Peel may not be dealing with a full deck. She is inadvertently correct, however.
Title 26 of the US Code is what claims to be the income tax. It starts right here.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/1
But reading it, it may seem off. And the reason is the tax code doesn't define what an individual is, other giving different tax rates for different marital statuses.
But what is an individual?
What about age? What if they are in utero? what about location? What about if the person is dead? what if they are permanently disabled? What about Puerto Ricans? what about visitors to the US for a week? A month? Six months? A Year? What about people who don't live in the US? What about a solider KIA? MIA? A POW? what about his widow? What about their children? what about someone in Guam? What about servicemen out at sea? What about subject to another country's income tax? What about foreign diplomats? The aides of foreign diplomats? The wife, the children of foreign diplomats? What about federal employees? Federal judges? What is an individual?
Rather, the regulations define what "individuals" are subject to the "Tax Imposed" by Title 26.
So technically Peel is correct. There is no individual income tax law. There are individual income tax regulations. And they are terrifying.
Our overbearing and tyrannical tax regulations could not survive an honest West Virginia v EPA analysis. No one voted for what we got. But boy did we get it.
Peel may not be dealing with a full deck. She is inadvertently correct, however.
Title 26 is what claims to be the income tax. It starts right here.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/1
But reading it, it may seem off. And the reason is the tax code doesn't define what an individual is, other giving different tax rates for different marital statuses.
But what is an individual?
What about age? What if they are in utero? what about location? What about if the person is dead? what if they are permanently disabled? What about Puerto Ricans? what about visitors to the US for a week? A month? Six months? A Year? What about people who don't live in the US? What about a solider KIA? MIA? A POW? what about his widow? What about their children? what about someone in Guam? What about servicemen out at sea? What about subject to another country's income tax? What about foreign diplomats? The aides of foreign diplomats? The wife, the children of foreign diplomats? What about federal employees? Federal judges? What is an individual?
Rather, the regulations define what "individuals" are subject to taxation.
So technically Peel is correct. There is no individual income tax law. There are individual income tax regulations. And they are terrifying.
Our overbearing and tyrannical tax regulations could not survive an honest West Virginia v EPA analysis. No one voted for what we got. But boy did we get it.
Peel may not be dealing with a full deck. She is inadvertently correct, however.
Title 26 is what claims to be the income tax. The issue is the tax code doesn't define what an individual is, other giving different tax rates for different marital statuses.
But what is an individual?
What about age? What if they are in utero? what about location? What about if the person is dead? what if they are permanently disabled? What about Puerto Ricans? what about visitors to the US for a week? A month? Six months? A Year? What about people who don't live in the US? What about a solider KIA? MIA? A POW? what about his widow? What about their children? what about someone in Guam? What about servicemen out at sea? What about subject to another country's income tax? What about foreign diplomats? The aides of foreign diplomats? The wife, the children of foreign diplomats? What about federal employees? Federal judges? What is an individual?
Rather, the regulations define what "individuals" are subject to taxation.
So technically Peel is correct. There is no individual income tax law. There are individual income tax regulations. And they are terrifying.
Our overbearing and tyrannical tax regulations could not survive an honest West Virginia v EPA analysis. No one voted for what we got. But boy did we get it.