Replies

LOL, whatever YN. It is a distinction without a difference.

For bottomline, all that is required is to tax activity or exchanges of services and/or goods to convert you direct tax into an excise. A transaction tax on the transfer of funds would be sufficient to meet the requirement, either side or bothsides paying the tax.

Sorry the Pollock decision was a dead issue before it was even written and the Courts were well on their way to totally reversing any effect it had before the 16th was ever proposed.

However, if you wish to believe the 16th actually has some substanbive significance as to whether you can be taxed on value transfered as rents, dividends or intrest or not, you are free to believe whatever your little heart desires may. It's a moot issue. Some folks need a security blanket, and other's don't I guess.