Quote:
Originally Posted by RightinNYC  Unfortunately, he's right and you're wrong. |
Unfortunately, all taxes on the individual were taxes based on appropriation and enumeration. The 16th amendment is what allowed income tax as we see it now...
Quote:
|
Wrong. Federal income taxes did exist before the ratification of the 16th amendment - they were just subject to more stringent regulation in that they were considered excise taxes and were treated differently based on how the income was earned. The 16th amendment simply removed those restrictions and allowed the government more leeway in shaping tax policy. See Pollock v. Farmer's Loan for a discussion of how the federal income tax was handled pre-1895.
|
Whats up with this wiki argument of yours??? Am i wrong, or did the OP say something along the lines of:
Quote:
|
Do you think current federal taxation code complies with this article of the constitution?
|
??????
Previously to 1913, they didnt tax a persons income as they did now. That was the OP's actual question, not whether income tax in any form under any premise existed. Try and stay on topic...
Quote:
|
This is also completely false. It's a conspiracy theory spouted by tax protesters who don't know what they're talking about and has no basis in reality.
|
It is actually true that the ratification of this amendment was obtained in multiple unconstitutional ways.
Quote:
|
If by "bounced back between Congress and SCOTUS" you mean completely ignored by the court system and unaddressed by the legislature, then yea.
|
That is fairly accurate. It would seem like a responsible thing to A.) officially prove what is the truth once and for all B.) investigate if in fact unconstitutional practices have in fact enacted a law...
Quote:
|
Uh, Brushaber completely validated the 16th amendment and confirmed the constitutionality of the income tax.
|
If you couldnt tell the line, i was responding in part to the OP.
Quote:
|
Redfield was a minor case occurring nearly 80 years ago that in no way indicated anything beyond its limited holding. Furthermore, see Department of Revenue v. Clark for an instance where the Court specifically declines to extend Redfield beyond its original reach.
|
Just thought it was something worth noting in regards to income tax discussion.
Quote:
|
For someone who was so eager to mock others for supposedly not knowing what they were talking about, you don't seem to have much of an idea of how this works.
|
The original discussion was in regards to the "CURRENT TAX SYSTEM". The only thing that was posted that has not been proved is unconstitutional ratification.
While most arguments are in essence ridicules, there are some instances where specific state constitutions prohibit the legislature from granting federal tax authority. In these instances, the specific constitutions require a vote of the population, legislature (state) isnt given the authority to ratify such an amendment...