Without you clarifying what you believe the legal meaning of direct and indirect tax, I will not, because any discussion on it will be based on both of us differing on the definition of terms which is then pointless.
The only definition relevant is the one the SC has used or will use.
Your frustration is continuing.
I'm hardly frustrated. I'm am very amused that you cannot go and read the cases I posted references to so that you can specify the meaning of direct and indirect. Your reluctance to do so indicates to me that what you really want is a battle of semantics. In court such a battle will only get you held in contempt.
Perhaps the next time you use the word "dumb" try using a larger font perhaps size 22 if it makes you feel better.
I was being kind. Those who believe these ideas of Shiff are more than simply dumb. They are enormously stupid and idiotic and don't have the common sense their mom's hoped they had when they gave them birth.
Now after the tingling sensation has left and your breath has returned to normal, JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Define your terms first. Listen, requesting that one define his terms is not only a proper debate request its one that is imperative if you are going to have any success with the courts.
First you fabricate my position as an attempt to duck the question and you now continue in this same vein.
I'm free to fabricate your posistion until you state one. Go ahead and state your posistion on the direct vs. indirect tax.
I believe the words soph.. and infan... come to mind.
Only an infan could believe and buy the crap Shiff sells. How much did he get you to part with ?
Just answer the question.
Define your terms.