A tax on income is not a tax on the source of that income. Period.
Strange, but the government, you know the folks actually levying those taxes on us, hold an entirely different view on that one.
Springer v. United States(1880), 102 U.S. 586
"The central and controlling question in this case is whether the tax which was levied on the income, gains, and profits of the plaintiff in error, as set forth in the record, and by pretended virtue of the acts of Congress and parts of acts therein mentioned, is a direct tax." "Our conclusions are, that direct taxes, within the meaning of the Constitution, are only capitation taxes, as expressed in that instrument, and taxes on real estate; and that the tax of which the plaintiff in error complains is within the category of an excise or duty."
KNOWLTON v. MOORE, 178 U.S. 41 (1900)
- 'indirect taxes are levied upon the happening of an event or an exchange.'
BROMLEY v. MCCAUGHN, 280 U.S. 124 (1929)
- While taxes levied upon or collected from persons because of their general ownership of property may be taken to be direct, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Turst Co., 157 U.S. 429 , 15 S. Ct. 673; Id., 158 U.S. 601 , 15 S. Ct. 912, this court has consistently held, almost from the foundation of the government, that a tax imposed upon a particular use of property or the exercise of a single power over property incidental to ownership, is an excise which neet not be apportioned
Tyler v. U.S. 281 U.S. 497, 502 (1930)
- An indirect tax is a tax laid upon the happening of an event,as distinguished from its tangible fruits.
Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.(1916), 240 U.S. 103:
- "the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation subject to apportionment"
House Congressional Record, March 27, 1943, pg. 2580:
- "The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and privileges (the type 3 and 4 taxes) which is measured by reference to the income which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax; it is the basis for determining the amount of tax."
Those are court decisions...courts don't actually levy taxes.
Springer v. United States(1880), 102 U.S. 5861880? That must bring back memories.
KNOWLTON v. MOORE, 178 U.S. 41 (1900)1900, huh?
BROMLEY v. MCCAUGHN, 280 U.S. 124 (1929)Property taxes? We aren't talking about property taxes.
Tyler v. U.S. 281 U.S. 497, 502 (1930)
- An indirect tax is a tax laid upon the happening of an event,as distinguished from its tangible fruits.
Hmmm...
A tax laid upon the happening of an event, as distinguished from its tangible fruits, is an indirect tax which Congress, in respect of some events not necessary now to be described more definitely, undoubtedly may impose. If the event is death and the result which is made the occasion of the tax is the bringing into being or the enlargement of property rights, and Congress chooses to treat the tax imposed upon that result as a death duty, even though, strictly, in the absence of an expression of the legislative will, it might not thus be denominated, there is nothing in the Constitution which stands in the way.
So you misquoted and quoted out of context. This was about death taxes, not income taxes. So according to the standards you apply to me, you are a liar.
Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.(1916), 240 U.S. 103:
Stanton v. Baltic Mining? You get this from a tax kook website?
House Congressional Record, March 27, 1943, pg. 2580:
So now you are claiming statements made on the House floor as evidence of fact?
This is typical of you, AG. You find a bunch of out of date rulings and assume time stood still for the last 70 years. Throw in the obligitory irrelevant cut & pastie and you've got a classic AG post.
Let's take a look a couple of more recent rulings:
|
GRAVES v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF NEW YORK, 306 U.S. 466 (1939) The present tax is a non-discriminatory tax on income applied to salaries at a specified rate. It is not in form or substance a tax upon the Home Owners' Loan Corporation or its property or income, nor is it paid by the corporation or the government from their funds. It is measured by income which becomes the property of the taxpayer when received as compensation for his services; and the tax laid upon the privilege of receiving it is paid from his private funds and not from the funds of the government, either directly or indirectly. The theory, which once won a qualified approval, that a tax on income is legally or economically a tax on its source, is no longer tenable, |
and a little more recent
So, again, a tax on income is not a tax on the source of that income. Period.
OKLAHOMA TAX COMM'N v. CHICKASAW NATION, ___ U.S. ___ (1995)
The Tribe and the United States further urge us to read the Treaty in accord with the repudiated view that an income tax imposed on government employees should be treated as a tax on the government.