If the federal income tax is legal than provide the law. If you do know what you are talking about do some research and provide some factual evidence. Don't go rambling on with these outrageous allegations that they're wrong and I am right. What kind of reporting is that.

first of all, the 16th amendment violates the taxation clauses in the Constitution, which is not allowable by the amendment process when concerning the organic Constitution. second, the Supreme Court has rule that the 16th amendment contains "no new taxation powers" (can you guess why they said this?), and third of all, "income" is not what you think it is - why not look up its legal definition? and there are many other points to be made - the point is that it is a huge scam hidden by legal trickery and complexities.

do you know the legal definition of a "US citizen"? do you know what the US is, as opposed to the USA (in legal terms)?

don't try to oversimplify the argument - it is deep and complex - and if you care to do legal research into this area, you will find that the American people have been bulldozed over by numerous legal scams (14th amendment, etc) since the 1830's.

US citizens are slaves, total subjects of govt.
American citizens are sovereigns.

Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793), "at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty ... Sovereignty is the right to govern; a nation or State sovereign is the person or persons in whom that resides. In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the Prince; here, it rests with the people; there, the sovereign actually administers the government; here, never in a single instance; our Governors are the agents of the people, and, at most, stand in the same relation to their sovereign in which regents in Europe stand to their sovereigns. Their Princes have personal powers, dignities, and preeminences; our rulers have none but official; nor do they partake in the sovereignty otherwise, or in any other capacity
than as private citizens."

if you are an American citizen (and not a US citizen), then no one, and no group, has any legitimate authority over you (this does not mean you can violate natural law - violations of property/contracts).
if you are a US citizen, you should really find another country to live in, since you don't mind living as a subject to government.

Show me the part where it says I'm forced to pay to murder and violate the rights of other human beings.

I can't seem to find the law you are referring to? Could you please point that out and cite which Supreme Court case?

Without getting into the details of why you are wrong, I think it can be simply demonstrated that we are not required by law to pay Federal Income Tax. Please click on the following link.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94630,00.html

You will see that Vernice Kuglin beat the IRS a few years back. This was possible because she was in the right and she got a fair trial. I will also suggest you begin your education by watching the film "Freedom to Fascism" by Aaron Russo.

Lazy reporting, this was also taken to court as the 16th amendment does not give congress any new taxing power that it already have, so your argument is completely without merit. They won the case against the Govt. for a number of reasons.

I think the complaint from some of the Paulettes is that it was not properly ratified.

I wish...

That you don't choose not to vote for Ron Paul because of what some of his supporters say

That you place your vote based historical research and a prudent investigation of all the facts

That you're capable of differentiating between the same old rhetoric and actual truth

That you'll open your eyes to the economic conditions that America will face in 20 years

That you change your idea about what the role of Government should be

Happy New Years!
-Mike

Megan's the one who asked for comments by Ron Paul supporters, and now she complains?

Just as an FYI, the Constitution isn't the supreme law of the people. Its the supreme law of the government. People are ruled by natural law. Natural law states that no one may take from me without my consent, otherwise it is called theft. These natural rights trump even the Constitution. And no, this is not a contradiction. The Constitution is there to restrain the government, not to restrain the people.

"Baiting Ron Paul trolls" = This blog has a low hit count! Read me, read me, please read me!

YOU ARE A LIAR SIR. EITHER THAT OR YOU HAVEN'T READ THE CONSTITUTION. ONLY CONGRESS IS AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION TO COIN MONEY. THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS A PRIVATELY OWNED BANKING CARTEL.

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin (1802)

if you would like to understand the legal essentials of the Income Tax, please study the material at this web page (it is too lengthy to post the essential elements):

http://www.originalintent.org/edu/

Hancock could make his argument without having to call people trolls. Maybe he should take the first 3 letters out of his last name.

Suggest you look at:

http://www.losthorizons.com

and you'll learn about the proper application of the "income tax" as it applies to most Americans.

This Ron Paul "troll" is about to school you on something else.

The threatened boycott of FOX News sponsors, has triggered panic among investors of NWS shares. A massive dump of News Corp stock is planned. The fincial blogs are ablaze with this.
http://finance.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NWS

http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.25639/browse_thread/thread/435d9e08edd073d4

Keep in mind that we raised over $6 mill in a 24 hr period, breaking all records. You can call us all the names you like, but we are powerful and our numbers are many.

The 16th amendment, regardless of its legality does not alone, set our personal income tax boundaries and laws. It simply allows unapportioned direct taxes on the people (which is unconstitutional) however doesn't lay down the law. Now that that is clear, show us the law.

We are tired of hearing you brainwashed idiots spouting off that the amendment process says we have to pay a personal income tax. The amendments allow for the law to be made, so WHERE IS IT (that's for your CAPS necessity).

Now, please enlighten us all, the majority of the free thinking U.S.A., where is the law. If we were to sue the U.S.A. asking for the law, we will end up like Ed Brown. They put his lawsuits threw extended loop holes then sued him instead, while the judge intimidates the jury and tells them that the only law available to them is his interpretation.

It's time to use your own mind, use the internet and search what your rights really are.

This Ron Paul "troll" is about to school you on something else.

The threatened boycott of FOX News sponsors, has triggered panic among investors of NWS shares. A massive dump of News Corp stock is planned. The fincial blogs are ablaze with this.
http://finance.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NWS

http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.25639/browse_thread/thread/435d9e08edd073d4

Keep in mind that we raised over $6 mill in a 24 hr period, breaking all records. You can call us all the names you like, but we are powerful and our numbers are many.

As a lawyer and a Ron Paul supporter, I agree that the income tax is constitutional per the 16th Amendment. That doesn't mean I have to like it or that I wouldn't like to see it repealed.

To the question of where is the law that authorizes the income tax: you need only look at the internal revenue code.

RON PAUL IS RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG. HAHA
CAPS LOCKED AND LOADED!!!

Wow! Taxes are a "touchy" subject. Since the government uses the power of the Gestapo to collect taxes, we pay them, legal or not. So, let us all assume they ARE legal. Legal doesn't mean "moral" so I classify them as "legal but immoral". Tantamount to slavery.

