Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: JOHN W K

Apportionment only applies to some taxes, the ones that are direct. Indirect taxes are not subject to apportionment. Examples of indirect taxes include excise taxes on liquor, income taxes on wages, tariff on imports, Capital gains tax, fee of 200 dollars on manufacture of a firearm, and, post 16th Amendment, income tax on income from property.

That the indirect taxes are legal per the apportionment clause doesn’t make them right. It just means you need a different argument.


71 posted on 09/29/2012 11:05:40 AM PDT by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: donmeaker
I’m not sure what your point is in brining up the 16th Amendment, but it certainly did not change the rule requiring direct taxes to be apportioned.

Aside from that I get the feeling you have a problem with the very intentions for which the rule of apportioning any general tax among the States was adopted. Am I correct in thinking this?

JWK

“The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil”3 Elliot’s, 243,“Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax3 Elliot’s, 244 ___ Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution.

72 posted on 09/29/2012 1:29:26 PM PDT by JOHN W K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson