Replies

Hi Geezer, thanks for posting the link to the online Cinstitution. I've bookmarked it.

In you post you disputed whether a new amendment would be needed to authorize a sales tax. I believe that the original poster was referring to the following, this assumes a sales tax is a direct tax, if I buy a house and pay a sales tax I would view that as a direct tax.

Article I

Section 2

..... Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the state of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

I haven't given this enough thought to decide if I agree, but it seem reasonable. The 16th amendment circumvented this passage.

this assumes a sales tax is a direct tax, if I buy a house and pay a sales tax I would view that as a direct tax.

The payer of the indirect tax does not own the property until after the transfer is complete including the payment of tax due.

The test of indirect or direct:

If the tax levied on an owner only, and because of ownership it is direct.
If a tax is levied against the receiver of property on an event or exchange that tranfers value or ownership from one to another through financial or commercial event or activity, the tax is indirect.

The purchaser buying property, any property whether real, personal, or merely a consumption item cannot own a thing until the transaction is complete. Title cannot be perfected and you cannot own until the requirements of law are met, i.e. taxes laid on the sales transaction have been paid.

An indirect tax levies taxes on the activity of commerce and the exchanges that occur. Not the property per-se as in a property tax that can be levied repeatedly on an owner as in annual property(real and personal)taxes of the states(which are indeed direct taxes.)

Remember,

KNOWLTON v. MOORE, 178 U.S. 41 (1900)

'indirect taxes are levied upon the happening of an event or an exchange.'

Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.(1911), 220 U.S. 107

"The Pollock Case construed the tax there levied as direct, because it was imposed upon property simply because of its ownership."

My understanding is the constitution provided for taxes indirectly through the states. The intention was to avoid taxation without representation by allowing the fed to tax individuals directly. If taxes were collected by the states then paid to the fed instead of directly to the fed we would have more control over the amount. Our representatives should be focused on reducing our tax burdon to the fed not allocating more funds for their state (Clintonomics).