The job entrusted to the people of America is to change what we don't like through our votes. Don't like warlike policy? Throw the bums out! Don't like taxes? Throw the bums out! White House, Congress, all of it, throw them out enmasse. It is that simple. If we are as fed up in this country as it seems we will speak in a voice like thunder when we vote.

Ms. McArdle is allowed her blogs and opinions. Just because we may not agree does not grant license to be rude or ugly or to "cyber-yell" at her. Liberty requires self-control and, as passionate as we may be, Paul supporters need to begin practicing this virtue now.

As a Ron Paul supporter I just go around smiling when someone stumps for other candidates. If they try to "convert" me I just tell them I am not undecided. Smile. If they ask, I tell them my choice. Smile. Then smile bigger. It drives them crazy!

wow i'm with ron paul i've never read anything you have written before but i would like to read more of chad's stuff!

Income tax was first created to pay off the loans from the newly formed Federal Reserve. It later became a tool of control over the people. This started when it was used to bring down Al Capone a famous gangster.
Other taxes were then instituted such as sales tax to aid in the control. Sales tax was created to try and make sure businesses payed a fair income tax. It has no other reason for being created that I can see of.
Both taxes are not fair taxes nor are they in step with the Constitution.

Why would anyone defend the govenments right to force people to collect taxes for them?

So taxes are not a reason anymore to fund the goverment as they tell you.
It's now a tool by which to control you.

But of course those that only work for a living and just do as their told will never really find out how true this is.
Unless they happen to be in the way of someone in govenment.

Real Tax cheats are never caught.
Why - because it's too hard to investigate. Those who are caught are really being targeted for other reasons or are those that just ran into trouble and could not pay.

A famous line got a famous person in deep trouble a while ago.
Only Little people pay taxes.
Well we can't have wealthy people telling the truth.

Do you think She was not telling the truth?

If she never said this do you think they would have gone after her?

What's wrong with this picture?

Ahh yes the system has problems and we will tweak it a little.
That will be the line given.
The thinking behind it is simple.
After a few years they will forget about it.

Nothing ever changes because they don't want to change anything.
They only want to pacify the masses.
Tell them what they want to hear and 3 years from now the anger will just die down and go away.

If you really want change you need to start at the top and stop defending the system either in part or as a whole.

This includes Taxes and anything else.

No change can happen unless we admit there is a problem and are dedicated to eliminating, replacing or what ever needs to be done to come up with a true solution to the problems this country has.

If you fear change then you are doomed to the consequences that following the status quo brings.

There is NO law that supports income tax. None. The IRS has never produced it. This has been proven by individuals a lot more informed then you. I guess ignoring these facts is your idea of research. There is NO law America. Income tax is theft. We can support this country just fine with the dozens of other taxes we pay. We can not support several other countries.

Ron Paul is a racist. Who cares about his other positions. I am not a single issue voter, but I will not vote for a racist. The market does not "fix" everything little libertarians. that only wokrs in a society and government free form political influence on business, which USA is not. Dr. Paul will not stop this...Pandoras Box has been open too long.

If discussing the income tax, we must also take into mind what was being said about it and how the people were convinced to pass it. When the income tax was proposed in the early 1900's, after it had been defeated in the 1890's, politicians at the time promised the American people that the income tax would only ever apply to the top 1%. Haven't we heard something like that before. Also, those people were promised that it would go away when the US debt was paid down, because that was why they needed the money in the first place.

And today it is still the same. The income tax today only pays a part of the intrerest due on the national debt. If we didn't have that debt, we wouldn't need it, and unlike what the anti-Paul people claim, the Federal Government would be able to perform all the same functions it does today.

So, while some try to base their objections to the legalese, I look at it from a more common sense angle. And history proves that you give the government an inch it will take a mile.

So do Ron Paul suppporters and Ron Paul himself pay income taxes?

Vincent G....she went to jail for tax evasion too.....guess you should have mentioned that liitle tidbit...

Those links are your evidence of no law that makes us pay taxes??? Those sites are conspiracy sites, AT BEST. Please provide a legitimate informationl website with bibliography and citible quotations please. Jeez.

The best that the tax defenders could come up with, on Megan's article, in defense of the income tax was USC 26 Section 1 appropriately titled "Tax Imposed".
Think about that word "Imposed" in relation to the word freedom. Are they compatible?
Also bear in mind that, no matter how you read Section 1, it does not create a clear obligation upon anyone in one of the states. Too vague. The US Constitution applies to the Federal Government a.k.a UNITED STATES.
U.S. Citizens are contractual "persons" as opposed to state nationals who are natural and without the UNITED STATES jurisdiction.
ALLCAPS is typically a corporation under the Uniformed Commercial Code, yeah people also use it, too much, to denote yelling in their writing. Look at your birth certificate, Driver's Licence, SSN card and you will see. The most powerful thing you have is your signature! The power to contract is a power we granted the Federal Government and through our ignorance and their deception it has been abused to gain jurisdiction over all the people of the states. You are a 14th Amendment US Citizen.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7040453665540929835&q=bursting+bubbles&total=44&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Jay...

If you are correct about the income tax then you really should go over and collect the $300,000 dollars that has been promised to the first person that can demonstrate the legality of the income tax.

Good luck!
http://www.livefreenow.org/30K_challenge.cfm

There IS a law for tax, it is: 26 U.S.C. sec. 1. Ron Paul supporters just throw out generalities, not specific examples of evdience or citiation.

When properly applied to persons who work for the government or those in contract with the federal government the Income tax is legal and lawful, it violates no part of the constitution. That is why it has survived for so long with the courts blessing.
So do you work for the government or is there a contract for benefits? Social Security is a privilege which grants benefits!
He who accepts the benefits must bear the duty. The courts will never say otherwise.

Journalist NOOB

Prove it???
Better people than you have tried. Have you never seen the youtube
"From Democracy to Fascism?"

I have no idea if it is legal or not.. I just do not wanna pay it! Why should my taxes go to support the military idustrial complex and their endless wars. I cannot imagin why anyone would vote for the Republican war mongers that are handing our country over to Saudi Arabia and China. We borrow money from China and Saudi Arabia every day to pay for the illegal occupation of a country. Can you imagin if any country on earth did that to us? Every man woman and child would be fighting in the streets. The media hides everything from the people. They push people like Julie-annie and now that slick snake oil salesman Huckabee. I was watching a creepy reporter for MSNBC named David Shuster was engaged in a lovefest over Huckabee. The entire system is rigged folks. Vote for Ron Paul cause that is the last best hope America Has for saving itself.

