Today's Federal tax on earned wages may violate our Constitution.

[johnwk]

Agreed. Income is profit. Profit is what you gain from sales or labor.

Only after deducting all expenses and outlays can we arrive at a profit and/or gain.

It seems to be self-evident that a wage earner does in fact invest capital in pursuit of earning a wage, e.g., the cost of transportation to and from work; the cost of food which fuels the wage earners body during working hours; the costs involved with housing, medical needs, and even clothing are all expenses incurred by the wage earner and are necessary expenses and outlays which makes one’s labor possible. And this does not even take into account the “investment” of eight hours of life itself which the wage earner makes available to their employer, and that is in addition to the actual physical and mental labor invested by the wage earner, which is also made available to their employer.

 

[Concerned American]

Only after deducting all expenses and outlays can we arrive at a profit and/or gain.

It seems to be self-evident that a wage earner does in fact invest capital in pursuit of earning a wage, e.g., the cost of transportation to and from work; the cost of food which fuels the wage earners body during working hours; the costs involved with housing, medical needs, and even clothing are all expenses incurred by the wage earner and are necessary expenses and outlays which makes one’s labor possible. And this does not even take into account the “investment” of eight hours of life itself which the wage earner makes available to their employer, and that is in addition to the actual physical and mental labor invested by the wage earner, which is also made available to their employer.

All of those are what you sell for your income. Take up those issues with the courts. This question has been debated in the courts ad nauseam and we still have taxes. Sorry it doesn't sit well with you.

 

[Oddball]

All of those are what you sell for your income. Take up those issues with the courts. This question has been debated in the courts ad nauseam and we still have taxes. Sorry it doesn't sit well with you.

You really think that the oligarchy is going to cut its own nuts off?

 

[Concerned American]

You really think that the oligarchy is going to cut its own nuts off?

Nope, which is my point. I think you are directing your comment to johnwk. I live in a state with no income tax and bottom line is you are going to pay for gov't services and infrastructure. There is no free lunch. If you don't pay through income taxes, you'll pay sales, excise, property and use taxes plus every fee that some whack job can dream up--see CA, where it costs over $600/yr. to register a newer pick-up. Someone once said "You can't escape death or taxes." It is a fact of life as sure as you're born and to continuously debate the fact is to bang your head on the wall for infinity.

 

[johnwk]

All of those are what you sell for your income. Take up those issues with the courts. This question has been debated in the courts ad nauseam and we still have taxes. Sorry it doesn't sit well with you.

Yup, our courts certainly have addressed how to calculate a "profit" or "gain" derived from ". . .capital, from labor, or from both combined . . ." EISNER v. MACOMBER , 252 U.S. 189 (1920)

And in United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259,(1927),, the Court noted that the income from an illegal business was held subject to income tax, but it was necessary to determine what that income was, and the cost of an illegal purchase of liquor was subtracted from proceeds of the illegal sale of the liquor in order to arrive at the gain from the illegal transaction which were then subjected to income tax in that case .

And, in Sullenger vs. Commissioner (1948) the Court allowed the business owner [who made illegal purchases of meat] to deduct the cost of meat purchased at a higher price then set by the Office of Price Administration, which he then resold for profit. The “income” from those sales was being taxed and was at issue in the case. The Court went on to cite Sullivan and concluded: “No authority has been cited for denying to this taxpayer the cost of goods sold in computing his profit, which profit alone is gross income for income tax purposes.”

So, once again your opinions do not align with the facts.

JWK

 

[DudleySmith]

Earned wages ARE "incomes from whatever source derived." I don't know how it could be any clearer.

No they aren't, they are barter agreements; workers are not investing capital and do not share in profits for value added, they are just tooling and labor, and don't accrue any income from the job. Capital gains and profits are real income, not wages. Just because they're paid in dollars makes zero difference from being paid in chickens or plutonium.

If I trade you a red brick for a brown brick there is no income for either of you.

 

[DudleySmith]

Only after deducting all expenses and outlays can we arrive at a profit and/or gain.

It seems to be self-evident that a wage earner does in fact invest capital in pursuit of earning a wage, e.g., the cost of transportation to and from work; the cost of food which fuels the wage earners body during working hours; the costs involved with housing, medical needs, and even clothing are all expenses incurred by the wage earner and are necessary expenses and outlays which makes one’s labor possible. And this does not even take into account the “investment” of eight hours of life itself which the wage earner makes available to their employer, and that is in addition to the actual physical and mental labor invested by the wage earner, which is also made available to their employer.

They should be allowed full deductions for all expenses same as business owners get, yes.

 

[johnwk]

They should be allowed full deductions for all expenses same as business owners get, yes.

I agree, and it seems to be self-evident that in calculating a profit and/or gain, collectively referred to as “income” within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment, that all necessary expenses and outlays of a wage-earner, including investments made in maintaining the property sold by the wage-earner, must be deducted from gross receipts in order to arrive at a taxable profit and/or gain.



