Happy Tax Day!

[OldFlame]

Spoken like someone that has never left the country.

But yes, our money will stay in US held financial institutions as plan to be rather nomadic in our golden years.

I've traveled quite a bit, and in South America, not a place I would feel comfortable living in.

 

[Weatherman2020]

You know, your link is from Dec of 21, right?

Which comes after October.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Actually, my taxes were awful this year.

Because I got married, I had to pay a penalty on my wife's Obamacare plan, because our combined income went above the subsidy she was receiving. it didn't matter that she needed the subsidy before we were married.

Good news, this won't be an issue going forward.

Correct, no problem going forward. Trump will be POTUS in 7 months.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Which comes after October.

yes, so your article only predates the attack by 22 months.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Correct, no problem going forward. Trump will be POTUS in 7 months.

Trump made the tax code less insane?

Really, do you have a link to that?

 

[JoeB131]

Correct, no problem going forward. Trump will be POTUS in 7 months.

No, that would make things worse for everyone, really.
Which is why it won't be allowed to happen.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Correct, no problem going forward. Trump will be POTUS in 7 months.

Trump is going to take office in Nov?

 

[johnwk]

they owe me a little back. every year this seems more complicated .

i can understand the attraction of a consumption tax

Federal taxes would not be a problem if our federal government did not, in violation of our Constitution, lay and collect a direct, un-apportioned tax, which it is now doing.

"No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

JWK

If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection [apportionment] could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895) JUSTICE FULLER

 

[rampart]

Federal taxes would not be a problem if our federal government did not, in violation of our Constitution, lay and collect a direct, un-apportioned tax, which it is now doing.

"No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

JWK

If, by calling a tax indirect when it is essentially direct, the rule of protection [apportionment] could be frittered away, one of the great landmarks defining the boundary between the nation and the states of which it is composed, would have disappeared, and with it one of the bulwarks of private rights and private property. POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 U.S. 429 (1895) JUSTICE FULLER

i know you have a constitutiom because that is an accurate article 1 quote.

now turn to amendment 16.

 

[johnwk]

i know you have a constitutiom because that is an accurate article 1 quote.

now turn to amendment 16.

What about the 16th Amendment?

 

[rampart]

What about the 16th Amendment?

it hasn't been repealed, has it?

 

[johnwk]

it hasn't been repealed, has it?

The 16th Amendment has not been repealed. What does the 16th Amendment have to do with what I posted?

Has Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 been repealed?

 

[johnwk]

it hasn't been repealed, has it?

Did you miss my reply, rampart?