Let me first say that I am voting for Ron Paul. So don't get me wrong when I say that all those who question the legality of the income tax are wrong. There are a couple of things you need to understand.

1. You are all right in saying the original constitution did not allow for an income tax but the 16th amendment changed that. This new amendment overrides anything the constitution previously said about taxes. That is how amendments work.

2. Despite what a lot of people say about the 16th amendment. It was ratified but enough states. Please do some research. The truth is out there.

3. Some of you agree that the 16th amendment gave the power the to tax income. "where is the law?" that is the million dollar question. You will have to look no further than the US tax code. Despite what people say it is law and was passed through congress and signed. Once again please do some research the proof is there.

4. The law is here: US Code: Title 16, Subtitle A, Chapter 1, Sub-chapter A, Part 1, subsection 1.

5. Income is defined in the tax code as coming from a number of sources including compensation for work.

Please do some more research. Don't by into these false theories. Tax law's ARE confusing and there is probably a better method but they ARE legal.

Let's not fight the legality of it any longer let's elect people who can change it.

Ron Paul 2008! He's got my vote!

How retarded is this guy? The "question" about whether the income tax is legal or not predates Ron Paul's career. And his people don't agree on a particular stancce about it.

Sheesh.

"Posted by: Paul | December 31, 2007 11:22 AM

As a lawyer and a Ron Paul supporter, I agree that the income tax is constitutional per the 16th Amendment. That doesn't mean I have to like it or that I wouldn't like to see it repealed.

To the question of where is the law that authorizes the income tax: you need only look at the internal revenue code."

So what you are saying is that the Internal Revenue Code is self authorising. Literally saying " We, The Internal Revenue Service, give ourselves the power and authority to collect taxes on your income."

What a novel approach. That must be where Bush got the idea for granting himself more power as president.

16th Amendent to the Constitution:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

The key to understanding to whom this Amendment applies is to understand what income is. Income has been defined as wages by legislation, but that legislation violates the Supreme Court's interpretation of the word 'icome'. Income is not any general revenue. Income is the difference between revenue and cost where cost is not authorized adjustments. Authorized adjustents may only be applied after income is calculated. The legislation concerning taxes never allows wage earners to subtract the unadjusted base costs from which their revenue is generated. In essence, corporations are taxed on their income, while wage earners are taxed on their revenue. This is in violation to the definition of income, according to the Supreme Court, and leads the government to unConstitutionally violate our 5th Amendment Rights as well as Article 1;Section 9; Clause 4 of the US Constitution which does not allow the Federal government to impose direct taxes without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Click in my name at the bottom of this post for a full explanation.

Income tax is legal? It was never fully ratified by the proper share of states, so it is not precisely legal. I think that if you investigate this issue, you'll find that there is a certain amount of info missing on that one, namely the proper amount of states backing it.

Show me the part in the Constitution where it says that "taxation without representaion" is okay via a "Progressive Income Tax".

Still waiting to see the law that Requires Americans to file... IT DOESN'T EXIST.
Watch Aaron Russo's film "America From Freedom To Fascism" You will get schooled.

$300,000 if YOU can answer these questions...

Freedom Law School is offering $100,000 to the first person who can demonstrate any of the three propositions listed below. The winner can collect up to $300,000 if he or she can prove all of the propositions below.

1. Show what statute written by the Congress of the United States requires Americans to file an income tax “CONFESSION” (return) and pay an income tax.

2. How can Americans file an income tax “CONFESSION” (return) without giving up their 5th amendment right not to give any information to the government that may be used to prosecute them.

3. Prove that the 16th amendment to the United States Constitution, which, according to the IRS and modern American courts permitted the income tax to exist was, lawfully added to the United States Constitution.

http://www.livefreenow.org/30K_challenge.cfm

Legal or not, it stinks and has to go.

As in the Ben Folds Five song, "Gimme my money back, bitch!"

The 16th amendment, allowing for an income tax (some argue that it was corporate and not personal, but it doesn't matter) was never ratified. Let me repeat (though not in all caps per your request), the sixteenth amendment was never never never ratified. However, it was pushed through as law anyway. That is what makes the income tax unconstitutional. Check your history, please, sir.

The 16th Amendment is WORD ART. It has nothing to do with private sector income taxes. The supreme court has stated this time and time again. The sixteenth is a SMOKE SCREEN for the uneducated masses. The legal terms used in the Sixteenth Amendment are not the same as the common words the general public understands. This is how the people are constantly fooled. One must always look at the legislative intent and the LEGAL definitions of the words.

Want to see Proof that their is NO LAW that compels private sector citizens to pay a tax on their labor (IE SLAVERY) and see the millions in refunds of all monies taken from them:

http://www.losthorizons.com/

The fact is you enter into CONTRACT making yourself have taxable income when you erroneously think you need to sign a W-4, W-2, 1099 to work in the uSA. There is no law in existence that says you have to sign one of those contracts to earn a living. Wake up America your being duped! ANYONE who says otherwise has a vested interest in the status quo.

Support Ron Paul:
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/

Honestly, the whole discussion is ludicrous. Ignoring the debate of 'constitutional v. not,' you don't really state anything to refute the opposition. Those that debate the unconstitutionality of the income tax have heard your argument. And so have you. You're just recycling old information in an attempt to get hits via Ron Paul's name.

I understand I'm adding to it, but I was here anyway, so why not?

DR MILTON PEARCH: WHY THEN DOES THE IRS SAY THAT THE INCOME TAX IS A "VOLUNTARY TAX"?????????????

Hey, this is what passes for argument in the media these days.

So-and-so claims such and such, but they are wrong... our next story...

Screw you. Prove it. Plain and simple - and $300,000 is waiting for you if you can.

Just saying that Ron Paul is wrong (about ANYTHING) without proving it amounts to an attempt to appeal to "conventional wisdom" which is NOT the same as truth.

