This is the essence of America. These are the rights that are specified in the Declaration of Independence. These are the rights that the Constitution of the United States of America was designed to protect. Men have fought and died for them. People flock from all over the world to get them. Men are endowed , by their nature, with these inalienable rights. Period; No exceptions; Ever. Yet, these things are in danger and they will remain so until people realize that everybody has the right to their own lives, liberty and the right to pursue their own happiness. I am sorry to say that the freest country in the world is not free.
Both the framers of the Constitution and the Supreme court of the United States of America have interpreted these rights to specifically include your inalienable right to contract, to acquire, to deal in, to sell, rent and exchange properties of various kinds, real and personal, without requesting or exercising any privilege or franchise from the government.
"The Power to tax involves the power to destroy." -Chief Justice John Marshall McCulloch v. Maryland, (1819)
If the exercise of a right were taxed, that right could be destroyed by raising the tax levels to unaffordable levels. Not only that, but it would no longer be inalienable. An inalienable right is an unconditional one; a right due to the nature of ones existence.
It is for these reasons that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in the case of Murdock v. Penna., 319 U.S. 105 (1943), "A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution."
This means that your inalienable rights to "...contract, to acquire, to deal in, to sell, rent and exchange properties of various kinds, real and personal,..." CANNOT BE TAXED. Legally that is.
The 16th Amendment states: "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."
According to the American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress, in report No. 80-19A, titled "Some Constitutional Questions Regarding the Federal Income Tax Laws": "The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Chief Justice White, first noted that the 16th Amendment did not authorize any new type of tax, nor did it repeal or revoke the tax clauses of Article I of the United States Constitution, quoted above." AND "Therefore, it can clearly be determined from the decisions of the United States Supreme Court that the income tax is an indirect tax, generally in the nature of an excise tax,"
In the case of Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911), the Supreme Court defined excise taxes as: "...Taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale, or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations, and upon corporate privileges."
Since your "income" is neither a commodity, a license, nor corporate privileges, it is not subject to "income" taxes. This is very significant.
One effect of the 16th Amendment is that it separated "income" from "sources of income". The Internal Revenue Code, section 61(a), lists the following as "sources of income": "wages, salaries, tips, fees, commissions, interest, rents, royalties, alimony, state or local tax refunds, pensions, business income, gains from dealings in property, and any other compensation for services (including receipt of property other than money)."
The IR Code NEVER defines "income". Therefore your wages are not "income", they are "sources of income". The 16th Amendment allowed congress to collect taxes "...on incomes, from whatever source derived,...". If your "income" is either a commodity, a license, or corporate privilege,(and therefore subject to an excise tax) then Congress could tax it regardless of the "sources"(as outlined above) that it came from. Just remember that a "source" of "income" IS NOT THE SAME as "income".
Article I, section 10, clause 5, of the U.S. Constitution states: "No state shall...make any Thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts;"
The Federal Reserve Notes that are in circulation and are called "money", aren't. In the past we had promissory notes, where the bearer was promised to be paid in gold or silver upon demand. Even these were not legal money, because only gold and silver are legal money. The fact is that, from a legal standpoint, our money is literally not even worth the paper it is printed on.
"Any note which is intended to circulate as money, but which is not currently payable on demand would be exempt from taxation." -Bank of N.Y. v. N.Y. County. 7 wall 26, 19 L. ER 60
The IRS must use a voluntary compliance system to collect taxes. If it were law, if the IR Code demanded compliance, then it would be declared Unconstitutional. One would be forced to provide evidence against oneself (a form 1040 can be used against you in a court of law), surrender ones property without due process, ect. All in all the Internal Revenue code violates the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 13th Amendments of the Constitution, as well as Article I, sec. 8. The only thing that gives the IRS any legitimacy in court is that by filing a "Form 1040 Income Tax Return" you waive your constitutionally secured rights, and are considered to have only privileges when dealing with the IRS.
In the case of Morse v. U.S., 494 F2d 876,880, it was established how one becomes a "taxpayer": "Accordingly, when returns were filed in Mrs. Morse's name declaring income to her for the tax due in that income, she became a taxpayer within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code."
In other words by filing an income tax return, you become a taxpayer in the legal sense of the word. Otherwise, you ARE NOT a "taxpayer", or "someone liable for taxes".
"Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint." -U.S. Supreme Court Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, pg.176
As you can see, there are definitely problems with what most people believe to be "The way things are"; However, it is True that the IRS and Federal Government have conspired to make us believe that. They terrorize peaceful citizens in order to get us to pay, and believe not only that we have to, but that it could not be any other way. What is needed is a change of paradigm. The proliferation of the idea of an ACTUAL voluntary system of internal revenue generation is not a naive concept, but rather a necessity for the continued prosperity of our nation.