Are income taxes unconstitutional?

Question

I saw some television show and have also heard about a book that tells how income taxes are unconstitutional. I havn't gotten around to reading it but if someone is familiar with this could you briefly explain the logic or facts behind this argument. Also, if it's true why is our country not goign crazy about this?

Answer 1

It used to be, but the Sixteenth Amendment changed all that.

Answer 2

they are not unconstitutional as the 16th amendment was added to the constitution in 1913...but the way the system is now is not at all how the founders of our country would have envisioned as acceptable taxation, nor how the enacters of the income tax thought the tax would evolve.
If anything, i think that the payroll/Social Security tax is much more unconstitutional than the income tax.
the gov't should have to wait in line for it's money from the citizens just like any other bill collector.

a couple of links w/some info:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/business/hottopic/irs_history.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Answer 3

Income Taxes have always been constitutional. Congress has always had the power to tax anything it wants to. Prior to the 16th Amendment, an income tax would have had to have been apportioned among the states. The 16th Amendment did away with apportionment clause making the income tax that we have today perfectly legal.

Tax Protesters have various theories on why, in their opinion, there is no income tax. Not one of them has been victorious in court and gotten out of paying their taxes.

Answer 4

There are a number of people that claim income taxes are illegal under the constition. and that you have no problem not paying any. Unfortunately, most of those people are in jail, and the supreme court ha ruled that the government has a constitutional right to tax us.

Answer 5

The government cant make money magically appear, so they take the money of the people that live here so they can pay the troops and other government agencies to keep the country safe and running, and unfortunately they also give it to lazy well-fare trash. Does the government abuse taxes? I believe so, but is taxing unconstitutional? Not in my opinion.

Answer 6

Correction to the unconstitutional question. The tyrants in Washington tried to levy nationwide earnings taxes by using capacity of federal statute. This grew to become into earlier than sixteenth modification. as quickly as sixteenth modification grew to become into ratified, earnings tax grew to grow to be constitutional. and those tyrant democrats incredibly be attentive to a thank you to wield the ability of raising taxes. And before all you leftists get your panties in a team related to the way you "care" related to the "center type" tell me. How does raising taxes on the wealthy and not reducing the tax cost on everyone else a tax minimize on your jacked up heads?center type tax expenses have not been touched considering Obama election yet all styles of recent taxes have been signed into regulation. it incredibly is reality and in case you disagree, you're a communist propagandists!! ,,!,, you

Answer 7

Income taxes were unconstitutional until 1913 when the 16th amendment was passed allowing income tax to be levied.

Answer 8

No, income taxes are Constitutional.

In Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution it states, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,...". In Article 1, Section 2 it states, "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States..." This is where the argument begins. Economists define direct taxes as those taxes that cannot be shifted to another payer. Most people assume that income taxes are direct taxes. Most economists would also classify income taxes as direct taxes, however, in a Constitutional sense, they are not. To put it simply, income taxes are already shifted from being the burden of one payer to being the burden of another. Under the current system, taxes are paid by the employee. Suppose a person makes $40,000 a year in gross pay. To keep things simple, let's ignore Social Security and other miscellaneous taxes. Assuming the person's federal tax rate is 25%, they will bring home $30,000. Instead of an income tax, let's pretend Congress decides instead to have a business wage tax. In other words, a tax on wages a business pays to its' employees. A business pays an employee $30,000 and that is what the employee takes home. However, Congress says the business has to pay a 33.3% tax on employee wages. So, an additional expense to the business would be this extra business wage tax of $10,000. Same net effect. In either case, the employee takes home $30,000 and the government collects $10,000.

Assuming for the moment that income taxes are direct taxes and therefore would have to be apportioned among the states, the 16th amendment removes that requirement. The 16th amendment states, "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."

Some people will argue that the 16th amendment was not properly ratified. Assuming for the moment that there were procedural errors in the ratification, the 16th amendment has been added to the Constitution. It has been upheld by the courts numerous times as valid. Therefore, in order to have it removed from the Constitution, it would take another Constitutional amendment. Anyway, most of the arguments against ratification claim that the states returned copies of the amendment with typographical errors or small spelling errors. There were several, more significant errors on the 14th amendment. However, those same people don't have a problem with the 14th amendment.

The first income tax was enacted in 1861. The Internal Revenue Service was created in 1862. Income taxes continued until 1872 when Congress decided not to renew it. Various other income tax laws were enacted between 1880 and 1894. The 1894 law was an income tax law, but the tax on incomes included taxes on income from personal property (rental income). The Supreme Court at the time declared that a tax on rental income was a direct tax and therefore had to be apportioned among the states in order to be constitutional. Since the writing of the income tax law did not differentiate to any great extent between regular income and rental income, the entire law had to be declared unconstitutional. That decision and the need to fund the government by means other than tariffs and duties, necessitated the passage of the 16th amendment which was ratified in 1913. Since 1913, there has been an income tax law and there have been various tax rates. Did you know that in 1945 (I think), that people who had incomes over $1 million had an income tax rate of 94%? How would you like to pay those taxes?

The basis for today's income tax laws go back to the Internal Revenue Act of 1954. This act setup a basic structure for our current tax laws. Prior to this, the entire internal revenue code was reenacted each time it was up for renewal. This became unwieldy. So in 1954, language was included to make it easier to adjust parts of the income tax laws, like standard deductions. The Internal Revenue Code was revised and reenacted in the Revenue Reform act of 1986. Since that time, only amendments to the Internal Revenue Code have been enacted each year.

The actual Internal Revenue Code can be found in the U.S. Statutes at Large which can be found at Federal Depository Libraries. There are probably several Federal Depository Libraries in your state. The Internal Revenue Code (which is positive law) is codified in the U.S. Code as Title 26. Title 26 is known as prima facie law.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html

Anyway, if you do happen to read a book or see another T.V. show about income taxes, most tax protestor arguments are debunked at the excellent tax protestor FAQ at http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html

Good luck,

Answer 9

yes income taxes are unconstitutional and there is no tax in the whole Malakand Division in Pakistan.
This is the only part of Pakistan where every where there is prosperity and peace.

Answer 10

Because they are legal. This claim has been made repeatedly by tax-cheats in the US and every single time they lose the case in court, have to pay back the taxes with penalties, and sometimes with jail terms.

Answer 11

No. And if anyone tells you differently, ignore them. Trust me, there are quite a few people in Federal prisons who found out the hard way.