Yes, I pay my taxes, because legal or not, the government will STILL put you in prison and take away everything you own. They will make an example out of you. And you will NOT get a fair trail for the same reason this journalist says Ron Paul is wrong. Because everyone simply believes it is - no need to prove anything.

I am assuming this article was written by a well-to-do working guy who has credit cards galore, a fat stash of cash in his 401K, and hundred pairs of shoes in his closet.
I am a single Mom who is double taxed on her revenue from tips, I work at a restaurant. I don't want a damn thing from the government...public education, health care, food stamps...I just want to keep my earnings and spend my money the way I want and take care of my daughter.
TAXES hurt the working class not the elites making billions on this war.

There are some who claim the 16th amendment was not properly ratified, but that's a seperate issue from whether the amendments can change that.

And for the retard who said you can't change the organic constitution: "shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution,"

And then exceptions are given for some laws before 1808 and equal sufferage in the Senate. Don't be a rabid Constitutionalist without reading the text.

Below is a list of the states who ratified the 16th amendment. The requisite was 36 and 42 of the existing states ratified it. Why do people say it wasn't ratified?

1. Alabama (August 10, 1909)
2. Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
3. South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
4. Illinois (March 1, 1910)
5. Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
6. Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
7. Maryland (April 8, 1910)
8. Georgia (August 3, 1910)
9. Texas (August 16, 1910)
10. Ohio (January 19, 1911)
11. Idaho (January 20, 1911)
12. Oregon (January 23, 1911)
13. Washington (January 26, 1911)
14. Montana (January 27, 1911)
15. Indiana (January 30, 1911)
16. California (January 31, 1911)
17. Nevada (January 31, 1911)
18. South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
19. Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
20. North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
21. Colorado (February 15, 1911)
22. North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
23. Michigan (February 23, 1911)
24. Iowa (February 24, 1911)
25. Kansas (March 2, 1911)
26. Missouri (March 16, 1911)
27. Maine (March 31, 1911)
28. Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
29. Arkansas (April 22, 1911, after having previously rejected the amendment)
30. Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
31. New York (July 12, 1911)
32. Arizona (April 3, 1912)
33. Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
34. Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
35. West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
36. New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
37. Delaware (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913, after rejecting the amendment on March 2, 1911)

Please read my post above if you haven't done so already.

No your wrong there are Supreem Court judges who have looked- Not only was the 16th Ammendment passed mainly by Anti Consitutional Corrupt manner-
IT REALLY WAS NEVER RADIFIED BY THE 50 STATES! "FACT"

This is the truth!

Ron Paul 2008

Legal or not is a moot point to argue.

Fools Spending Our Money And How They Get So Much Of It; Would Be A Better Discussion.

So what if you think Income Tax is legal or not.

I think we can agree that we pay too much tax for the VALUE of services we receive.

Do not be foolish and divide on details. Think about the greater scope and that we are far from what America is intended to be. Only Ron Paul is forthright with this understanding.

To Assume Benevolence When Giving Away Power Is Foolish.

This is the last election cycle that will be open for combating what has been put in place. The legislation has passed, without pomp or ceremony, to make sure that opposition does not get another voice.

Those who are not aware will sell America into slavery. Financial Catastrophe is in motion. As things are now, so they will not remain.

Safety Is A Function Of Awareness.

I Vote For Virtue; I Vote For Ron Paul.

The author is so sure that he pays double the tax just to prove you all wrong. Yea right!! He's probably using a tax attorney instead of a CPA first of all. People that believe that the tax system isn't slavery (which is illegal I believe) either don't pay the taxes that the majority pay, or, directly profit from the tax system, or, are too stupid to have money in the first place. We as citizens are not allowed to hoard (save) gold what makes anyone think it's going to be allowed that we save (hoard) money unless that money were just debt in the first place. It is the intention of the banks to give us debt (credit) and further enslave us with interest (inflation). I hope the author responds to any of the comments with the respect a beat dog should have. Moron.

Paul Revere II it was never ratified by 50 states because there was only 48 at the time and like I said it only need 36. What is the issue?

Instead of arguing as to rather the income tax is legal or not take the time to email your Senator and Representative and let them know you want to repeal the 16th amendment.

Jason: "Ron Paul supporters just throw out generalities, not specific examples of evdience [sic] or citiation [sic]."

That's some funny stuff right there. :)

Oh and please, in your response pay particular attention to the part in amending the constitution that says any amendments made can't contradict the original.

"Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article"

Supposedly they figured out a legal way to circumvent this part but it's pretty clear that it wasn't a legitimate work around they just penciled it in.

Then again, these Paul supporters are behind a guy who puts earmarks for his congressional district in appropriations bills, who then votes against the bills (knowing they'll pass anyway) to make a symbolic statement about "unconstitutional" spending. Hypocrites.

Graphic of American Socialism - Neo-Cons in Far Right Margin

MSM

We Love You

Your the best False Flaggers Ever!

Too bad Truth and Love will Win!

Dr. Ron Paul President

Watch the movie freedom to fascism and then ask again about the income tax law.

If you Paul supporters really believe the income tax is illegal, or that Federal Reserve notes aren't legal money, put your beliefs into practice. Stop filing income tax returns, don't pay any tax liability, and don't convert Federal Reserve notes into goods and services. When the IRS comes after you, argue your case in court and see how far you get with your lunatic assertions.

the difinition of "income" in the constitution does not mean "wages" or "compensation". when you work for money, the money you trade for your labor is personal property. this was enforced by the supreme court shortly after the 16th amendment. can you understand, or should i type all in capitals?

It doesn't take away from the man's message that some of his supporters are slightly misinformed. The Income Tax is not unconstitutional. Ron Paul advocates the repeal of the 16th amendment and abolish the IRS. This is not difficult to figure out.

Jay Hancock, you have been grossly misinformed. Less than 10 years after the addition of the 16th amendment, the Supreme Court ruled that the 16th amendment did not instill the government with any new powers of taxation. This decision has never been overturned. In the future, please make sure you get your facts straight so that you may avoid embarrassing yourself further. Also, I advise you to refrain from any further discussion of this subject until you have seen the film "America: Freedom to Fascism". You just might actually learn something.

