The income tax is constitutional even if we use a strict interpretation.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

Article 1, Section 8 clearly states that congress may levy any tax if it is used for the general welfare, but there are some limitations to taxation. This comes about in Article 1 section 9 which states that if a direct tax is created than it must bear some relation to the population of a state.

Obviously creating an income tax in relation to population size is practically impossible, and would require that everyone would have to make the same amount of income in order for the math to work. This idea of direct taxation on income derived from property was ruled unconstitutional in that Pollock case, but it just meant that "direct" taxation on income from property is unconstitutional.

Finally there is the case of  Springer vs. United States which shows that the supreme court ruled the 1864 revenue act was constitutional because of their strict interpretation of article one, and this was revisited in Pollock which decided that the income tax of 1894 was unconstitutional because it was a direct-apportioned tax. Thus the tax's reviewed in the Pollock case were only considered unconstitutional because they violated article 1 section 9, while the Springer case found income tax's to be constitutional as long as they did not violate article 1. Thus in both cases the language of article 1 was raised, but income tax's were only considered unconstitutional if they were a direct income tax.

Thus the 16th amendment could be repealed but congress would still have the power to tax income as long it is a indirect tax. For example income tax's were used from the 1860's to the 1870's, and was never ruled unconstitutional unless they were a direct tax. Thus Congress always had the power to erect an income tax just as long as it was not a direct tax.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

what is an indirect income tax?

[Napoleon XIV]

what is an indirect income tax?

Think something along the lines of an excise tax.  That is, you don't tax the income; you tax the process by which the income is created.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Who cares?

It's like finding an old old city law that says before human waste is disposed of, you must yell out the window. Back in Europe, they used to throw that stuff on the street. Maybe you can find a lawyer that says every time you flush, you need to yell out the window. I say so what? No one does it, no one will do it, no one will charge anyone for not doing it, and if the pols wanted to, they could easily change the law to allow it.

So what if Income Tax is unconstitutional. 99% of Americans accept it. Those 1% who don't are, frankly, insane and should be committed.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

So what if Income Tax is unconstitutional. 99% of Americans accept it. Those 1% who don't are, frankly, insane and should be committed.

People who don't want to have the fruits of their labor robbed from them at gun point are "insane and should be committed"?

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

So what if Income Tax is unconstitutional. 99% of Americans accept it. Those 1% who don't are, frankly, insane and should be committed.

People who don't want to have the fruits of their labor robbed from them at gun point are "insane and should be committed"?

No, you can be opposed to taxes, but trying to say it is somehow unconstitutional and anti-freedom and a conspiracy... that's a bit much.

[Oakvale]

Call me silly, but how can a part of the Constitution be unconstitutional?

[Ban my account ffs!]

Call me silly, but how can a part of the Constitution be unconstitutional?

If you're libertarian and don't like a particular amendment, you just pretend there was a conspiracy and say it wasn't properly ratified.

As for Libertas:  I believe government (that is, the people we elect to represent our interests) has the right to take a portion of our income to pay for the services that are provided to us.

I understand most libertarians wouldn't mind destroying our economy and handing the vast majority of property and riches to the top 0.1% that we might toil, suffer, and be exploited in our "freedom"... but I'll take the income tax, thank you very much.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

As for Libertas:  I believe government (that is, the people we elect to represent our interests) has the right to take a portion of our income to pay for the services that are provided to us.

The only 'right' the State has is to wither away and die. The State is not the people; rather, it is the most evil institution in the history of mankind.

[Mechaman]

So what if Income Tax is unconstitutional. 99% of Americans accept it. Those 1% who don't are, frankly, insane and should be committed.

People who don't want to have the fruits of their labor robbed from them at gun point are "insane and should be committed"?

No, you can be opposed to taxes, but trying to say it is somehow unconstitutional and anti-freedom and a conspiracy... that's a bit much.

Hey, aren't you the guy who once compared the Atlas forum to Nazi Germany?
Just saying.

[Associate Justice PiT]

As for Libertas:  I believe government (that is, the people we elect to represent our interests) has the right to take a portion of our income to pay for the services that are provided to us.

The only 'right' the State has is to wither away and die. The State is not the people; rather, it is the most evil institution in the history of mankind.

     While I do agree that the notion of the state having rights is laughable (this from many of the people who claim that businesses don't have rights, in which case they are technically correct, but are missing the point by a mile), the state will always draw an income tax from the people just because the vast majority of people wouldn't know what to do without the income tax & all of their favorite entitlement programs in place.

[Mechaman]

As for Libertas:  I believe government (that is, the people we elect to represent our interests) has the right to take a portion of our income to pay for the services that are provided to us.

The only 'right' the State has is to wither away and die. The State is not the people; rather, it is the most evil institution in the history of mankind.

Wow, FF comment of the week.

[Derek]

The 16th amendment should be repealed.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

As for Libertas:  I believe government (that is, the people we elect to represent our interests) has the right to take a portion of our income to pay for the services that are provided to us.

The only 'right' the State has is to wither away and die. The State is not the people; rather, it is the most evil institution in the history of mankind.

There is no institution more evil than an individual man, stripped of his institutional accruements.  Nothing is more horrific than the state of nature, as morality itself is a painstakingly-established institution.

False and false.