The characteristics of a tax define the tax, not its name
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Judy
Quote:
Originally Posted by
johnwk
Yes, Judy, according to the Court’s written opinion, the 16th Amendment seems to have made no material change to Congress’ taxing powers. The Amendment merely confirms Congress may lay and collect taxes on “incomes” without having to apportion the tax ___ a power apparently possessed by Congress from the beginning. But note, the Amendment does not say Congress may lay and collect “direct” taxes on incomes without having to apportion them. The Flint case, which I provided a link to, explains in detail how Congress’ was able to lay and collect a tax on incomes, prior to the adoption of the 16th Amendment, without having to apportion the tax. The tax in Flint turns out to be an indirect tax on a privilege granted by government and did not have to be apportioned, while the amount of tax to be paid is calculated from profits and gains realized under the privilege.
Under the alleged fairtax, Congress gets to impose a 23 percent tax on articles of consumption; gets to impose a 23 percent tax on the sale of labor; and maintains its power to lay and collect excise taxes calculated from profits and gains which ___ as in the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909 ___ turns out to be an income based tax.
The ugly truth is, the alleged “FairTax” does not eliminate income based taxes. But it does create two new taxes and two new government agencies to be used to tighten the iron fist of our federal government around the necks of the American people and their businesses.
Why do you support such tax tyranny?
JWK
The corporate excise tax of 1909 was replaced with the corporate income tax in 1913 and hasn't existed in the US for 105 years.
The FairTax repeals the federal corporate income tax and all other federal income based taxes that are part of the Internal Revenue Act of 1986 and replaces that revenue with a 23% national retail sales tax on new goods and services,
.
Judy,
I’m beginning to understand the mental block you have in judging the merits of a tax. You fail to identify the characteristics of the tax and how it operates on individuals, and focus only on the name of a tax. Repealing the Corporate Excise of 1909 and replacing it with the corporate income tax in 1913 does nothing to change the characteristics of the tax. In each case the tax is calculated from profits, gains and other incomes and the name of the tax is irrelevant in its operation. Is this really that difficult for you to understand?
Your above assertion, that the “FairTax repeals the federal corporate income tax and all other federal income based taxes that are part of the Internal Revenue Act of 1986” is meaningless and an intentional attempt to delude if the characteristics of an income based tax are still available to Congress under the alleged “FairTax”, which is the case.
Additionally, the alleged “FairTax”, when applied to ordinary working people, such as Mary and Joe Sixpack who sell the property each has in their own labor to finance their economic needs, turns out to directly tax an inalienable right of mankind in addition to operating as an income based tax, as the tax to be paid is calculated from money received from the sale of their labor.
Our founders fully understood the notoriously oppressive nature of direct taxation, and that is why they specifically commanded in our Constitution that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Our Founders intended that if direct taxation were ever to be used, and levied directly upon individuals by our federal government, as the alleged “FairTax” does, it would turn out to be an equal per capita tax and every tax payer would pay an equal amount of tax, which is not the case under the alleged fairtax.
JWK
If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895)
fairtax vs fair share balanced budget amendment
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Judy
The one joy from all these stupid dialogues, Johnwk, is that until the FairTax passes, Joe and Mary Sixpack Whiners will be paying 15.30% self-employment tax to Social Security Administration and at least 25% income tax on their "labor" to the IRS until it does.
And that is why I support adopting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment which, unlike the alleged fairtax, would end all income based taxes and begins with the following 32 words:
“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.
NOTE: these words would return us to our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! They would also end the experiment with allowing Congress to lay and collect taxes calculated from lawfully earned "incomes" which now oppresses America‘s economic engine and robs the bread which working people have earned when selling their labor!
JWK
“…a national revenue must be obtained; but the system must be such a one, that, while it secures the object of revenue it shall not be oppressive to our constituents.”___ ___Madison, during the creation of our Nation’s first revenue raising Act