Thread: Direct Taxes
View Single Post
Old 04-14-2007, 07:07 AM   #6 (permalink)
sgtdmski
The Man You Love to Hate
Premium Member
 
sgtdmski's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ketchikan, AK
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,818
Country:
Points: 7,052, Level: 55
Points: 7,052, Level: 55 Points: 7,052, Level: 55 Points: 7,052, Level: 55
Level up: 51%, 98 Points needed
Level up: 51% Level up: 51% Level up: 51%
Activity: 26%
Activity: 26% Activity: 26% Activity: 26%
Send a message via MSN to sgtdmski Send a message via Yahoo to sgtdmski
sgtdmski is offline
Reply With Quote
 
The Constitution did not give the Congress the power to lay a direct tax. However, the 16th Amendment granted the Goverment the power to collect an income tax without regards to apportionment. Thus we have our now infamous progressive tax system.

The Supreme Court was correct in ruling that the 16th Amendment did not grant the government any new taxing powers, Congress always had the right to lay and collect taxes. The 16th Amendment removed the requirement for apportionment. Apportionment would require the individuals of a state to pay a percentage equal to their percentage of population of the Country. For example, if Alaska has 5% of the country's population, the residents of Alaska would be responsible for paying 5% of the country's taxes.

dmk
Conservatism, I repeat is not an ideology. It does not breed fanatics....But if you want men who seek, reasonably and prudently, to reconcile the best in wisdom of our ancestors with the change which is essential to a vigorous civil social existence, then you will do well to turn to conservative principles
-Russell Kirk-