There is no law requiring any American to pay income tax.

Try it and let us know how it goes.

Hey did they let you out of the clink already?

There's hardly a constitutional amendment, law, or supposition that hasn't been used in an attempt to prove that income tax collection is invalid. As a constitutional lawyer who works for a tax policy organization, I'm often asked whether the Sixteenth Amendment was properly ratified or (often more rudely) to show where the law is that requires people to pay income taxes.

I find these arguments, like most constitutional law discussions, interesting. But ultimately the truth is that the Secretary of State proclaimed the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment on February 25, 1913, 26 U.S.C. § 1 imposes tax on taxable income, 26 U.S.C. § 63 defines taxable income as gross income minus allowed deductions, 26 U.S.C. § 61 defines gross income as all income from whatever source derived, and 26 U.S.C. § 6012 requires the filing of returns by every individual with gross income for the year (with some exceptions). Dozens of cases have upheld the federal government's power to collect income taxes against just about every argument.

Irwin Schiff wrote:

The government has been lying about the need for Americans to keep books and records for income tax purposes. You can immediately stop paying income taxes by claiming Exempt on a W4, and you can even get back all the money you were duped into paying this year by filing a zero-icome tax return, refusing to assess yourself and asking for it all back.

This is what WE call a progressive individual.

I wish wrote:

I find these arguments, like most constitutional law discussions, interesting. But ultimately the truth is that the Secretary of State proclaimed the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment on February 25, 1913, 26 U.S.C. § 1 imposes tax on taxable income,

The definition of Income when the 16th Amendment was ratified meant a corporate profit. Individuals working for corporations do not have income. To act like they do is double-entry bookkeeping.

26 U.S.C. § 63 defines taxable income as gross income minus allowed deductions, 26 U.S.C. § 61 defines gross income as all income from whatever source derived,

You can't define a word and use that same word in the definition!

and 26 U.S.C. § 6012 requires the filing of returns by every individual with gross income for the year (with some exceptions).

If it were mandatory to file a tax return every year, that would violate the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendment, to name only three Consitutional rights.

You don't seem to know what "double-entry bookkeeping" is.

I wish wrote:

Dozens of cases have upheld the federal government's power to collect income taxes against just about every argument.

I'd love to know about the arguments that were not upheld and therefore not required to pay income tax. (Asking for a friend...)

Why is income tax automatically deducted from your paycheck?

How would the mood shift if you didn't have income tax automatically deducted but instead had the mail it in annually (quarterly)?

I'd guess all these "pay your fair share for the greater good" liberals would realize just how much they actually are paying and we'd quickly reassess the size and cost of the government.

Look at your last paycheck - the federal government probably took a car payment, retirement savings payment, vacation savings, or a solid portion of a mortgage payment without asking.

And don't give me "roads and bridges" or "teachers and firefighters" arguments - that's hardly where this money is going.

There is no law that allows you to run or drive on the roads for free. Parks, trails, tracks, are also all off limits to those who think they were built for free.

krispy kremlin_. wrote:

Why is income tax automatically deducted from your paycheck?

How would the mood shift if you didn't have income tax automatically deducted but instead had the mail it in annually (quarterly)?

I'd guess all these "pay your fair share for the greater good" liberals would realize just how much they actually are paying and we'd quickly reassess the size and cost of the government.

And, yet again, you would be wrong.

jon secada wrote:

krispy kremlin_. wrote:

Why is income tax automatically deducted from your paycheck?

How would the mood shift if you didn't have income tax automatically deducted but instead had the mail it in annually (quarterly)?

I'd guess all these "pay your fair share for the greater good" liberals would realize just how much they actually are paying and we'd quickly reassess the size and cost of the government.

And, yet again, you would be wrong.

Come on, every salesperson in the world knows that people are willing to pay more when it's automatically deducted monthly as opposed to one big lump sum.

Liberalism = a mental disorder wrote:

jon secada wrote:

IDIOTS... As a self-employed consultant I pay taxes quarterly, and have do so for nearly 20-years. I don't "mail" it in. It is deposited electronically.

And, yet again, you would be wrong.

Come on, every salesperson in the world knows that people are willing to pay more when it's automatically deducted monthly as opposed to one big lump sum.

The American public also ought to know that the IRS has no authority to seize property. The IRS only does so because the federal judges let them get away with it. If Americans knew the truth, every federal judge would be behind bars.

krispy kremlin_. wrote:

Why is income tax automatically deducted from your paycheck?

How would the mood shift if you didn't have income tax automatically deducted but instead had the mail it in annually (quarterly)?

I'd guess all these "pay your fair share for the greater good" liberals would realize just how much they actually are paying and we'd quickly reassess the size and cost of the government.

Look at your last paycheck - the federal government probably took a car payment, retirement savings payment, vacation savings, or a solid portion of a mortgage payment without asking.

And don't give me "roads and bridges" or "teachers and firefighters" arguments - that's hardly where this money is going.

I actually agree with you on this. Philosophically, I'm a voluntaryist. The idea that you need gov't to build roads or provide fire protection is spurious. How do people put on road races or organize trade conventions without government involvement? It's been my experience that people will pay for what they value voluntarily without being forced. Have you ever read this?:

Irwin,

First, and most important, I wish you were right. Moreover, I applaud your tenacity on questioning the system. On a personal note, it is characters like you that make my work slightly more interesting. You do, however, need to work on your facts to support your arguments.

You wrote: 'The definition of Income when the 16th Amendment was ratified meant a corporate profit. Individuals working for corporations do not have income. To act like they do is double-entry bookkeeping."

Unfortunately, this statement is inaccurate. The Sixteenth Amendment reads:

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.

Even prior to the Amendment, the Constitution gives the federal government the power to tax pretty much anything, with three caveats: (1) federal duties, imposts, and excises must be uniform throughout the U.S.; (2) no federal direct taxes may be imposed unless it is proportional to population; and (3) no federal taxes can be imposed on exports from a state. In 1894, the Supreme Court ruled that the income tax is a direct tax, and consequently, while the federal government can impose it, it has to be imposed proportional to each state's population.

This was viewed as a non-starter, so progressives in both parties in the early part of the twentieth century pushed for a constitutional amendment to allow for a direct and unapportioned federal income tax. In 1909, hoping to blunt momentum pushing Congress to challenge the Court and pass an income tax anyways, President Taft signed into law a corporate income tax (of 1%), and proposed a constitutional amendment to allow collection of an income tax.

Many histories have been written about the subsequent events, and there are those who still think the Sixteenth Amendment never got the necessary ratifications by state legislatures, and that Knox is a villain. (Don't use that as an excuse not to pay your taxes, though!) Nevertheless, Secretary Knox's proclamation has been taken at its word by reviewing courts, and the federal income tax is with us now.

You wrote: "You can't define a word and use that same word in the definition!"

This post is taking much longer than anticipated to write, so I will just keep this response simple - You need to learn the definition of an adjective and a noun. If you do not understand how this applies to your response, you absolutely should not be arguing constitutional law.

Here is some advice that you might find helpful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWrQIh6imNA

Irwin,

Are you kidding me? What the F are you talking about?

I pity you sir.

I hate taxes as much as the rest of us but realize they have an important purpose in our current society.

Peace and good luck.

loqueelvientoajuarez wrote:

Try it and let us know how it goes.

The OP's namesake Irwin Schiff did try it. He spent more than 10 years behind bars and died in prison last week.

tripstop wrote:

loqueelvientoajuarez wrote:

Try it and let us know how it goes.

The OP's namesake Irwin Schiff did try it. He spent more than 10 years behind bars and died in prison last week.

Then the original poster is just an imposter.