Wasn't full on slavery legal at some point in United States history too? So what about the folks who fought that "law"? As Abraham Lincoln said, “We have decided that the negro must not be a slave within our limits, but we have also decided that the negro shall not be a citizen within our limits; that he shall not vote, hold office, or exercise any political rights.” --September 15, 1858.

Legal or illegal this little gem from old "heroic" Abe's playbook of pro-racist quotes of the time?

Chad, Thank You Bro!! Happy New Year, and may your house be blessed by all the goodness in the world, People who still read and understand will take this country back from the whatever you want to call them. Incert your own colorful metafor. Your Labor is not owned by the Government or anyone else, Let the sound of freedom ring. Happy New Year All even the uniformed or just Dumb Hack that wrote this Ha HA HA HA HA whatever. RON PAUL 08 Like it or not we will WIN!!

RM, you are confused.

I wrote:

"To the question of where is the law that authorizes the income tax: you need only look at the internal revenue code."

You responded:

"So what you are saying is that the Internal Revenue Code is self authorising. Literally saying 'We, The Internal Revenue Service, give ourselves the power and authority to collect taxes on your income.'"

The IRS did not promulgate the Internal Revenue Code. It is not a set of IRS regulations; rather it was passed by Congress and signed into law, as amended. There are, however, a host of regulations promulgated by the IRS under the authority of the IRC, but they are something entirely separate. The IRC clearly provides for the power to tax the people and it is constitutional per the 16th Amendment.

I caution all of you against actually evading taxes and arguing that the income tax is either a) unconstitutional or b) not authorized by law. You will lose.

You cannot prove a proposition to someone who is convinced that it cannot be proven. There's enough evidence floating around to suggest that maybe we all shouldn't be filing tax returns soon, but the weight of the evidence is overwhelmingly on the other side. This is not "proof" but that is merely semantics. Welcome to the world of the law. Nothing is proven.

There may not be a statute that requires you to file a tax return (although there may be, I don't care to look), but I'm quite certain that there is a regulation, validly promulgated under the authority of the Internal Revenue Code, that has the force of the law. You may disagree that regulations are constitutional enactments of law, but the Congress by passing the Administrative Procedures Act and the Supreme Court disagree.

Dave,

Ron Paul is not a hypocrite by seeking money for his district. He is merely working within the system that is presented to him, while seeking to abolish that system. Paul would not seek earmarks, however, if he believed that the executive government could more effectively spend the money. Rather, he seeks to get as much money taken out of his district via taxation back to his district within the parameters of the system as it exists.

I once would've agreed with you but Paul's marvelous and lucid explanation on Meet the Press convinced me otherwise. Truly a brilliant man.

So Joe should we just be little sheep, You are just another be afraid of the Government or else, Well I am going to say this once, and let me be perfectly clear. The great men that started this country did so at the peril of their very lives and property, Look at what happend to the orginal signers of the Constitution. Freedom is not Free. I would rather Die on my feet than Live on my knees, so I will send you knee pads for a New Years present, who knows that might come in usefull, oh yeah, Read thicker books or just Quit your job at the IRS.

Well, legal or not..and I believe them to be illegal because they violate the very nature of the unalienable rights of Americans... regardless... the solution is to get rid of the IRS it's demonic agents, the Federal Reserve (i.e. Private Corporation) and get the government back under the it's constitutional leash that it seems to have broken away from. Regardless of what lawyer or IRS agent says what. The fact is that the purpose to this country was to free people from slavery, oppression and persecution and allow them to live free. Taxes obliterate this entire concept and Congress nor anyone for that matter have a right to impose any amendment that obliterates American peoples sovereignty. Point blank! You can not do this at all! I do not care if you write a law and congress passes it and enforces it! It is obviously is direct contradiction to the rights Americans enjoy over any right the Government enjoys. End of Argument!

If you argue that taxation is legal at the federal level then you must also accept the idea that total enslavement of the people is correct. And regardless of what congress has to say neither is correct.

So, the Government can either dismantle the illegal and immoral systems of taxation or face the American people at the end of a gun barrel at which point the American people have the right to overthrow their government if that government becomes a tyranny... which is way overdue now.

WOW....I can't believe the total knowledge of so many good Americans about the Income tax....if you are a government employee...live in the District of Columbia..live on Guam...and Puerto Rico ...guess what they do owe taxes and the rest of us do not.....look up info on Joe Bannister a former IRS agent and read about the thousands that are receiving all monies back from the IRS with a Formal Form printed by their own dept. Please do your homework before you all get bent out of shape....your America is in grave danger of serious trouble...so take heed and listen to the hundreds if not thousands of well informed American citizens...

This little act of an Liberal mainstream reporter whose name is very appropriate. Hancock more like he has hand in ==k. With a name like Hancock, you should really appreciate our liberties and our Constitution and rights. I recommend that you read a book by someone that can actually wright
The 5000 Year Leap: The 28 Great Ideas That Changed the World by W. Cleon Skousen

vote Ron Paul 2008

Raferjanders,

If indeed you are so brave, I challenge you not to file a tax return this season, if you indeed are obligated to pays taxes (under my and nearly everyone's interpretation of the law) and if your employer reports your income to the IRS. I would welcome your court challenged, wish you luck, and then be sad to see you go to jail.

No law exists, no politician would be stupid enough to get one enacted.

trolls? Is the Baltimore sun a wee bit more professional than this... I was on the fence but the media really has shown me how they neglect the support of individuals over corporate control...

I'm donating to Dr. Paul RIGHT NOW!

Interesting...where does this 26 U.S.C. sec. 1. code get its power from? Show me the law or show me a Supreme Court case that say's that the individual and not a corperation has to pay the income tax? Google Tommy Cryer

http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=4604

But don't worry I pay my taxes. I don't want the guy's with a badge bustin down my door. Don't fight the power!

Interesting...where does this 26 U.S.C. sec. 1. code get its power from? Show me the law or show me a Supreme Court case that say's that the individual and not a corperation has to pay the income tax? Google Tommy Cryer

http://www.immigrationwatchdog.com/?p=4604

But don't worry I pay my taxes. I don't want the guy's with a badge bustin down my door. Don't fight the power!

Why not just propose and ratify ANOTHER ammendment eliminating the income tax just to make it perfectly clear? Who in their right mind would want their income taxed, so it certainly would be a popular ammendment, wouldn't it??

