17598Re: [tips_and_tricks] property tax case
- Apr 15, 2010
Again, another fictional character, a corporation, goes to a municipal court, a political subdivision, which does clearly have venue and also juridiction. And we try to understand the law by reading caselaw. But what about my circumstance, a private human that has no subtitle E activities.
--- On Tue, 4/13/10, Jake <jake_28079@...> wrote:
From: Jake <jake_28079@...>
Subject: [tips_and_tricks] property tax case
Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2010, 6:12 PM
> My general cause is that our rights are not taxable, and no law does so.
A tax on property is not a tax on the right to acquire / own it & the exercise of a right can most assuredly be taxed.
See, e.g., the oft-cited Steward Machine Co. v. Collector, 301 U.S. 548, 580 (1937):
". . . natural rights, so called, are as much subject to taxation as rights of less importance. * * * What the individual does in the operation of a business is amenable to taxation just as much as what he owns, at all events if the classification is not tyrannical or arbitrary. "Business is as legitimate an object of the taxing powers as property." Newton v. Atchison, 31 Kan. 151, 154 (per Brewer, J.), 1 Pac. 288. Indeed, ownership itself, as we had occasion to point out the other day, is only a bundle of rights and privileges invested with a single name. Henneford v. Silas Mason Co., 300 U.S. 577. "A state is at liberty, if it pleases, to tax them all collectively, or to separate the faggots and lay the charge distributively. " Ibid.
~ ~ ~
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>