This video is predicated upon an errored interpretation. To report the income tax being imposed as a direct tax is incorrect. The SC has made clear the income tax, as is currently being imposed, is an indirect excise tax. That is to say, a tax imposed upon the gain/profit from the transfer of a "certain" commodity. Although liability for Subtitle A is found in Subtitle F (26§6151) the SC still finds the arraingement or location as being irrelevant. It appears we're beating a dead horse.
The 16th amendment has nothing to do with taxes on personal wages. This was ruled by the supreme court. The S. Court also ruled that the 16th did not change the constitution. Also the S. Court ruled that the word income in the 16th meant coporate profita and it ruled a working individual that doesnt own a company cannot make a profit. ALso the court ruled that the income tax was a indirect excise tax which only corporations have to pay. So if anyone wants to argue look up the SC rulings
The problem here is that the math is wrong. Interest on the debt is about 1/5 of all the money raised by income taxes. Not to say that the spirit of this protest is wrong, but there's more to it than the simple conspiracy you'd have us believe. After all, the Federal Reserve send 97% of its profits to the Treasury as a grant/bribe. Thus, the two are joined at the hip.
I read through it all. Your correct there is a income tax, however that is for the state only. There is no law or statute obligating you to pay a 'Federal' Income Tax. There is a difference.
Again, I'm looking at the page right now and no where on or in it does it mention anything about it being about Federal Law. You should look up the court cases where people have challenged this and won. If you win against a so called Federal Law in court that can only mean that that Federal Law isn't true otherwise you'd end up in Federal prison.
There are a handful of people who have avoided criminal (but not civil) penalties by convincing a jury that they were too STUPID or delusional to understand the tax laws and their violations were not willful, but no one has ever won against the IRS in a tax collection case using one of the frivolous arguments described.
Income tax was passed in 1863 during the war to help pay for the war and doesn't the 16th amendment say you should pay for income tax?
gekko101 1 year ago
Very informing
powerofnow11 1 year ago
law or not its unconstitutional
alicemcelroy 2 years ago
This video is predicated upon an errored interpretation. To report the income tax being imposed as a direct tax is incorrect. The SC has made clear the income tax, as is currently being imposed, is an indirect excise tax. That is to say, a tax imposed upon the gain/profit from the transfer of a "certain" commodity. Although liability for Subtitle A is found in Subtitle F (26§6151) the SC still finds the arraingement or location as being irrelevant. It appears we're beating a dead horse.
agtwatchdog 3 years ago
Thank you for the responses everyone. Send me a message if you would like a link to my website.
Zanoske 3 years ago
This video should have way more number of views, but I guess this shows a little people know about the reality of how every worker gets ripped off.
Income tax is corrupt and should be abolished and the same thing goes for the federal reserve.
ytbmmvi 3 years ago
The 16th amendment has nothing to do with taxes on personal wages. This was ruled by the supreme court. The S. Court also ruled that the 16th did not change the constitution. Also the S. Court ruled that the word income in the 16th meant coporate profita and it ruled a working individual that doesnt own a company cannot make a profit. ALso the court ruled that the income tax was a indirect excise tax which only corporations have to pay. So if anyone wants to argue look up the SC rulings
zackmcnell 3 years ago
The problem here is that the math is wrong. Interest on the debt is about 1/5 of all the money raised by income taxes. Not to say that the spirit of this protest is wrong, but there's more to it than the simple conspiracy you'd have us believe. After all, the Federal Reserve send 97% of its profits to the Treasury as a grant/bribe. Thus, the two are joined at the hip.
ajpmathwiz 3 years ago
There is a law, it's called Title 26.
RetSquid 3 years ago
Please attach a link to that. I'm sure we'd like to see that and have access to it.
Zanoske 3 years ago
Go to google and type in 'title 26'.
RetSquid 3 years ago
I read through it all. Your correct there is a income tax, however that is for the state only. There is no law or statute obligating you to pay a 'Federal' Income Tax. There is a difference.
Zanoske 3 years ago
WRONG!
This isn't a State law, it's Federal law, therby Federal income tax.
RetSquid 3 years ago
Again, I'm looking at the page right now and no where on or in it does it mention anything about it being about Federal Law. You should look up the court cases where people have challenged this and won. If you win against a so called Federal Law in court that can only mean that that Federal Law isn't true otherwise you'd end up in Federal prison.
Zanoske 3 years ago
"Again, I'm looking at the page right now and no where on or in it does it mention anything about it being about Federal Law."
It was passed by Congress and is thereby Federal law.
RetSquid 3 years ago
There are a handful of people who have avoided criminal (but not civil) penalties by convincing a jury that they were too STUPID or delusional to understand the tax laws and their violations were not willful, but no one has ever won against the IRS in a tax collection case using one of the frivolous arguments described.
RetSquid 3 years ago
so whats the problem, why should anyone still pay income taxes than if there's no law for it???
Mackoek 3 years ago
They don't know any better. Spread the knowledge and more people will rebel against it.
Zanoske 3 years ago
i am taking the day off!
pierceddana 3 years ago
I had no idea about this, very shocking
lakewood51 3 years ago