Wow, a lot of back and forth here but in any instance I'll be voting for Dr. Paul!
If we could get everybody to NOT file a tax return for 2008, wouldn't that be revolutionary! :-)

Wow,

No wonder so many people call Ron Paul supporters kooks.

I'm a supporter, but what I'm reading here makes me question it.

Doesn't matter whether it was ratified or not. There are consequences for not paying.

Even RP says it is the law. He has never said otherwise.

He simply proposes getting rid of it. Plenty of money to support entitlements if we stop fundung dictators, and reduce our military to just protecting our BORDERS.

Sounds like you just want to be a Neo Con...but David R WANT LET YOU TAKE OFF YOUR TRAINING WHEELS.

"The Revolution of the Intelligent."

This sort of immature, bad, and insulting writing in this blog is just the worst part about the internet these days. It's the sort hammy neo-con circle jerk foreplay that any idiot with a smarmy attitude and a state school education can write. The issue was tossed aside and the dissenters were mocked without being given a credible response. Since you insist on being a child, there's no point in even trying to refute you further. Go back to writing for Bazooka Joe comics.

I am one of those lucky bastards who did the research several years ago. I have not had taxes held from my paychecks, nor filed a tax return in 7 years. Still no Big Brother beating down my door, and I have my paperwork in order in case they ever decide to show up. Remember kids, an IRS summons/subpoena is not a valid summons - only an appointed/elected judge can summon you to court. Don't jump out of the mainstream until you're sure you can walk on the land. If you're not careful, you'll jump right into the Government's frying pan, ready to hang you out in the media as an example to all the sheep glued to the TV.

Oh, and Ron Paul FTW!

16th amendment says:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

However, IRS is not a legislative service, it is part of the exececutive branch. Therefore income tax (as it is executed today) is unconstitutional.

I sure hope that if you are thinking about voting for Ron Paul you don't let some of the whacked out things SOME of his supporters have written her disuade you from voting for the good doctor. Every politician has a few strange supporters.

Jay,

I have looked into this carefully. A book I would recommend as a starting point is "Constitutional Income Do You Have any?" It goes exhaustively through how the 16th Amendment came to be, what it actually meant when it was ratified (which is doubtful), and subsequent court cases and rulings about the meaning of the amendment and what words in the amendment legally mean. This book is based on historical fact and law it is very interesting. Check it out, it is worth a read although a taxing read, pun intended.

In addition, here is one legal brief for a case that was won in favor of a taxpayer. http://www.gcstation.net/liefreezone/THEMEMORANDUM.pdf Unfortunately, we have been deceived for so long as to what taxable “income “ actually is and most including myself are intimidated by the IRS to pay what in many cases we should not owe. Intimidation is a strong force and it is not freedom. Nobody wants to lose their house or whatever. The question you must ask yourself is, if you legally don’t owe the money why do you pay?

Another source to lead you to a trail or two is the video Freedom to Fascism. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173

This has nothing to do with weather or not the government needs to collect taxes. Or what is the best way to spend those taxes once collected. It is about the legality of tax collection methods.

Good luck with your quest.

"Of all the communities available to us there is not one I would want to devote myself to, except for the society of the true searchers, which has very few living members at any time." Albert Einstein

To the misinformed guy who wrote this article. Watch this very short clip about Tom Cryer, he unlike you, is an actual attorney and says that the Income Tax is a fraud. There is NO LAW. He won his tax lawsuit, making this a fact..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7524494695820663660&q=tom+cryer&total=31&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

In a perfect world, God would make people like you pay income tax, because you apparently want to , and all of Ron Paul supporters would get a free pass. Welcome to the world you vote for.
Blessings,
Bill

Maybe the income tax can be only considered a "tribute" to the people that "own" the society. Why allow someone to claim ownership over your body? Maybe slavery could still exist in this manner only to trick people to think such thinking was ended after the civil war. Maybe the civil war was about more than just "physical" slavery. Maybe the lawyers here in this post could simply rationalize "theft" by making little symbols on pieces of paper that say such behavior maybe not "theft". Maybe "stealing" can be rationalized by claiming that such behavior will help the poor. Why would "green ink" on paper signify worth anymore than me just saying I'm "worth" millions simply because I say I'm so. Most people would call that insane. Just because a charlatan or psychopath says you owe them money doesn't mean you do. The 16th should be elminated soon enough anyways, maybe it just took us awhile to getting around to this point in history, where the validity maybe now called into question. MAybe I should go into law simply to only get this amendment repealed, if anyone has links of folks already involved in doing such please post them.

And you are Jay Hancock, a business columnist for The Sun?

Hmm...

I smell a counterinsurgency going on here. There are way too many people misspelling easy words, and they are all supposedly Ron Paul supporters. Good old fashioned smear tactics :)

What I'm tired of is people attacking Ron Paul supporters, as if they were a special breed of people. The only thing we have in common is that we agree with some or all of the political positions of Ron Paul. Instead of falling for the mainstream media's 'guilt by association' trap, read what Ron Paul is actually all about!! Please!

And why someone would defend the idea that the government OWNS your labor, I really don't know.

All I know is that Ron Paul is the first political candidate that I have any respect for. I truly do believe that he is the Hope for America. I changed my party so that I can vote for him in the primary.

The 5th Amendment protects one from being compelled to incriminate oneself. You must file an income tax return - even if you obtained money illegally - so you are forced to incriminate yourself, in conflict with the 5th Amendment.

United States v Sullivan (1927) didn't buy this argument, said you still had tile but could claim priviledge on the form instead of filling it out completely.

Try this and you'll get in trouble for sure. So in essense when in comes to income tax the 5th amendment isn't respected - hence some claim it's unconstitutional.

There are a lot of other reasons not to like it.

Hey Jay
You might want to clean your beard off when and if you remove your head from your ass. Then read up on what you said about income tax. There is no law that states you have to pay taxes on your labor. If you know of one, show it. Then put you head back in. You look better that way.

Just show the law requiring a tax on labor. Hey Jay Hancock, this is a challenge to you for your next post. Just show the law.

Your argument shows the weakness of depending on a "Constitution" and its "interpreters".

