What the Courts Say About the Income Tax

(Note: This article is intended for informational purposes only and is not wrtten by Dr. Clarkson)

Just exactly what is this thing called an income tax? Few Americans know the answer to that question. The following are a small number of court cases, most of them United States Supreme Court cases, that reveal the truth about this so-called income tax.

Take a few moments to concentrate on these cases. Pour yourself a strong hot one, or a tall cool one, and focus on this. If this doesn't quicken your heart rate and fill you with both excitement and fear of what is really happening in America, then you are probably are too far gone and hopelessly enslaved by the self-imposed, false religion called the "income" tax.

"The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and privileges which is measured by reference to the income which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax: it is the basis for determining the amount of the tax. (House Congressional Record, March 27, 1943, page 2580) "
..the conclusion reached in the Pollock Case did not in any degree involve holding that income taxes generically and necessarily came within the class of direct taxes on property, but on the contrary recognized the fact that taxation on income was in its nature an excise entitled to be enforced as such.." (Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1, at 16-17)
Excise Taxes are "..taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations, and upon corporate privileges. (Cooley, Const. Lim., 7th Ed., page 680.)" (Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107, at 151)
"A tax laid upon the happening of an event, as distinguished from its tangible fruits, is an indirect tax.." (Tyler v. U.S., 281 U.S. 497, at 502)
"We must remember, too, that the revenues of the United States must be obtaine d in the same territory, from the same people, and excise taxes must be collected from the same activities, as are also reached by the States in order to support their local government." (Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107, at 154)

Does this Excise Tax Apply to Us?
_______________________________________________________________

Since we now know that the income tax is not a tax on income, and we know it is a tax on business activities and certain privileged occupations, what does that really mean? What about those of us in the mainstream of America, just putting in our 40 hours and doing our best to get by? How does this excise tax apply to us?

"Since the statutory definition of ‘taxpayer' is exclusive, the federal courts do not have the power to create non-statutory taxpayers for the purpose of applying the provisions of the revenue acts.." (C.I.R. v. Trustees of L. Inv. Ass'n., 100 F.2d 18, at 29)
[Quoting Adam Smith's Wealth Of Nation s favorably], "The property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property.." (Butcher's Union Company v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746, at 757)
"..Included in the right of personal liberty and the right of private property - partaking of the nature of each - is the right to make contracts for the acquisition of property. Chief among such contracts is that of personal employment, by which labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property. If this right be struck down or arbitrarily be interfered with, there is a substantial impairment of liberty in the long-established constitutional sense. The right is as essential to the laborer as to the capitalist, to the poor as to the rich; for the vast majority of persons have no other honest way to begin to acquire property, save by working for money." (Coppage v. State of Kansas, 236 U.S. 1)
"A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution." (Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, at 113)
"The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but the individuals' rights to live and own property are natural rights for the enjoyment of which an excise cannot be imposed. (Redfield v. Fisher, 292 P. 813, at 819)
"..Reasonable compensation for labor or services rendered is not profit.." (Lauredale Cemetery Assoc. v. Matthews, 47 Atlantic 2d 277, at 280)
"..The Governm ent here contends that all gross receipts represent income which must be reported. But gross receipts may or may not represent income, depending on the circumstances.. It cannot be said that conversions of capital assets invariably produce income.. It appears that the Government makes too broad a claim in asserting that gross receipts invariably measure income or gross income.." (United States v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400)
"..There is a clear distinction between 'Profit' and 'wages,' or compensation for labor. (Quoting Commercial League Association of America v. People ex re. Needles, Auditor, 90 Ill., p 66), Compensation for labor cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law. The word 'profit,' as ordinarily used, means the gain made upon any business or investment - a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor." (Oliver v. Halstead, 86 S.E. Rep. 2d, at 868)
"The general term ‘income' is not defined in the Internal R evenue Code." (United States v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, at 405)

Are We Required by Law to Complete A Tax Return?
__________________________________________________________________

The Court has established beyond a shadow of a doubt that the individual American Citizen trading his/her labor for money is exercising a right, which cannot be taxed. Since we are not taxpayers, as the IRC defines the word, do we need to keep receipts, store records, file tax returns and invite the IRS to probe into our personal and private affairs whenever they want to? Can we be required to give the IRS any and all information they ask of us? Are we required by law to complete a tax return every year like the IRS claims?

"..Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint.." (Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145)
"The revenue laws are a code or a system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to non-taxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedures are prescribed for non-taxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws." (Long v. Rasmussen, 281 F. 236, at 238
"(P)ersons who are not taxpayers are not within the system and can obtain no benefit by following the procedures prescribed for taxpayers, such as the filing of claims for refunds." (Economy Plumbing and Heating v. U.S., 470 F.2d 585, at 589)
"There can be no question that one who files a return under oath is a witness within the meaning of the [Fifth] Amendment.." (Sullivan v. United States, 274 U.S. 259, at 263)
"The information revealed in the preparation and filing of an income tax return is, for the purposes of Fifth Amendment analysis, the testimony of a witness.." (Garner v. United States, 424 U.S. 648)
"The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a Citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his door to an investigation.. He owes no such duty to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State.. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." (Hale v. Henkle, 201 U.S. 43)
"The legal right of the taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or to altogether avoid them by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted." (Gregory v. Helvering, 293 US 465)
"Anyone may so arrange his affairs that his t axes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes." (Helvering v. Gregory, 69 F2d 809)

Can't the IRS Tax Anything They Want Because of the 16th Amendment?
_______________________________________________________________

What about the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? Did it not give to the IRS the authority to tax individual Citizens' incomes? Isn't that what created the income tax? Can't the IRS tax anything they want because of the Sixteenth Amendment?

"..The confusion .. arises from the conclusion that the Sixteenth Amendment provides for a hitherto unknown power of taxation; that is, a power to levy an income tax which, although direct, should not be subject to the regulation of apportionment applicable to all other direct taxes.. an erroneous assumption.. The purpose of the Amendment was... to accomplish the result intended; that is, the prevention of the resort to the sources from which a taxed income was derived in order to cause a direct tax on the income to be a direct tax on the source itself, and thereby take an income tax out of the class of excises, duties, and imposts, and place it in the class of direct taxes." (Brushaber v. Union Pacific, 240 U.S. 1, in 1915.)
"(T)he Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged.. " (Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103, at 112)
"(T)he contention that the (16th) Amendment treats a tax on income as a direct tax.. is.. wholly without foundation.. " (Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1, at 18)

What you have just read is only the beginning. The IRS and many in Congress know these laws, and they fraudulently misrepresent them to the American people. It is somehow justifiable to these so-called public servants to lie and misrepresent the laws as long as they collect money for the federal government. These public officials will almost always make statements which indicate that, in their view, your money and my money is in truth really their money. They will often make comments which seem to assume that every individual not actively involved in paying all he/she can into the federal coffers is really a crook holding out, really a thief stealing money belonging to the government, really an immoral and dishonest person who should be punished. But you know the old saying, "It takes one to know one.."

It is my belief that many in Congress and the IRS do not know these facts. But it is also my belief that many of those so-called public servants DO know the truth, and they are actively engaged in hiding the truth from the American people. These men and women are paid with our money, and are paid to serve the public trust. So far as I can see, they are totally failing in their service of the public trust.