Presuming Schiff was right, Fedzilla is so unconstitutionally huge, it still made him pay...plenty of years in the debtors prison (Oh, we don’t *technically* have those, do we?).
We all know the serfs haven’t a chance against the leviathan, whom can tax and spend to their heart’s content.
I seem to recall something about the multitude of agents eating sustenance, or some such....
Schiff is not wrong, however, in the fact that the “income tax” is an “excise” tax and therefore is limited in its scope. You see, an “excise” tax is a tax on activity and the tax is determined by the amount of money one makes from their participation in those taxable activities.
And the IRS agents who have been prosecuted, were rightly prosecuted because they based their arguments also upon the false premise that the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified by the states and then some other nonsense that has no weight whatsoever fro the law itself.
The 16th Amendment “income tax” is 100% constitutional. The IRS is a 100% constitutional agency created by Congress under the authority that Article 1 of the Constitution gives them. It is not the IRS’s job to teach us the law, it is their job to collect all that is owed to the federal government.
The American citizens and their representatives are the ultimate enforcers of the laws that they create. If we do not inform ourselves as to the nature of the laws and how those laws apply to our wealth, then we only have ourselves to blame when the IRS tries to collect that which some federal form, that is to have on it ONLY that which pertains to Article 1 federally connected activities, says is owed to the federal government. Once those forms are signed under penalty of perjury & filed with the IRS, unless rebutted by filing the proper rebuttal forms, the IRS can only assume that what was on those original forms was true & correct.
I read recently about a guy who worked as an independent contractor in the oil fields of Alaska, a pipeline inspector I believe. He tried to deny that the revenue he made from his job was not subject to taxation, however, 100% of his income was derived from the privilege of earning that income on federally owned lands. As the SCOTUS has ruled:
United States v County of Allegheny, 322 US 174 (1944): “The Government is an abstraction, and its possession of property largely constructive. Actual possession and custody of Government property nearly always are in someone who is not himself the Government but acts in its behalf and for its purposes. He may be an officer, an agent, or a contractor. His personal advantages from the relationship by way of salary, profit, or beneficial personal use of the property may be taxed...”