All over the world Constitutions contain some tyranical clauses, and EVEN if it were properly ratified the Income Tax ammendment would still be imoral. That is what matters. If you want to take money from people at the tip of a gun, you are an imoral savage.

Time to educate even deeper, at least by video, this video came out over ten years ago and goes way deeper than "Freedom to Fascism", it should be shown to every American citizen...................

Money Masters

And, watch this and you will understand why you "understand" things in "their" ways......

Brain Cogs Part 1

Here is a decent article on Ron Paul.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0102/p01s08-uspo.html?page=1

Trash...

Show the law.

Is this what reporting is? Is this what America has come to? Is this how manipulated the American public is?

We the People!
We the Change!
We will be Free!

The key in that amendment is the word "income". Income DOES NOT MEAN WAGES. Income is defined as PROFIT AND GAINS FROM CORPORATE ACTIVITY. Therefore that amendment gives no new power of taxation to the government. Wages are an equal exchange of labor for goods or services. There can be no taxes levied on equal exchanges, only on INCOME, which again is profit and gains.

Are you now going to tell me that my hard work from the sweat of my brow is considered a gain when I am paid for that work... NO, it's an equal exchange giving to me by another entity as to the value of what that person feels my work is worth.

Please do your homework before writing such an article... it makes you look incredibly stupid.

Why are the Ron Paul supporters crazy? I happen to believe the Rudy, Hillary and Obama supports are crazy.

I rather have supporters that are passionate about freedom and liberty instead of whatever Hillary stands for. And I've yet to figure out what Rudy stands for except he only mentions 9/11 every second he gets. Oh yeah and Oprah supports Obama... great endorsement there....a Billionaire that thought you could easily survive on minimum wage! That sounds crazy and out of touch to me.

I think what we have here are the Ron Paul supporters (the American Revolution supporters ready to be free and self supportive) and the Everyone Else Supporters (English Loyalists faithful to the King and scared to exist without their parasitic host).

Hmmm.... I wonder who the crazy ones are?

LOL, this guy is an IRS agent and he is afraid of Ron Paul.

Most of the comments I just read are close but not quite hitting the real issue. The damage was done by a probably corrupt Congress in 1913. They are the only ones that can repeal the Fed Res Act or the 16th or make a new amendment, whatever. When one understands that Congress prolongs the illusion of representing us citizens, it is obvious that they are making their own deals, furthering their own situations, and doing the will of their true benefactors. That is why Mr. Paul is a standout example of honesty through authentic public service.Maybe he could use the NSPD ,like Bush did, and go around Congress.

Help me here lawyers. If a jury decides not guilty in a tax evasion case, then the defendant is acquitted. Is this true?
If so, does this not mean that the acquitted cannot be brought up on these charges ever again?
If that is so and the American people get together and decide to never ever return a guilty verdict on an INDIVIDUAL for INCOME tax evasion then we in essence will win the argument through our own personal opinion in doing so and the cases will cease to be brought because everyone will quit filing income tax as individuals period. Please comment on this Lawyers. Should be simple enough to credit or discredit me on this. I do not know for sure if I am correct on this.

YOU FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE GOOD PEOPLE SHALL VOTE AND THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE. THE DOCTOR SHALL RULE COUNTRY AND LEAD US INTO A NEW DAWN. REALIZE THE ERROR OF YOUR WAYS AND ALL SHALL BE FORGIVEN.

YOURS,

WITH HOPE

MR. ROBERT HUNTER

You are all MISSING THE POINT!

Whether the income tax is legal, whether the 16th Amendment was passed cleanly or under cover of darkness, whether or not there is a law or regulation or some dark incantation with chicken entrails that makes the income tax compulsory or not....

The income tax is patently IMMORAL. Human slavery used to be legal; it was never moral.

Taxation is theft. Period. Whether the folks with most of the guns and law books decide to make it clearly LEGAL or choose to leave it ambiguous to have fun with those who think they can beat the house at it's own rigged game, the fact is that taxation is theft.

It is extorted via threat of violence. The short of it is, don't pay your taxes, stand on your rights to "not pay", eventually you'll see a government employee with a gun; resist further, you will likely experience violence in close proximity to your person.

For a more nuanced and detailed explanation, I would suggest some research starting at LewRockwell.com or Mises.org.

The real point here is that Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate that has any semblance of a clue (actually, he pretty much gets it; the point being the rest are completely clueless) regarding personal liberty and the proper role of government -- the possible exception being what's-his-name running for the Libertarian Party's nomination...who essentially endorsed Congressman Paul -- and has a bona fide track record to back it up.

It would behoove all who believe the income tax to be either illegal or immoral to study more Mises, Rothbard, and Jefferson than to expend further energies standing on the doctrine of Irwin Schiff and others of his ilk. Nothing against them, but theirs is a quicksand of loophole legality as opposed to the bedrock principles of liberty and private property rights. There is millenia-old wisdom regarding which makes a better foundation.

"Let's not fight the legality of it any longer let's elect people who can change it."

Slaves can't vote. The IRC as applied by the IRS makes slaves out of us all. I can think of many reasons why it is not legal, and none that it is legal. The income tax always has been and always will be an inherently corrupt tax throughout the world. In this nation it has been plagued with fraud, deceit, lies, and appears to be one of the biggest crimes committed in American history. To point to the IRC and say "That's the law" is a vast oversimplification - upon reading the IRC it would appear there is indeed no tax on income. One must be very familiar with the very large and very complex tax code and language and general laws etc before this becomes clear, but as soon as one begins to examine the IRC the sheer amount of BS is sure to make any objective and rational person begin to question whether the income tax is legal. The IRC overturns most of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and violates many other parts of the common law. It is an abomination to the law.

Mr. Hancock,
You may scoff at what I am about to say, but it is the truth. I am 58 years old and have spent months, full time, researching these facts:

1) the 16th amendment was never properly ratified. Bill Benson has gone to all the involved Secretary of States offices and has sealed proof from them: 3/4 of the states did NOT ratify. See:
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp
I have personally gone to several states to confirm the discrepancies myself. Benson is in litigation with the government on this matter.

2) even if it had been ratified, the income tax's "income" is a tax on corporate gain, not on an individual's labor. See:
http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap4.html
for post 1913 Supreme Court rulings, which have never been overturned, & references.

