Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[The Sixteenth Amendment] was a response to the Income Tax Cases (Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.), and it exempts only "taxes on incomes" from the apportionment rule that otherwise applies to direct taxes. [45] Professor Calvin H. Johnson, a tax professor at the University of Texas School of Law, has written:
Tax protester Sixteenth Amendment arguments are assertions that the imposition of the U.S. federal income tax is illegal because the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads "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This tax was repealed and replaced by another income tax in the Revenue Act of 1862. [9] After the war when the need for federal revenues decreased, Congress (in the Revenue Act of 1870) let the tax law expire in 1873. [10] However, one of the challenges to the validity of this tax reached the United States Supreme Court in 1880. In Springer v.
Protesters argue that the income tax violates the Fifth Amendment right that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". [4] However, people can be deprived of life, liberty, or property with due process of law — this is what the courts do. [8] Legal commentator Daniel B. Evans describes:
Some tax protesters may cite what they believe is evidence that the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution (removing any apportionment requirement for income taxes) was never "properly ratified" or that it was properly ratified but does not permit the taxation of individual income, or particular forms of individual income.
A variation on the "show me the law" argument, the "there is no law requiring an income tax" argument, and the "IRS refuses to say what law makes U.S. citizens liable for income tax" argument is the contention that the IRS has an affirmative duty to respond to taxpayer demands for an answer as to why taxpayers must pay income taxes.
Arguments made by tax protesters in the United States generally fall into several categories: that the Sixteenth Amendment was never properly ratified; that the Sixteenth Amendment does not permit the taxation of individual income, or particular forms of individual income; that other provisions of the Constitution such as the First, Fifth, or a ...
Gould nullifies what tax protesters view as an attempt by the IRS to tax beyond the explicit provisions of the law. Section 861 did not exist in the year 1917, when the Gould case was decided, and the Court was neither presented with nor decided the issue of whether domestic or foreign income is not taxable.