There must first be an operable tax revenue bill such as the FairTax so that the removal of the 16th amendment and/or income taxation would proceed apace in a manner consistent with the laws of the country.
Getting the cart before the horse and destroying the income tax as you put forth would merely have Congress shooting themselves in the foot and cutting off government revenues as well. They would certainly be foolish to do that - and would undoubtedly lose their jobs on a wholesale basis if they were to let that happen since it makes no sense.
It's by far better to eliminate the income tax and its appurtenances and require its records destruction and THEN move on the eliminate the 16th and/or the constitutional prevention of income taxation in an orderly fashion and without chaos.
Dear pigdog,
"It is a logical fallacy since if unconstitutional there would be no income tax law and therefore no tax revenue."
Well, it's theoretically possible that it would be some other sort of fallacy, but it doesn't fall into the category of formal logical fallacies.
However, we've gone around this tree before. A constitutional amendment repealing the 16th Amendment could easily be written to provide for a date in the not-too-distant future when the authority to tax income would expire, providing the time needed to move from one system to another.
There is no reason that such an amendment couldn't say:
"This amendment will become effective two years from its adoption to the Constitution, during which time, the federal government may continue to impose and collect income taxes."
Or whatever is determined to be the right language.
"It's by far better to eliminate the income tax and its appurtenances and require its records destruction and THEN move on the eliminate the 16th and/or the constitutional prevention of income taxation in an orderly fashion and without chaos."
Nope. That's demonstrably false. If the NRST is passed, the 16th Amendment will not be repealed. Why buy the cow when the milk is free?
sitetest