3) USC Title 26 (IRS code) is convoluted and twisted. Remember when Clinton's deposition had a definition of "sex"? You will be amazed at the definitions for "US", "citizen", "individual", and "taxpayer" in the IRS code: not at all what you think they would be.

We have given "evidence of having actually read" much more than just the document you have read in passing. This matter is a tangled web that appears to say one thing, but actually means something quite different. Please, don't be too quick to dismiss things you have not looked into. I hope you will take these references and look beyond the surface.

cuthbert1776 is right in that the income tax is immoral and that most people are missing the main point. Also, a little bit of research into the matter will show how the income tax steals from individuals and does more to harm our economy than anything else except maybe The Federal Reserve and its' hidden inflation tax . LewRockwell.com and Mises.org are excellent sources to do just that.

However cuthbert, you shouldn't be so fast in dismissing Irwin Schiff (or others of his ilk) since their research bolsters and lends credit to the same views espoused by Rockwell, Mises, Rothbard, Paul, et al, (albeit in a different manner) by demonstrating that government consistently uses fraud and force to keep perpetuating the income tax/IRS scam on the American People.

I am sure most of us Ron Paul supporters agree that electing him as President will be a step in the right direction to end the income tax since he would be in a stronger position to call for a new amendment to abolish the 16th, as well as end the IRS. Furthermore, he will call for allowing sound currencies (whether government or private) to compete with inflationary Federal Reserve Notes and/or the abolishment of the Federal Reserve itself.

the Seventh Circuit case of United States v. Buckner[23]:

For the record, we note that the following beliefs, which are stock arguments of the tax protester movement, have not been, nor ever will be, considered “objectively reasonable” in this circuit:
(1) the belief that the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution was improperly ratified and therefore never came into being;
(2) the belief that the Sixteenth Amendment is unconstitutional generally;
(3) the belief that the income tax violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment;
(4) the belief that the tax laws are unconstitutional;
(5) the belief that wages are not income and therefore are not subject to federal income tax laws;
(6) the belief that filing a tax return violates the privilege against self-incrimination; and
(7) the belief that Federal Reserve Notes do not constitute cash or income.

Wow, I guess the new blog tactic is to use Ron Paul's name as a way to drive traffic to a really poor colection of text that is "desribed" as an article about Income Tax. It seems the author's cat got loose on the keyboard and has published another poorly researched article. But not too bad for a cat dancing on the keyboard.

I'm sure some Paul supporters might say that, but Paul himself does not say the income tax is unconstitutional. He says he wants to repeal the 16th amendment in order to make it unconstitutional. He has said, however, that the method of collecting the income tax is unconstitutional.

Income is defined as Corporate gains and profits. Wages and labor are free trade between you and your employer. When half your check is taken because establishment knows best for you and everyone else you have to work 2 -3 jobs just to be 1 paycheck away from bankrupcy. How in the hell are you supposed to pursue happiness if your a drone slave to the elite? The 16th amendment was never legally ratified, was passed while most of the politicians were on Christmas break with their families. Show me the law where I am liable? I pay taxes on my check then get taxed again on EVERYTHING I buy.

Mr. Hancock, I know your job is to report, and most people take it for grantit, the sky is blue, grass is green, pay your taxes........ Im sure youve been made to believe this since the time you were born as most Americans have. Many of us have taken the red pill though and broken free of the Matrix and understand whats goin on. As Jimi Hendrix once said "When the power of love is greater than the love of power, there will be peace." --- Another quote I can't remember who said it but here it is: the difference between a taxidermist and an taxman; is the taxidermist leaves the skin behind."

Anyway Mr. Hancock here is a link to a video that might elighten you, and you will see how the American public have been enslaved. Cheers :)

"The sleeper('s) must awaken"-
-Frank Herberts "DUNE"

Oops forgot the link -- here -
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936

Attn: Jay Hancock, and all!

Yes the Income tax is legal...(was it properly ratified)? 16th? probly not...(another day)

The real question is...what is Income?

It's the most important word..."Income". ...hmm, whats in a word?...ahhh, money that "comes in" (I gotta go out to get mine) ...it doesnt just come in! ... and I dont own any stock in Raytheon...

"Income" (the word) was defined by the Supreme Court multiple times AFTER the first version of the 16th was passed in 1913....(corporate profit)...!

so there was a problem...The Supreme Court did not agree w/ the written law!

So in 1956 (after all the wars)...the sixteenth amendment was reworded...and consequently the words "wages salaries and tips" was/were removed.

Income according to the Supreme Court is "CORPORATE PROFIT!!!

...if YOU benefit from CORPORATE PRIVELEGE (cannot have personal assets siezed) and/or have money that just (comes in) from ownership or investment in a corporation...(or are an elected or appointed official of the U.S.govt)...then YOU are the one that the 16 amendment is referring to...

Not the average wage earner!

STANDARDS FOR CREATING YELLOW JOURNALISM: When fear strikes: abandon your principles; use smear tactics; point fingers; resort to insults and name calling; stifle the truth - misleading people is more fun; side with evil. By all means sell your soul to your corporate controllers.

So much misinformation; so little time.

Bill Benson (the author of "The Law That Never Was") has been in litigation with the government (again) about whether the 16th Amendment was properly ratified, and Benson lost (again). See http://tpgurus.wikidot.com/william-benson for details.

Other nonsense about the federal income tax being unconstitutional, inapplicable, or other wise invalid is refuted at http://www.evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html

Meg knows she get a lot of hits for ad links by inking Ron Paul stuff. That's about the extent of it.

Hey Jay,
You are either stupid, ignorant or both ! What the 16th Amendment clarifies, and taxes ,is the income derived FROM
the source. As an excise Tax, I might add. Mainly on corporate profit, and the gains and profits from priviledged activities (like working for the Feds)
who get paid wages.
If I get paid money(sic) a check or other form of remuneration, for my labor;; that IS the SOURCE. The tax isn't ON the source, it's derived FROM the source. My boss isn't the source. He provides the source , by paying me for my labor. If I hit the lottery for a million, the tax is on the million, not the $ 10 dollar wager. Common sense, read the law or find someone to explain it to you.