Peter Hendrickson
Article I, Section 9, places limits upon the Legislative Branch of the federal government; states very clearly: “No capitation, or other ...more »
Article I, Section 9, places limits upon the Legislative Branch of the federal government; states very clearly:
“No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section9
The transcripts of the Constitutional Convention mention taxing labor only one time, that was on July 12th, and it was referred to as a direct tax.
Dr. Adam Smith in his ‘Wealth of Nations’ defined what Direct Taxes were and how for what purpose they function and how their use has affected various countries (France and England specifically).
Dr. Adam Smith defines Direct Taxes, which includes ‘Capitations’ and ‘Poll-taxes’ as:
[Taxes upon the Wages of Labour]
"A direct tax upon the wages of labour, therefore, though the labourer might perhaps pay it out of his hand, could not properly be said to be even advanced by him; ..."
...
[Capitation Taxes]
"The taxes which, it is intended, should fall indifferently upon every different species of revenue, are capitation taxes, and taxes upon consumable commodities. These must be paid indifferently from whatever revenue the contributors may possess; from the rent of their land, from the profits of their stock, or from the wages of their labour."
...
Capitation taxes, if it is attempted to proportion them to the fortune or revenue of each contributor, become altogether arbitrary. The state of a man's fortune varies from day to day, and without an inquisition more intolerable than any tax, and renewed at least once every year, can only be guessed at. His assessment, therefore, must in most cases depend upon the good or bad humour of his assessors, and must, therefore, be altogether arbitrary and uncertain.
Capitation taxes, if they are proportioned not to the supposed fortune, but to the rank of each contributor, become altogether unequal, the degrees of fortune being frequently unequal in the same degree of rank.
...
"Capitation taxes, so far as they are levied upon the lower ranks of people, are direct taxes upon the wages of labour, and are attended with all the inconveniences of such taxes."
- "Wealth of Nations" Adam Smith [1776]
If one were to look-up the legal terms ‘capitation tax’ and ‘poll-tax’ in a pre-1930 legal dictionary they will clearly understand what it is that they mean.
The federal government cannot ever change a term as defined and established within Fundamental Law, the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution, transcends time, it is not a ‘living document’.
The IRS admits their power to tax under the Internal Revenue Code is due to the implementation of the XVI Amendment.
For further clarification, please review the legal annotations for the XVI Amendment, it makes it very clear exactly what “income taxes” are; which specifically excludes any mention of taxes upon ones common labor:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt16toc_user.html
Up until the ~1940’s, not more than %8 percent of Americans filed tax returns (the average ranged between 3-6%), this was due to the confusing implementation of the ‘Current Tax Payment Act of 1943’ having to due with “wage” withholdings.
It is quite simple the current implementation of the Internal Revenue Code is being grossly misapplied, “The Code” as the IRS calls it, it itself perfectly legitimate, the issue is the status quo perception handed down from others to those new to the word force. We need to get back to our founding principles and away from the currently established socialist agenda. Socialism breeds lazy freeloaders. “lawfulman” is evident of that cold-hard-fact.
For a full explanation see here:
http://freedomwatch.uservoice.com/pages/16625-freedom-watch-show-
ideas/suggestions/180526-cracking-the-code-by-pete-hendrickson
« less full details »