Win / GreatAwakening
GreatAwakening
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

Yes, you hit the main points.

1862 - First income tax, applied to federal employees, therefore constitutional, but later dropped.

1895 - Pollack decision, where SCOTUS said that portion of the 1894 income tax statute that taxed income from ownership of property was, in effect, a tax on the ownership of that property, making it a direct tax requiring apportionment. Therefore, it was unconstitutional and the entire tax act was thrown out.

1909 - Corporate income tax act, pushed by Taft. This is one where people get it wrong, thinking that "income" means "corporate profits." Remember, in 1909, most States did not have corporation laws for the general public. This was directed at corporations that were federally chartered, such as those created for building out the railroads. (Congress has never had authority to tax corporations chartered by the States.) In that sense, it was constitutional, and the tax was an exise (indirect) tax for the PRIVILEGE (which all excise taxes are) for doing business in corporate form where Congress created the corporation.

The problem we run into, is it is hard to parse through a lot of old case law because some of the important elements are missing -- such as original court filings in the cases, which tell us who the parties were. The court decision usually skips much or all of that.

1916 - Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad - the case that confirmed the 16th Amendment as constitutional. Yes, but the Union Pacific Railroad was a federally-chartered corporation for building the railroads, and Frank Brushaber was receiving dividends from that federal corporation. This is why it was (a) an excise tax, and (b) constitutional.

Since then, it has been a con job whereby people volunteer to participate, and once volunteering, must comply with the statutes.

Thus, "voluntary compliance," which is an oxymoron if not understood correctly.

https://files.catbox.moe/fwjqot.pdf

But that is income tax.

Q was referring to the Federal Reserve.

Two peas in a pod, but not the same.

2 years ago
1 score
Reason: None provided.

Yes, you hit the main points.

1862 - First income tax, applied to federal employees, therefore constitutional, but later dropped.

1895 - Pollack decision, where SCOTUS said that portion of the 1894 income tax statute that taxed income from ownership of property was, in effect, a tax on the ownership of that property, making it a direct tax requiring apportionment. Therefore, it was unconstitutional and the entire tax act was thrown out.

1909 - Corporate income tax act, pushed by Taft. This is one where people get it wrong, thinking that "income" means "corporate profits." Remember, in 1909, most States did not have corporation laws for the general public. This was directed at corporations that were federally chartered, such as those created for building out the railroads. (Congress has never had authority to tax corporations chartered by the States.) In that sense, it was constitutional, and the tax was an exise (indirect) tax for the PRIVILEGE (which all excise taxes are) for doing business in corporate form where Congress created the corporation.

The problem we run into, is it is hard to parse through a lot of old case law because some of the important elements are missing -- such as original court filings in the cases, which tell us who the parties were. The court decision usually skips much or all of that.

1916 - Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad - the case that confirmed the 16th Amendment as constitutional. Yes, but the Union Pacific Railroad was a federally-chartered corporation for building the railroads, and Frank Brushaber was receiving dividends from that federal corporation. This is why it was (a) and excise tax, and (b) constitutional.

Since then, it has been a con job whereby people volunteer to participate, and once volunteering, must comply with the statutes.

Thus, "voluntary compliance," which is an oxymoron if not understood correctly.

https://files.catbox.moe/fwjqot.pdf

But that is income tax.

Q was referring to the Federal Reserve.

Two peas in a pod, but not the same.

2 years ago
1 score
Reason: Original

Yes, you hit the main points.

1862 - First income tax, applied to federal employees, therefore constitutional, but later dropped.

1895 - Pollack decision, where SCOTUS said that portion of the 1894 income tax statute that taxed income from ownership of property was, in effect, a tax on the ownership of that property, making it a direct tax requiring apportionment. Therefore, it was unconstitutional and the entire tax act was thrown out.

1909 - Corporate income tax act, pushed by Taft. This is one where people get it wrong, thinking that "income" means "corporate profits." Remember, in 1909, most States did not have corporation laws for the general public. This was directed at corporations that were federally chartered, such as those created for building out the railroads. (Congress has never had authority to tax corporations chartered by the States.) In that sense, it was constitutional, and the tax was an exise (indirect) tax for the PRIVILEGE (which all excise taxes are) for doing business in corporate form where Congress created the corporation.

The problem we run into, is it is hard to parse through a lot of old case law because some of the important elements are missing -- such as original court filings in the cases, which tell us who the parties were. The court decision usually skips much or all of that.

1916 - Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad - the case that confirmed the 16th Amendment as constitutional. Only, the Union Pacific Railroad was a federally-chartered corporation for building the railroads, and Frank Brushaber was receiving dividends from that federal corporation. This is why it was (a) and excise tax, and (b) constitutional.

Since then, it has been a con job whereby people volunteer to participate, and once volunteering, must comply with the statutes.

Thus, "voluntary compliance," which is an oxymoron if not understood correctly.

https://files.catbox.moe/fwjqot.pdf

But that is income tax.

Q was referring to the Federal Reserve.

Two peas in a pod, but not the same.

2 years ago
1 score