As stated in Sullenger vs. Commissioner (1948) “No authority has been cited for denying to this taxpayer the cost of goods sold in computing his profit, which profit alone is gross income for income tax purposes.”

JWK

"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 him from 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." ___ Butchers’ Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1884)

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No one is taught this in democrat-controlled indoctrination centers............um.............er..................public schools and universities, but the income tax was declared unconstitutional at the turn of the 20th century.

So, Progressives simply added it later on.

Supreme Court Declares Income Tax Unconstitutional

Share Supreme Court Declares Income Tax Unconstitutional The Supreme Court declared the income tax to be null and void in a momentous 5-4 decision written by the Chief Justice. Congress […]

www.withum.com

Yep, this is why the 16th was added. And it was not the Progressives that did it since it takes far more than just them to add an amendment.

 

[johnwk]

Yep, this is why the 16th was added. And it was not the Progressives that did it since it takes far more than just them to add an amendment.

But keep in mind it was the Democrats who decided to lay and collect the unconstitutional direct and Temporary Victory Tax of 1943 on earned wages, which is what was used to eventually confiscate the bread which working people earn today when selling the property each has in their own labor.
.

 

[Concerned American]

Yup, our courts certainly have addressed how to calculate a "profit" or "gain" derived from ". . .capital, from labor, or from both combined . . ." EISNER v. MACOMBER , 252 U.S. 189 (1920)

And in United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259,(1927),, the Court noted that the income from an illegal business was held subject to income tax, but it was necessary to determine what that income was, and the cost of an illegal purchase of liquor was subtracted from proceeds of the illegal sale of the liquor in order to arrive at the gain from the illegal transaction which were then subjected to income tax in that case .

And, in Sullenger vs. Commissioner (1948) the Court allowed the business owner [who made illegal purchases of meat] to deduct the cost of meat purchased at a higher price then set by the Office of Price Administration, which he then resold for profit. The “income” from those sales was being taxed and was at issue in the case. The Court went on to cite Sullivan and concluded: “No authority has been cited for denying to this taxpayer the cost of goods sold in computing his profit, which profit alone is gross income for income tax purposes.”

So, once again your opinions do not align with the facts.

JWK

There's a ship in Boston Harbor with tea on it. Go for it. Good luck. LMAO.

 

[Votto]

Yep, this is why the 16th was added. And it was not the Progressives that did it since it takes far more than just them to add an amendment.

 

[johnwk]

There's a ship in Boston Harbor with tea on it. Go for it. Good luck. LMAO.

Is that your admission that the documentation is too overwhelming for you to refute that you now resort to an adolescent suggestion, rather than admit you may very well have been in error?

JWK

 

[Concerned American]

Is that your admission that the documentation is too overwhelming for you to refute that you now resort to an adolescent suggestion, rather than admit you may very well have been in error?

JWK

In error of what? LMAO. Let me know when you quit paying your income taxes.

 

[Oddball]

Yup, our courts certainly have addressed how to calculate a "profit" or "gain" derived from ". . .capital, from labor, or from both combined . . ." EISNER v. MACOMBER , 252 U.S. 189 (1920)

And in United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259,(1927),, the Court noted that the income from an illegal business was held subject to income tax, but it was necessary to determine what that income was, and the cost of an illegal purchase of liquor was subtracted from proceeds of the illegal sale of the liquor in order to arrive at the gain from the illegal transaction which were then subjected to income tax in that case .

And, in Sullenger vs. Commissioner (1948) the Court allowed the business owner [who made illegal purchases of meat] to deduct the cost of meat purchased at a higher price then set by the Office of Price Administration, which he then resold for profit. The “income” from those sales was being taxed and was at issue in the case. The Court went on to cite Sullivan and concluded: “No authority has been cited for denying to this taxpayer the cost of goods sold in computing his profit, which profit alone is gross income for income tax purposes.”

So, once again your opinions do not align with the facts.

JWK

Stockholm syndrome ain't pretty.

 

[PeterPilot]

The rule of law in this country does not exist if the people are unwilling to defend the rule of law.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, ‘Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?’ “A republic, if you can keep it,” responded Franklin.

A large portion of "the people" who were attempting to defend the rule of law regarding the election of 2020 by exercising their First Amendment rights have been sitting in the DC Jail without benefit of Habeas Corpus.

The government is completely out of control, and there is no rule of law. That has been amply demonstrated, but some folks are unable to face the bitter truth.

 

[johnwk]

A large portion of "the people" who were attempting to defend the rule of law regarding the election of 2020 by exercising their First Amendment rights have been sitting in the DC Jail without benefit of Habeas Corpus.

The government is completely out of control, and there is no rule of law. That has been amply demonstrated, but some folks are unable to face the bitter truth.

Is it not time for America’s freedom loving people to rise up and rebel against a federal government which is acting in rebellion to our written Constitution?

JWK

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, ‘Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?’ “A republic, if you can keep it,” responded Franklin.