Posted on 09/20/2006 10:32:34 AM PDT by tpaine
Top Ten Civil Liberties Abuses of the Income Tax
by Chris Edwards
Any tax system creates a threat to individual liberty because "the power to tax involves the power to destroy," as Chief Justice John Marshall observed.
But the federal income tax and its enforcement harm civil liberties much more than necessary to raise needed funds for the government. Certainly, the IRS performs poorly and too easily abuses the rights of citizens. But ultimately Congress is to blame for creating an excessively complex and high-rate tax system.
New laws to increase taxpayer protections and replacement of the income tax with a simpler, flatter consumption-based tax could greatly reduce the following 10 areas of civil liberties abuse.
1. "Vertical" Inequality. Although equality under the law is a bedrock American principle, the income tax treats citizens unequally.
2. "Horizontal" Inequality. Even people with similar incomes are treated unequally by the many exemptions, deductions, credits, and other intricacies of the income tax.
3. Complexity, Ambiguity, and Uncertainty. Certainty in the law is a bulwark against arbitrary and abusive government. But there is no certainty under the income tax because it rests on an inherently difficult-to-measure tax base, uses no consistent definition of "income" or other concepts, and is a labyrinth of narrow and limited provisions created by politicians intent on social engineering. Individuals are baffled by the complex rules on capital gains, pension and savings plans, and a growing list of targeted incentives. Those complexities would be eliminated under a flat consumption-based tax system.
4. Huge Size and Instability of Tax Law. Citizens are required to know the nation's laws and comply with them. Yet federal tax rules are massive in scope and constantly changing. Tax laws, regulations, and related documentation span 45,662 pages.
5. Lack of Financial Privacy. The broad-based income tax necessitates a large invasion of financial privacy that a low-rate consumption-based tax could avoid. The IRS regularly gains access to a myriad of personal records, such as mortgage records, credit card data, phone records, banking and investment records, real property transaction data, and personal correspondence. This broad IRS authority to obtain records without court supervision has been referred to by the Supreme Court as "a power of inquisition."
6. Denial of Due Process. The Fifth Amendment right to due process is ignored in many respects by the federal income tax regime. Due process requires that government provide accused citizens a clear notice of a claim against them and allow the accused a hearing before executing enforcement action.
7. Shifting of the Burden of Proof. For non-criminal tax cases -- the vast majority of cases -- the tax code reverses the centuries-old common law principle that the burden of proof rests with the accuser. Except in some narrow circumstances, the IRS does not have to prove the correctness of its determinations. When the IRS makes erroneous assessments, as it often does, citizens carry the burden to prove that they are wrong.
8. No Trial by Jury in Tax Court. Despite Sixth and Seventh Amendment guarantees of trial by jury, the federal tax system carefully sidesteps such protections. To contest an IRS tax calculation prior to assessment, one must file a petition in the U.S. Tax Court. But since this is an administrative court, not an Article III court, no jury trial is required.
9. Unreasonable Searches and Seizures. In most situations, the Fourth Amendment guarantees that, before the government can search private property and seize records, it must demonstrate to a court that there is "probable cause" to believe that lawless conduct exists. However, the IRS's summons authority under tax code section 7602 allows it to obtain records of every description from any person without showing probable cause and without a court order.
10. Forced Self-Incrimination. The requirement to file tax returns sworn to under penalty of perjury operates to invalidate the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. Citizens face a legal dilemma. On the one hand, refusing to file a return would expose a citizen to prosecution for failure to file. On the other hand, disclosing information sought in tax returns constitutes a waiver of Fifth Amendment protections. The IRS can and does release that information to federal, state, and local agencies for both tax and non-tax law enforcement purposes
Oh, so you don't like people to disagree with your claims is that it? You just say something and we are all expected to nod? I don't agree with your points and I explained why. That's the way it is supposed to work.
The $429 billion is amply covered by the 23% tax inclusive rate in any event and is not an added-on amount.Where did you get the $429 billion amount. I bet if you check the same source you would see that the 23% rate doesn't cover everything.
Whatever.
I'll yank your chain later.
Doesn't Prop 13 also violate the equal protection clause? Why should some guy who has owned his house (of equal value to mine) 20 years longer than me pay less than 1/4th the property taxes?
Because the house is valued [for tax purposes] based on what the owner paid for it.. -- 20 years from now, you too will appreciate that point.
If we let the State set that value, -- the sky becomes the limit.
The true un-'equality' comes when that owner - if a corporation, - never dies or never sells.
And a number of posters have also explained why your ideas are mere fluff!! That, also is how it's supposed to work.
But clearly $429 billion os much less than the $600 billion the Tax Panel dredged up out of nowhere.
Why don't you give us your version then of a fair and consumption-based tax?I don't write tax laws but common sense tells me when I'm being lied to. 40 some states use sales taxes but for some reason you think -I- should come up with a new plan?
The Fairtax sales pitches from "the grass roots" are filled with lies.
You can start with the "sales tax rate" which isn't a sales tax rate by any standard nor is it used "to compare to the income tax"...It's a "grass roots" lie. The rate is written that way for the business. The business that would be required to collect and remit the tax...It has no direct relation whatsoever with the consumer.
If you want to know why the Fairtax is failing, aside from being a flawed plan, look in a mirror.
Thank god everyone doesn't listen to you whiney naysayers.
How much would you like to bet??? Actually,if anything the $429 billion sounds high, if anything. Most probably it's even lower that that.What's the source?
How can they tax stuff you OWN?... Answer; they can't..
The american public is in gross denial..
How can they tax stuff you OWN?... Answer; they can't..Actually they can and probaly would. One of the ways is what they call a tax on imputed rent where you would have to pay a "sales tax" on the rental value of your own home.
Just because you haven't thought of a way doesn't mean it can't be done...There are people who lay awake at night figuring out ways to get your money...both legal and illegal.
Using your definition then, Social Security is not an entitlement program because those that receive payments from the system have paid money into the system. Its a rebate, right?
Except when taxes haven't been paid, then its a grant.
But perhaps you'd like to argue that no one will purchase anything taxable under the FairTax. Would you like to argue that???
Just out of curiosity, if the FairTax bill did pass, would you rush out to buy a plasma TV before it took effect, or would you wait so you could purchase the TV with the tax added?
What's the source of the reputed $600 billion???
I am confident that we will discover just how creative and resourceful people can be to avoid paying the FairTax; and then we'll discover how creative politicians can be writing bills to restrain avoidance.
I doubt that S/S would qualify in the same way since there's no return of part of the payment in any direct way- and if then only many years later (or not at all) while the prebate is readily returned to the taxpayer. In addition, the S/S is conditioned upon wage income rather than any sort of tax payment - it's taken from the earner without recourse and not truly "paid by the taxpayer" as a tax. And not every taxpayer gets S/S - or has his income confiscated for it.
I've never seen any description of S/S calling it a rebate at all, but there is plenty of information that rightfully calls it an entitlement. The income tax amounts that some obtain on April 15 could be called a rebate, but if you can find a source calling S/S a rebate, I'd like to see it. So I very much disagree with your notion. In addition, it's a definition of the dictionary, not "mine".
Regardless of that, that's not what the thread is about in any event nor is whatever S/S might or might not be at all relevant to the FairTax but merely an attempted diversion..
And then again, why would this be relevant to the FairTax? The prebate has nothing to do with the taxes paid by the taxpayer, but strictly has to do with family size.
Did you not know that???
What's the source of the reputed $600 billion???I don't know. You said it was the Tax Panel. So what was the source of the $429 billion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.