Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

17215Re: MOTION TO DISMISS INCOME TAX INDICTMENT-- Rebuttal of US v Vroman, 975 F2d 669

Expand Messages
  • rebel382003
    Sep 30, 2009
      Arguing the status of the 16th. Amendment is an exercise in futility. If attempted in a court, it allows the judge to shift the burden of proof onto the defendant to prove there is no possible way the income tax might be valid. There is no way that that can be accomplished.

      The Pollock court divided the income tax into two parts. The issues before the court were financial gain from rental property and from stocks which the court declared was different from a tax upon wages or revenue derived from labor. The income from rental property and stock was claimed to be a tax upon capital investments which the court considered unconstitutional. The rest of the income tax (upon wages and labor) was (upon rehearing) declared to be void because that component was intended to be a small portion of the tax which would have then become the only tax that was still valid. Congress could have reinstalled an income tax upon labor by legislation if they desired.

      The 16th. Amendment supposedly reversed the ruling that the tax on capital investments was unconstitutional. The Amendment has never had any effect on a tax levied upon wages and salaries, regardless of what Benson and his lawyers contend. Ref. CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS ON THE INCOME TAX by the Congressional Research Service. Discussion of the 16th. Amendment is a red herring to confuse tax resisters.

      The Supreme court definitively declared in South Carolina v Baker, 485 US 505 (1988) that Pollock had been effectively overruled in 1939 by Graves v New York, 306 US 466.

      In short, the 16th Amendment has been superfluous since 1939 and has never had any bearing on a tax upon wages or salaries.

      The 16th. Amendment is never alleged in any indictments as a source of authority for a tax.


      --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Cliff Bass <cliff_bass@...> wrote:
      > I forgot a few things.  Please see the attachment where it shows that the income tax is not an excise but a direct tax on the source.  There is also a lot of other crap if you are interested.  But make it simple on yourself as  the cloud of confusion is greater than need be.  And I have been there with the shovel for a long time now.
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic