[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani

Man puts down ABC's The View on air

Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka

My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But..

Cash Jordan: “Set Them Free”... Mob STORMS ICE HQ, Gets CRUSHED By ‘Deportation Battalion’’

Call The Exterminator: Signs Demanding Violence Against Republicans Posted In DC

Crazy Conspiracy Theorist Asks Questions About Vaccines

New owner of CBS coordinated with former Israeli military chief to counter the country's critics,

BEST VIDEO - Questions Concerning Charlie Kirk,

Douglas Macgregor - IT'S BEGUN - The People Are Rising Up!

Marine Sniper: They're Lying About Charlie Kirk's Death and They Know It!

Mike Johnson Holds 'Private Meeting' With Jewish Leaders, Pledges to Screen Out Anti-Israel GOP Candidates

Jimmy Kimmel’s career over after ‘disgusting’ lies about Charlie Kirk shooter [Plus America's Homosexual-In-Chief checks-In, Clot-Shots, Iryna Zarutska and More!]

1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires.

Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed

Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!!

Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES

Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen

Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances

"NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor

If You're Trying To Lose Weight But Gaining Belly Fat, Watch Insulin

Arabica Coffee Prices Soar As Analyst Warns of "Weather Disasters" Risk Denting Global Production

Candace Owens: : I Know What Happened at the Hamptons (Ackman confronted Charlie Kirk)

Illegal Alien Drunk Driver Mows Down, Kills 16-Year-Old Girl Who Rejected His Lewd Advances

STOP Drinking These 5 Coffees – They’re Quietly DESTROYING Your Gut & Hormones

This Works Better Than Ozempic for Belly Fat

Cinnamon reduces fat

How long do health influencers live? Episode 1 of 3.

'Armed Queers' Marxist Revolutionaries Under Investigation For Possible Foreknowledge Of Kirk's Assassination Plot


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Constitutional help wanted
Source: self
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 31, 2011
Author: me
Post Date: 2011-03-31 02:13:26 by titorite
Keywords: None
Views: 481
Comments: 32

I am having trouble understanding a few parts of the constitution and the laws of today.

Specifically , taxation,the 16th amendment and the supreme court ruling of 1895 Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co.

Seriously , as a look into this, I find some severely fucked up shit.

Section 9 of article 2 states

"No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken"

Followed by

"No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

Now as I read this, it seems clear that both income tax and many sales taxes are void.

Income tax and sales tax being a direct tax and that is to say nothing about things the states export to one another and get taxed on.

Allegedly the 16th amendment supersedes article to section 9

"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."

Reading up on all this I came across this website,

http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/16thb.htm

"Because an income tax was declared unconstitutional before the adoption of the 16th Amendment in a case called Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1894), on reh’g 158 U.S. 601 (1895), and because the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, protestors conclude that the income tax must still be unconstitutional.

This conclusion is false. The short answer is that, while the Supreme Court did hold that the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, the amendment relieved the pre-existing power to tax incomes from the constitutional requirement of apportionment. Therefore, the previous problem with the income tax was removed and the income tax is now constitutional."

Now my brain starts to boggle because this law website says that the 16th only relieved the pre-existing power to tax incomes from the constitutional requirement of apportionment.

But this power was not pre-existing!

Thats why it was ruled unconstitutional in the first place!!!

Apportionment has little to do with it since we all earn money. Whether we beg on the street or work for a fortune 500 company the government considers any form of money coming into your hands INCOME and theirfor taxable. It applies to every us citizen that earns even one cent from picking it up off the ground.

How is this not considered a direct tax?

Now whats worse is because of the lack of apportionment the common man is taxed more then the rich man or corporation. As we have seen with several companies that are able to pay ZERO income taxes and even in some cases are entitled to tax refunds. This is not because they are exempt , for no US citizen or entity is exempt. The corporations have merely been allowed to retain lawyers to provide "write offs and tax deductions" on such a massive scale that it equals fraud.

The Government currently seems to tax everyone whatever amount they want.

If your poor then you will pay more in taxes and if you are rich you can pay nothing if you jump the the loopholes not afforded to the poor.

AND THEN their is the matter of exported articles being non taxable.

IF a Florida farmer exports oranges to Missouri the oranges are not supposed to be taxable as they came from another state. And yet Missouri taxes them and all foods.

Where this has much more serious implications is with online transactions.

Many folks that use ebay and craigslist are resellers. Buying something here and selling it there. Recently many states are attempting to pass internet transaction taxes. Again this goes against the constitution and what it prohibits regarding state to state exports.

How is all this unconstitutional stuff being held up as valid?

All this IRS BS seems more like a scam to me.

Why the hell aren't we using a flat tax system...

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.

#1. To: titorite (#0)

I'll evade the income tax debate for now but the following is quite easy:

IF a Florida farmer exports oranges to Missouri the oranges are not supposed to be taxable as they came from another state. And yet Missouri taxes them and all foods.

What the Constitution says is "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

It is simply saying that Florida cannot collect local taxes on items being shipped out of state. What Missouri does is a different issue as that is not taxing an export to another state but is a tax collected within the state and has nothing to do with interstate commerce which is what the constitutional prohibition is about.

Original_Intent  posted on  2011-03-31   3:09:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Original_Intent (#1) (Edited)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

It is simply saying that Florida cannot collect local taxes on items being shipped out of state. What Missouri does is a different issue as that is not taxing an export to another state but is a tax collected within the state and has nothing to do with interstate commerce which is what the constitutional prohibition is about.

Would the constitutional prohibition apply at a federal level as well?

For example If I buy my electric or phone services from another state that exports the service where ever, shouldn't that service or goods be non taxable?

titorite  posted on  2011-03-31   3:18:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 2.

#5. To: titorite (#2)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

It is simply saying that Florida cannot collect local taxes on items being shipped out of state. What Missouri does is a different issue as that is not taxing an export to another state but is a tax collected within the state and has nothing to do with interstate commerce which is what the constitutional prohibition is about.

Would the constitutional prohibition apply at a federal level as well?

For example If I buy my electric or phone services from another state that exports the service where ever, shouldn't that service or goods be non taxable?

They justify it under Section 8's general taxing authority and also under the interstate commerce clause - which has been warped and perverted by successive courts all out of its original intent which was to insure the free flow of commerce between the states.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; ...

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Original_Intent  posted on  2011-03-31 03:45:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]