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

6971The term "revenue law"

Expand Messages
  • David L. Miner
    Nov 15, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Angela --

      In light of no less than 5 US Supreme Court cases and no less than two
      Congressional references, all acknowledging that the so-called income tax is
      an indirect excise tax, why do you say "No" to the question? Other than the
      fact that Irwin Schiff has erroneously referred to the so-called income tax
      a direct tax for at least 14 years, and went to jail many times because of
      his views, that is...

      Yours in freedom,

      Dave Miner
      www.FreedomSite.net


      " In the Supreme Court case of U.S. v. Hill, 123 US 681 the Supreme
      Court said"

      "The term `revenue law' when used in connection with the jurisdiction
      of the courts of the United States, means …a law which is "directly
      traceable" to the power granted to Congress by 8, Art. I of the
      Constitution, `to lay and collect taxes duties, imposts, and
      excises.'"

      Is the income tax as now imposed and collected "directly traceable"
      to any power granted to Congress by Article 1 of Section 8 of the
      Constitution?
      The answer to that is "No" - which means federal courts never had
      jurisdiction (on this and other grounds) to prosecute anybody in
      connection with alleged income tax crimes. Which means that all
      criminal trials over the last 50 years involving income taxes - and
      also civil lawsuits brought by the government ? HAVE ALL BEEN ILLEGAL!

      Angela
      See my new page listing over 70 court decisions re the income tax
      http://irwinschiff.homestead.com/CasesOnIncome.html
    • Show all 6 messages in this topic