CreateDebate


Debate Info

17
12
No Yes
Debate Score:29
Arguments:14
Total Votes:39
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 No (7)
 
 Yes (7)

Debate Creator

RevFred(349) pic



Is the federal income tax legal?

Freedom to Fascism (video.google.com)

No

Side Score: 17
VS.

Yes

Side Score: 12
3 points

i believe the idea of federal taxes on a persons wages to be ridiculous.

it is hard enough for most people just to pay bills, eat, and still afford gas to get to work. Then you start taking part of my hard earned pay check away from me?!?! i feel that taxes should be on sales....and corporate dealings only. with no little people earning a wage/salary all those big companies are nothing.....

Side: No
2 points

Oh but you don't understand. Its for your own good. You see, the government knows how to spend YOUR hard earned money better than you do. I thought that was quite obvious. /sarcasm

Side: No

No, The sixteenth Amendment should be repealed.

Side: No
1 point

Firstly The 16th Amendment was not properly ratified. Please see

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/theman.asp

secondly even if it was ratified there are eight supreme court rulings that said the 16th amendment gave the no new powers to tax. They include

Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Staton vs Baltic oil

and lowe vs peck

and have never been over turned

These court cases caused the demise of the income tax law passed in 1913

Also , Income as defind by the constition is

gains or profits made by corportion

For a good documentry on this subject check out

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173

Supporting Evidence: Freedom to Facism (video.google.com)
Side: No
2 points

Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Side: Yes
Paul-ish(77) Disputed
3 points

Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Taxation is seizure of property.

Supporting Evidence: Fourth Amendment (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: No
1 point

What does "against unreasonable searches and seizures, or no warrants shall issue upon probable cause" mean to you?

Well, for most people, it means that your house can't be search without a warrant or a just cause. This amendment applies to criminal law situations.

Side: yes
xenos(15) Disputed
2 points

define "income" as it pertains to tax code

Side: No

The Sixteenth Amendment is pretty explanatory. "...lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived,...."

Side: yes
1 point

Xenos’ argument is flawed for two reasons: First, the argument only suggests that a federal income tax is distasteful and unfair, but it contains no discussion of whether the income tax is actually ‘legal.’ Second, even if the argument were on point, though it isn’t explicit, Xenos seems to rely on the misconception that corporations pay no taxes. A corporation is technically a legal entity, required to pay income taxes the same way any individual is. In fact, corporations may be taxed at a higher rate than individuals, and the owners of the corporation (shareholders) have their income taxed again when they receive payments. In essence, this double taxation is the price that shareholders pay for the corporate veil.

The United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 provides that “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the Common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.” The United States Constitution, Amendment 16 provides that “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

A good starting point for the definition of ‘income’ would be § 61 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C.A. § 61) which provides, in pertinent part: “Except as otherwise provided […], gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) gross income derived from business […]”

The United States Supreme Court has a long history of case law that informs us of several important factors: first, they have not struck down the IRS income tax provisions as unconstitutional. Because the Supreme Court’s job is (in part) to tell us what is and is not constitutional, this is telling. See Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137. Second, the Court has upheld an expansive view of what constitutes “income.” To the extent that the Internal Revenue Code is vague (which it is, despite its best efforts), the Supreme Court has held that the concept of taxable income includes a whole lot. It certainly includes a person’s income generated from their employment.

The question is “is the federal income tax legal?” The answer is: the constitution explicitly allows it, and the Supreme Court has upheld it - there is no more firm a base for ‘legality’ in the American system than that. Laws can change, and a Federal Income Tax may be deemed illegal, but only after significant legislative action. I will admit that I agree with Xenos entirely: I dislike the income tax, don’t want to pay it, and think that it is unfair that anybody gets a part of my hard-earned pay check (but that raises an argument about what should be done with tax dollars, and I’d prefer to avoid it). Unfortunately, there are many laws of this nation that I believe are unfair or distasteful, but their legality remains intact as long as Congress and the Supreme Court approve.

Side: Yes
unownmew(160) Disputed
1 point

You do realize you just stepped on your own foot by posting the tax code?

“Except as otherwise provided […], /gross income/ means all /income/ from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) gross income derived from business […]”

GROSS INCOME means income from the various sources derived. That's all well and good, but, what does INCOME by itself mean? You can not define a word with the same word and expect to understand it.

The Government was not given power to tax GROSS INCOME. The Income tax is not a direct tax anyway, it's an excise tax on corporations. Taxation on rights and property is immoral and would never have been supported by the Framers of the Constitution (The power to tax is the power to destroy).

And even if such a tax was "Constitutional," by the Declaration of Independence, the people of the Several States have all power to refuse to pay such an immoral and unjust seizure of property.

Side: No
0 points

Stop being so picky and finicky and pay your taxes.

Side: Yes
0 points

The government makes the laws regarding legality. If the government outlawed the tax, it would be illegal.

Side: Yes
0 points

Yes, the federal income tax is legal. The Sixteenth Amendment makes it expressly legal. However, a more important question is whether a _federal_ income tax is consistent with the original principles of our republic.

I do not believe it to be so; however, I think a state income tax would be legal. From an original (non-amended) Constitutional perspective, I believe there is support for state taxation, especially in the case of sales taxation, but no support for a federal income tax.

Side: Yes