Posts Tagged ‘income tax’

Cover of "The Corporation"

The federal personal income tax in the United States isn’t constitutional, but the federal corporate income tax is.

Ironically, Walter Block of the Mises Institute has written in defense of corporations, despite them being creatures of government. It perhaps should come as no surprise, since the Mises Institute is a 501(c)(3) government-sanctioned and regulated tax-exempt organization that got its status from founder Lew Rockwell and others, begging the government they claim to hate, for such status.

Despite Mises Institute VP Jeffrey Tucker conveniently overlooking McDonald’s Obamacare exemption and corporate subsidies they receive when waxing on about all the taxes they pay, he is right in not condemning the federal corporate income taxes paid by McDonald’s, since they are both constitutional and justifiable.

A Google search for “the income tax is unconstitutional” turns up 57,400 pages, showing the prevalence of those who fail to distinguish between the constitutionality of income taxes and corporate income taxes.

It is why I am careful to say that I am against direct taxes on individuals, and not all direct taxes, since corporate taxes are a direct tax on corporations, which are creatures of government.

The federal personal income tax is unconstitutional, since the most powerful argument is given in Aaron Russo’s documentary, From Freedom to Fascism, whereby the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the 16th amendment conferred no new taxing power upon the federal government, and it was agreed it didn’t have that power prior to the amendment.

A heavily progressive personal income tax is one of the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto, and with good reason, since its purpose is wealth redistribution.

A corporate tax can also be used for wealth redistribution but its justification is that it’s compensation for the special privileges that corporations are afforded by the state that created them, and corporations have no rights, while people do, and one of those rights includes keeping the fruits of your own labour.

Some people, like Walter Block, pretend to be great libertarians, and even have the audacity to claim they hate the state, and others don’t. Yet it is ironic that these neo-libertarians, as I call them, have turned libertarianism upside down to the point of arguing that government-created entities effectively have rights, with some of them even arguing that even corporate taxation is theft, despite me showing how the blanket statement that “taxation is theft” doesn’t withstand scrutiny.

Read Full Post »

Meet the Press

Meet the Press, America’s longest-running television show, isn’t still on the air due to superior research and guests.

On the September 4, 2011 episode, they played a video of one of Texas Governor Rick Perry’s campaign events, in which a nine year old asked him who was his favourite superhero.

At 26:35:

I’m gonna show you my age a little bit, Eric, because I don’t know any of the real current superheroes, but there was one back in my day named Superman, and Superman came to save the United States.

Too bad that Meet the Press researchers and host, David Gregory, failed to point out to their audience that Superman had recently renounced his U.S. citizenship, which I find to be very fitting symbolism for would-be President Rick Perry’s plan for America.

Then, at 30:55, presidential historian and frequent Meet the Press talking head, Doris Kearns Goodwin, declared about Perry:

Some of his stands — saying Social Security is unconstitutional, the income tax is bad, we go back to the Senators being elected by state legislatures. That was great, when we had Mr. Oil and Mr. Gas and you could buy your way into the Senate.

First of all, Social Security IS unconstitutional, since it’s not general welfare, but specific welfare. Even if you consider it to be general welfare, the general welfare clause was intended to be a restrictive clause, in limiting spending to Congress’ enumerated powers.

The income tax IS bad since its purpose was and is to insure an ever-growing and unpayable national debt.

And as for big corporations buying their way into the Senate in the past, as if that doesn’t happen even more now! Before, big corporations had to curry favour with a majority of the elected legislators of each of the several States, whereas now, they are able to buy off senators directly, and they have unlimited campaign contributions with which to do so since the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision.

Read Full Post »

Income tax

Some politicians talk about a flat income tax (U.S. Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes in 1996 and 2000), and some claim to have implemented such a tax (the Canadian province of Alberta in 2001).

Nearly all, if not all, so-called flat income taxes proposed by politicians and implemented by various states, are not flat.

They say it’s a flat tax because it only has one tax rate, but that’s not true. In 2011, Alberta has a basic personal income tax exemption of $16,977 CAD.

Therefore, Alberta has two tax rates. 0% if you make between $0 and $16,977, and 10% on whatever you make in excess of that.

The only truly flat personal income taxes are to be found wherever there are no personal income taxes, such as Texas, Florida and the state of Washington.

Read Full Post »

Ludwig von Mises

From today’s LewRockwell.com article, The Duplicity of Warren Buffett, Eric Englund wrote:

Although far from legendary, Warren Buffett’s cognitive dissonance, regarding taxes, is maddening. On the one hand, he celebrates the Sixteenth Amendment and brags about the billions of dollars Berkshire Hathaway pays in federal income taxes – after all, Buffett is self-described as Uncle Sam’s “grateful nephew.” Yet, on the other hand, he basically refuses to lend money to Uncle Sam for fear that the federal government will pay back the loans with cheaper dollars; which is, as Ron Paul describes, the inflation tax.

What did Ludwig von Mises say about inflation as a tax?

People sometimes call inflation a special way of “taxing” a country’s citizens. This is a dangerous opinion. And it is wholly untrue. Inflation is not a method of taxation, but an alternative for taxation.

For more on Warren Buffett, see my article, Warren Buffett’s inconsistencies.

Read Full Post »

Seal of the United States Internal Revenue Ser...

From the IRS’ Fall 2010 publication, Individual Income Tax Returns, 2008, we see that the “progressive” federal income tax ceased to be so for those who made more than $2 million in 2008.

The effective tax rates for those who made at least $200k were (from page 11):
$200k to $500k – 19.5%
$500k to $1m – 23.9%
$1m to $1.5m – 24.7%
$1.5m to $2m – 24.8%
$2m to $5m – 24.6%
$5m to $10m – 23.8%
>$10m – 20.9%

The 13,000 who made more than $10 million paid a lower effective tax rate in 2008 than the 578,000 who made between $500,000 and $1 million.

The reason for this is made clear in the same chart, showing a steady increase in the proportion of “unearned” income from capital gains and dividends, which were taxed at a top rate of 15%, compared to the top rate of 35% for “earned” income.

Read Full Post »

RRSP withholding taxAs the RRSP (Registered Retirement Savings Plan) contribution deadline approaches on March 1 in Canada, a regular reader of this site pointed out to me that you can divide your RRSP withdrawals into $5000 chunks to limit the withholding tax.

Taxtips.ca shows that the withholding tax brackets for lump sum withdrawals outside of Quebec are:

10% for withdrawals of $1 to $5000
20% for withdrawals of $5001 to $15,000
30% for withdrawals greater than $15,000

In Quebec, the tax is half those amounts.

Therefore, if you want to withdraw $20,000, as an example, you can do so with four separate withdrawals of $5000 each and only be liable for $2000 in immediate withholding tax instead of $4000, leaving you with $2000 to spend or invest before the April 30 tax filing deadline of the following year.

At that time you will be required to pay the remaining amount of tax owed on those withdrawals.

Read Full Post »

You aren't a person -- you have a person

Have you ever heard anyone say that you don’t have to pay personal income taxes in the U.S., or that you can “drive” without a license?

If so, were those ideas discounted with typical tactics employed by those who intend for you to not do your own investigation?

If not, it’s because these matters are actively discounted and suppressed by the mass media, and, ironically, by many influential members of the liberty movement.

At the start of the first segment of the August 18, 2010 episode of The Divided Kingdom, the co-host stated:

There is one element of the patriot movement that we don’t care for. That element seems to want to get people into trouble, with the IRS, or, get them to, get bizarre, what can I say, cop-outs from the system, that maybe aren’t going to be looked at, well, in other words, instead of a driver’s license, some other kind of a pass, a passport — all kinds of different things.

And from that same area of the patriot movement, we always get a condemnation of the Social Security.

By “that element,” does she mean the one that accurately states that:

  • You don’t need a driver’s license to lawfully travel by car. (Note, I said “travel” and “car,” not “drive” and “vehicle”).
  • Statute isn’t law, and you can go through a process in all common law jurisdictions to be exempt from all statutes.
  • You aren’t a person — you have a person.
  • In my estimation, makes a strong case that the personal income tax on U.S. citizens is unlawful.
  • Social Security is unlawful, as a consequence of being unconstitutional.

For more details, go to thinkfree.ca and watch some great free videos that woke me up to some of these intentionally suppressed facts and their eye-opening consequences.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »