Why are we paying Income Taxes Part 3?

Question

Last week I wrote a discussion on Income Tax and wanted to see proof of the law? All I got was a Wikipedia defintion which I don't use because of the many mistakes that are make within the website. However I would like for anyone to show me in the US law that requires us to pay Income Tax?

I don't want to see a codify IRS rules. In the constitution it says do not tax a man labor or compensation! But somehow I have been doing serious research and I have not found a Federal Law saying that we are to pay the income taxes.

I want someone to show me a Federal US Law in our constitution that says we are to pay these taxes. Not some book that the IRS design to mislead us? If You have a answer please leave a website and or other resources so that I can review them and I will write back to you to tell you if I am right or wrong!

Answer 1

Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, ..."
http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm

16th amendment of the Constitution 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."
http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm#amdt_16_(1913)

Both of those provide Congress the power to levy and collect an income tax. Using the power granted to Congress by the Constitution, the Internal Revenue Code was passed. The actual law passed by Congress can be found in the U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 68A. The U.S. Statutes at Large can be found in Federal Depository Libraries. Do a google search, there are probably several in your state.

Here are some court cases concerning the validity of the Internal Revenue Code and its codification in Title 26.

In United States v. McDonald, 919 F.2d 146 (10th Cir. 1990) and in United States v. Studley, 783 F.2d 934, 940 (9th Cir. 1986) the court stated, "Indeed, as we have repeatedly held, the entire Internal Revenue Code was validly enacted by Congress and is fully enforceable."

In Ryan v. Bilby, 764 F2d 1325, 1328 (9th Cir. 1985) the court stated, "Congress’s failure to enact a title [of the United States Code] into positive law has only evidentiary significance and does not render the underlying enactment invalid or unenforceable. See 1 U.S.C. § 204(a) (1982), (the text of titles not enacted into positive law is only prima facie evidence of the law itself). Like it or not, the Internal Revenue Code is the law, and the defendants did not violate Ryan’s rights by enforcing it."

In Bilger v. United States, 87 AFTR2d Par. 2001-468, No. CIV F 00-6486 OWW JLO (U.S.D.C. E.D.Ca. 1/9/2001). the court stated, "In his opposition, Plaintiff asserts that ‘Title 26 U.S.C. (including section 6321) has not been enacted into positive law, and is not the law, but is only prima facie evidence of the law.’ ... Congress’ failure to enact a title into positive law has only evidentiary significance and does not render the underlying enactment invalid or unenforceable. See 1 U.S.C. section 204(a). ‘Like it or not, the Internal Revenue Code is the law’. [Citations omitted] Plaintiff’s positive law argument is without merit."

Whether you like it or not, whether you believe it or not, the Internal Revenue Code is valid and the codification of that LAW in the U.S. Code as Title 26 is valid.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode01/usc_sec_01_00000204----000-.html

Now, you said, "the constitution it says do not tax a man labor or compensation!". You are wrong. The Constitution does not state that anywhere. It is not written in my pocket Constitution, nor is it written in the online version of the Constitution at http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm
If, by chance, you believe the fifth amendment says that labor can't be taxed, you are wrong.
In Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R., 240 U.S. 1, 24 (1916), the court stated, "So far as the due process clause of the 5th Amendment is relied upon, it suffices to say that there is no basis for such reliance, since it is equally well settled that such clause is not a limitation upon the taxing power conferred upon Congress by the Constitution"

Answer 2

You obviously have never read The Constitution. Please provide the specific section where it states "do not tax a man labor or compensation." You can't, because no such wording exists in The Constitution.

If you have not found a law despite your "research" then your research sucks, pure and simple. I'll make it easy for you: Title 26 of the US Code. Here's a link: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html That's not some wiki, but the Cornell University Law Library, one of the most prestigious in the world. I defy you to provide a link to any site that proves that income taxes are illegal AND is AT LEAST as prestigious. Heck, I'll settle for half as prestigious.

The Constitution gives the government the right to lay taxes of all types, INCLUDING income taxes. Due to some court challenges in the late 1800s, income taxes were declared to be direct levies and therefore subject to apportionment. The taxes were NEVER declared to be illegal, just subject to apportionment. That was impossible in those days but would be child's play in today's modern computerized society. As a result, the 16th Amendment was proposed and passed which changed the manner in which income taxes were treated, i.e. without apportionment.

If you choose to ignore the facts, then you are either hiding your head in the sand or are just a fool. Maybe both.

Answer 3

Title 26 of the Federal Code IS the law.

Look it up!

1) Article 1 Section of the US Constitution: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes...."
2) The 16th Amendment removed the apportionment clause that would have be required under the original Constitution for a tax on incomes.
3) The resulting law passed by Congress is and was Title 26.

The constition sets out the rights and responsibilities of the branches of government. It itself contains no "laws". Congress and the President pass laws and the courts interpret them.

Answer 4

I have tried to find it myself, it just not there, the 16th amendment was not properly ratified, and was repealed in the 21st or 22nd I believe, isn't it kind of ironic that the same year the federal reserve act of 1913 was enacted illegally a tax on wages was incorporated? the federal reserve is a bank, privatly owned, and cannot be audited by the government.

I think there is a problem with the understanding what income was. it was not wages wages are considered private property and private property wasn't to be taxed, it was profit from business or tax on capital gains tax. if it was this easy to show a law then why don't they just show that ed brown the law and he will pay the taxes, so since they can't he won't pay. they would rather spend months or years surrounding his house with military guns and fly bys with helicopters and shots over their heads and arresting visitors etc, instead of just showing him the law. that is all he wanted.

what they don't want is him going to jail, or court, as that would bring attention to the fraud, a lawyer would have a field day with this one. what a mess!! I guess they want to fatigue him enough to get him to pay and that way avoid the courts and such.

This is really sad to tax a man's labor and to take away from him something that belongs to him his blood and sweat teh real makers of wealth, when before the 1913 fed reserve act the government was doing fine with excise taxes, sales taxes and tariffs etc these were voluntary you didn't want to pay the tax you didn't buy the product or use the service. and they used real money too like gold and silver not paper, which the fiat has no value it represents debt not wealth.

RRRR

Answer 5

Go read the 16th amendment of the US Constitution. This was amended around March 1913.

Answer 6

You need to post this in a category for spitting into the wind. The world is not like you and others on the fruitcake fringe would like it to be.