REPUBLICANS PLAN PUSH FOR ELIMINATION OF IRS

[JoeyRamone 0]

If i did not have 4 kids i would.....

[mailin 0]

Maybe if the governement stayed within the lines of 'original intent' than they would be able to survive on minimal taxes from its constituants.

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

Quote

What Does The US Constitution Permit?
The Federal Constitution only permits the government to lay two forms of taxation. One is a "direct tax" and the other an "indirect tax". Together these two forms of taxation comprise the whole; much like the northern and southern hemisphere - there's no third choice.

The term "indirect tax" never appears in the Constitution. The Constitution permits the US Government to "lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises..." [See Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1.]

Although there has been some debate about the meaning of the word "taxes", as it appears in the above quote, it is generally held that its use refers to the direct taxes authorized in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, while "duties, imposts and excises" are the three species of taxes which comprise the class of indirect taxes.

So how can we tell the difference between these two forms of taxation that the US Supreme Court has called "the two great tax classes"?

Here's a solid definition of "direct tax" straight from the US Supreme Court:


"Direct taxes bear upon persons, upon possessions, and enjoyment of rights". Knowlton v. Moore, 178 US 41
[See Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, which grants the U.S. the power to lay a direct tax.]

In other words, direct taxes cannot be avoided because they are upon things that are fixed - such as your physical being, your real property, and certain fundamental rights.

By contrast, an indirect tax is a tax that you can avoid by choosing not become involved in the activity upon which the tax is laid. An example of this might be importing products from another country into the United States. In such a circumstance one is required to pay an import duty. However, one can avoid paying an import duty simply by not importing foreign products into this country. Another example might be distilling rum in the Virgin Islands and importing it into the states of the Union. If one wishes to avoid the taxes involved in such a process, one need only to refrain form the activity.

In short, an indirect tax is a tax that you can choose to avoid without giving up the normal affairs of life. However, if one cannot avoid a taxable activity without sacrificing the ordinary affairs of life, the tax is not indirect, but direct.

Since within the class of indirect taxes, the excise tax is the one most familiar to the American public; what exactly is an excise tax?


"The term 'excise tax' and 'privilege tax' are synonymous. The two are often used interchangeably."
American Airways v. Wallace, 57 F.2d 877, 880
Here is a more detailed definition:


"The obligation to pay an excise is based upon the voluntary action of the person taxed in performing the act, enjoying the privilege or engaging in the privilege which is the subject of the excise, and the element of absolute unavoidable demand is lacking" People ex rel, Atty Gen v. Naglee, 1 Cal 232; Bank of Commerce & T. Co. v. Senter, 149 Tenn. 441SW 144
You will note that two elements are mandatory upon the government if a tax is to be classified as an excise, and thus avoid the requirement of apportionment. The first is that your actions must be "voluntary". In other words, as stated earlier, you must be free to steer clear of the "taxable activity" without sacrificing the ordinary affairs of life. Secondly, if you steer clear of the "taxable activity" the government cannot make a demand upon you for the tax that you cannot avoid by stating (or showing) that you were not involved in any excise taxable activity. We will revisit this issue later in the article.

If more people actually stood up to the IRS and the gov't. with the realization that we are not required to pay the biggest tax of all (income tax) then the gov't. may actually have to start listening to its constituants and spending money more wisely. I work for/with a state representative who gets away with stuff that he shouldn't be able to get away with. He invited several members of the US House of Representatives to dinner when they were in town for the DNC, and he's partially reimbused with federal grants and tax payer money.

If the money wasn't there to be spent then they would have to answer to us more - and that sounds mighty fine to me!

But... it's always easier to say than to do, unfortunately

Jen

Arianna Frances

[JoeyRamone 0]

Jen,

Thanks for your input, you have some great and vaild posints. Only if we could control the spending by lamass goverment appointed workers.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

It will NEVER happen. Too many tax attorneys and accountants have a vested interest in the current system.

We could start killing them and distributing their wealth, at the same time as we are instituting this new system. EVERBODY WINS!!!

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Just a fact of life for many people...I am not here to brag....

Paying 38% still leaves you with more money than other people have, by virtue of how much you have to make to be taxed 38%. Quitcherbitchin'.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[JoeyRamone 0]

Quitcherbitchin'***

I have every right to bitch. Come spend a day in my shoes, work 80-100 hours a week with me then we can see who has the right to bitch.

[billvon 2,998]

>I have every right to bitch.

100% right - but then, so does peaceful jeffrey.

[storm1977 0]

Well the IRS no longer exists... there is some cutting to start off with :-)

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[billvon 2,998]

> Well the IRS no longer exists...

So who takes care of administering the flat tax? I have a feeling that if you just told everyone "Hey, just send us 15% of your income, we trust you" you might not get 100% cooperation.

[mcrocker 0]

Quote

> 15% flat tax for anyone making over 20K/year and a 1% national sales tax.

That's about half what you need to run the government in its current form. Where does the rest of the money come from?

How about this..

Leave taxes alone (precent wise). Take 50% of all tax and apply it to the Government budget. Allow the tax payer to pick where the remaining 50% is allocated (Education, Health Care, SS, DoD, DoE ...). Make the departments run on a budget of 50% and use any extra from tax payer allocations to fund future projects (like a new aircraft carrier, or new books for schools).

I would love to see a big check box on my 1040 so I could send my $$ where I felt it would have the most impact.

[PhillyKev 0]

Ughh....while a nice theory, could you imagine the impact that would have on the advertising and lobbyist industries? I get half a dozen people a day handing me flyers or wanting to talk to me about some issue just going outside for a smoke break. Add to that their quest to get you to give them money that you have to give to someone anyway. It would be relentless.

[burbleflyer 0]

Quote

It will NEVER happen. Too many tax attorneys and accountants have a vested interest in the current system.

The only thing preventing it is attitudes like yours.

Neal Boortz put it very well when he asked who ever thought the wall would come down when Reagan uttered his most eloquent words..."Mr. Gorbachev. Tear down this wall"


AND.. if you think accountants make their money filling out tax returns you sir are sadly mistaken.