Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 8 Share on Twitter 1 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 10/28/16

What is an "income" tax and where did it come from? NOT the 16th Amendment!

By       (Page 2 of 6 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page. (View How Many People Read This)   14 comments
Author 506832
Message Jeff Maehr
So, where IS "income" defined if not in the IR Code so that we can KNOW what "income" actually and lawfully is and not just go on presumption and hearsay? Once again, let's allow the U.S. Supreme Court to tell us exactly what is, and what is NOT, "income".

- Helvering v. Edison Bros. Stores, 133 F2d 575. (1943); "The Treasury cannot by interpretive regulations, make income of that which is not income within the meaning of revenue acts of Congress, nor can Congress, without apportionment, tax as income that which is not income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment."

- Doyle v. Mitchell Brother, Co., 247 US 179 (1918); "We must reject in this case . . . the broad contention submitted in behalf of the Government that all receipts -- everything that comes in -- are income within the proper definition of the term 'income'..."

- Edwards v. Keith, 231 F. 110 (2nd Cir. 1916); "It taxes only income 'derived' from many different sources; one does not 'derive income' by rendering services and charging for them."


Webster's Dictionary defines "derived" as; "to take, receive, or obtain especially from a specified source," and, "to take or get (something) from (something else)." The property (wage, salary, or compensation) would be the parent substance (principal) and the "gain, profit or income" would be a separate "derivative" obtained from the parent substance, like interest on that part of your wage that you invest in some way. Webster's Dictionary defines "from" as "to show removal or separation," and, "used to indicate the place that something comes out of."

- Southern Pacific v. Lowe, U.S. 247 F. 330. (1918); "... [I]ncome; as used in the statute should be given a meaning so as not to include everything that comes in. The true function of the words 'gains' and 'profits' is to limit the meaning of the word 'income.' " (Emphasis added).


In other words, for something to be "income" it MUST be something that is a "gain" or "profit" to you.

- U.S. v. Ballard, 535, 575 F. 2D 400 (1976); (see also Oliver v. Halstead, 196 VA 992; 86 S.E. Rep. 2D 858); "There is a clear distinction between 'profit' and 'wages' or 'compensation for labor.' Compensation for labor cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law. . . The word profit is a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor . . . The claim that salaries, wages and compensation for personal services are to be taxed as an entirety and therefore must be returned by the individual who performed the services . . . is without support either in the language of the Act or in the decisions of the courts construing it and is directly opposed to provisions of the Act and to Regulations of the Treasury Department..." (Emphasis added).

- Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930); "The claim that salaries, wages, and compensation for personal services are to be taxed as an entirety and therefore must be returned by the individual who has performed the services . . . is one that is without support, either in the language of the Act or in the decisions of the courts construing it. Not only this, but it is directly opposed to provisions of the Act and to regulations of the U.S. Treasury Department, which either prescribed or permits that compensations for personal services not be taxed as an entirety and not be returned by the individual performing the services... It is to be noted that, by the language of the Act, it is not salaries, wages or compensation for personal services that are to be included in gross income. That which is to be included is gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal services. Since it is not the salary, the wage or the compensation that is to be included, but only the gain, profit or income that may be derived therefrom, it would seem plain that salaries, wages or compensation for personal services are not to be taxed as an entirety... Since, also, it is gain, profit or income to the individual that is to be taxed, it would seem plain that it is only the amount of such salaries, wages or compensation as is gain, profit or income to the individual..." (Emphasis added).


Wow, so what did we learn from the above case cites? (There are many more). "Income" didn't include American's wages prior to the 16th Amendment. There was never a regular lawful tax on wages because working has always been a right and not a privilege that can be taxed...

"The legislature has no power to declare as a privilege and tax for revenue purposes, occupations that are of common right." Sims vs. Ahrens, 167 Ark. 557; 271 S.W. 720, 730, 733 (1925).

"The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but, the individual's rights to live and own property are natural rights for the enjoyment of which an excise cannot be imposed." Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). (Emphasis added).


The income tax is an "excise" tax as the courts ruled. An excise tax is a tax on privilege. Working is NOT a privilege you can be taxed for...

"It could hardly be denied that a tax laid specifically on the exercise of those freedoms would be unconstitutional... A state [or federal government-author] may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal Constitution." Murdock v Pennsylvania, 319 US 105, at 113; 480, 487; 63 S Ct at 875; 87 L Ed at 1298 (1943).

"The right to engage in an employment, to carry on a business, or pursue an occupation or profession not in itself hurtful or conducted in a manner injurious to the public, is a common right, which, under our Constitution, as construed by all our former decisions, can neither be prohibited nor hampered by laying a tax for State revenue on the occupation, employment, business or profession." The Antelope, 23 U.S. 66, 120.

"Among these unalienable rights, as proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, is the right of men to pursue their happiness, by which is meant, the right to pursue any lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity or develop their faculties, so as to give them their highest enjoyment... It has been well said that, the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable ...to hinder his employing.., in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of the most sacred property." Butchers' Union Co. V. Crescent City, CO., 111 U.S. 746, 757 (1883). (Emphasis added).


"Labor is property, and as such merits protection. The right to make it available is next in importance to the rights of life and liberty. It lies to a large extent at the foundation of most other forms of property, and of all solid individual and national prosperity." Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36, at 127 (1873).

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6

 

Must Read 2   Valuable 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Jeff Maehr Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Jeff Maehr has been in the health and wellness field for 43 years. Over the last 14, he has been thrust into the political and constitutional law and liberty arena, and is very active in educating others (and himself) in the growing database of (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

What is an "income" tax and where did it come from? NOT the 16th Amendment!

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: