitutionally .

And when I complained to the IRS they audited me for ten years straight.

And I didn't even use the good arguments ... just the " you guys are nuts " one.

I can just imagine what they would have done if I argued against it with the " general welfare clause " .

Yep, so either way we're stuck paying a very stupid income tax in a very stupid way.

UH ..uh....someones always changing the tax code ...look at what Bush and his dudes did ..they gutted the crap out of a bunch of it..but you always have those talking about a flat tax or a tax just on spending and not INCOME...tax what is bought not what is earned...IMO the way to fairly tax everyone other than a flat tax . to me taxing what someone has gone and worked for is inherently an evil .

But I am a rebel ....

 

[Danoff]

I looked it up on wikipedia (and a few other places).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

It turns out that the ratification was rather sloppy, as was the admission of ohio into the union. I have no doubt that if push came to shove, the ammendment would be done properly - and so it's a moot point.

However, there is definitely some question as to whether the ratification process was done properly. The bigger issue in my mind is the equal protection violations in our tax code (of which there are literally thousands, dozens were probably introduced this year alone).

 

[ledhed]

I looked it up on wikipedia (and a few other places).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

It turns out that the ratification was rather sloppy, as was the admission of ohio into the union. I have no doubt that if push came to shove, the ammendment would be done properly - and so it's a moot point.

However, there is definitely some question as to whether the ratification process was done properly. The bigger issue in my mind is the equal protection violations in our tax code (of which there are literally thousands, dozens were probably introduced this year alone).

Almost explains why the US has so many damned Lawyers per capita ...

 

[FoolKiller]

It turns out that the ratification was rather sloppy, as was the admission of ohio into the union.

Wait, so does that mean that Ohio might not be a true state? Do I need to get a passport to go to Cedar Point or to catch a Reds game? Will the Bengals get kicked out of the NFL?

You know, those Buckeyes always did seem kind of odd to me.

 

[ledhed]

Wait, so does that mean that Ohio might not be a true state? Do I need to get a passport to go to Cedar Point or to catch a Reds game? Will the Bengals get kicked out of the NFL?

You know, those Buckeyes always did seem kind of odd to me.

Look into the legality of the Louisianna purchase....


I dare ya ...

 

[Tornado]

Look into the legality of the Louisianna purchase....
I dare ya ...

Let's not and say we did. I had to do a project on that very subject in relation to expressed powers of the Constitution for college history. That was a fun 2 weeks.

Will the Bengals get kicked out of the NFL?

You know what's scary? The Bengals is my favorite team but I never knew where Cincinnati was until then.