Taxes are unconstitutional.
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (69)
sorted by:
The government got around this SCOTUS decision by way of the 16th Amendment which was ratified on 2/3/1913. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
However, it wasn’t legally ratified. While it did get the required 2/3 vote in both the US House and Senate, it never received the required 3/4 approval from the state legislatures. At the time, there 48 states, so 36 state legislatures were required to approve it. It never reached that threshold. In fact, many state legislators voted against the amendment. In DC, the SOS at the time was Philander Knox who was a lackey to the banking cartels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philander_C._Knox
He simply declared the amendment ratified and no one called him on it. It simply became law at the whim of a puppet of the banking industry. Also, the intent of the income tax was to tax income on investments and not wages earned from labor. Labor started being taxed under FDR without the required changes to the amendment.
There was a Patriot named Larsen Rose who has done all the research on the tax laws dating back to the amendment, but of course he has been persecuted by the government for telling the truth. http://www.larkenrose.com/
Do you have more information on states not ratifying it? From what I could find, it was ratified by 36 states and passed, then it was ratified by an additional six states after it passed. What states are listed as passing that didn't actually ratify it?
Larsen Rose did the research so I will yield to him. I do recall one story that Kentucky voted to reject the amendment, but like a Dominion machine, Secretary Knox changed their certification to approval. Apparently this happened with other states.
Right, but unless this happened in like at least 7 states, it still has enough ratification to pass. I just have a really hard time believing that a freaking amendment was passed because a guy said "yup, everything looks good", and not states tried to sue or point out that they, in fact, had not ratified it.
The records of that vote for all 48 states is online in their archives. I am planning a project to look up all 48 this weekend.
It was Bill Benson in The Law That Never Was who asserted that every state that allegedly ratified the 16th had one of ten irregularities in the process. This list can be found online and is pretty significant. However, the Supremes have stated that all these irregularities are immaterial due to intent, and that's made Benson's argument a dead letter. Those seeking remedy must first research why their earnings are not income and then correct the record.
Larken with section 861, and Bill Benson who promoted the data about the 16th ratification process, are only chipping away at unimportant details, which is why they've gotten no traction.
Since it's deemed ratified it allows an excise upon federal activity. Every individual for whom the IRS receives a credible information return (declaring income) is responsible to verify or challenge that information and it is deemed correct if unchallenged. They also don't make it easy to challenge but they have standard processes that you can use once you do the further research needed.