Taxes and the New World Order

The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises . . . but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States . . .
- United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers . . .
- United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3

No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
- United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 9

There are two kinds of taxes: direct taxes and indirect taxes. Any other name applied to any tax still leaves the renamed tax as a direct tax or an indirect tax. Whether they bear the name vat tax, sales tax, poll tax, duty, impost, excise, capitation, flat, stamp, or whatever other name, they nevertheless all remain either a direct tax or an indirect tax.

A direct tax is one paid directly to the government by the persons on whom it is imposed. Examples include some income taxes, some corporate taxes, and transfer taxes such as estate (inheritance) tax and gift tax.
An indirect tax or "collected" tax (such as sales tax or value added tax (VAT)); is one which is collected by intermediaries who turn over the proceeds to the government and file the related tax return.

Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution required that direct taxes imposed by the national government be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. In other words, the amount of direct taxes that could be collected from any State was tied directly to its share of the national population. On the basis of this requirement, application of the income tax to income derived from real estate and specifically income in the form of dividends from personal property ownership such as stock shares was found to be unconstitutional because it was not apportioned among the states; that is to say, there was no guarantee that a State with 10% of the country's population paid 10% of those income taxes collected, because Congress had not fixed an amount of money to be raised and apportioned it between the States according to their respective shares of the national population.

The two types of taxation were intended by our forefathers to serve exclusive and separate jurisdictions in absolute, with direct taxation local and close at hand leaving no possibility of federal tax tyranny. Direct taxation carries the power to destroy, so our forefathers insisted on direct taxation for local government. The feds are only permitted indirect taxation so that private property would not be at risk to a corruptible central body and would, thusly remain sacred.

The U.S. Constitution reflects our contempt of hierarchies and our certain knowledge that each and every hierarchy in all history inevitably became corrupt. The American genius was the systems of checks and balances and competition which keep institutions honest and incorruptible. These ideas and ideals created the greatest economic engine in history.

Up until the early 1800's, our government was funded primarily by indirect taxes on alcoholic beverages, carriages, sugar, tobacco products, property, sales and corporate bonds. Then came the War of 1812 and all of the war associated expenses. There was an income tax proposed during the War of 1812, but was defeated. Instead, taxes were added onto luxury consumer goods. In 1817, all internal taxes were abolished and tariffs on imported products were the only funding the government received.

The actual taxing of income began in 1861 with the Civil War when the Congress passed a 3% tax on all net income above $600 a year . Other taxes were added such as inheritance tax and sales and excise taxes to fund the war effort. The history of the Internal Revenue Service begins with an Act passed in 1862 which established an office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue. This office had the power to assess taxes, levy and collect the taxes and enforce the laws regarding taxation. This power was passed along to what we know today as the IRS. The income tax was rescinded after the war in 1872.

The Populist Party "demanded a graduated income tax" in their 1892 platform, as did the Socialist Labor Party in 1887. The Democratic Party, led by William Jennings Bryan, advocated the income tax law passed in 1894.

In 1894 Congress passed an income tax act very similar to the current income tax law. The Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act of 1894 attempted to impose a federal tax of 2% on incomes over $4,000. That law was challenged on the basis that a tax on income is a direct tax, the United States Constitution requires direct taxes to be apportioned, and the act passed by Congress was not apportioned. The United States Supreme Court agreed and held the income tax act was unconstitutional (Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.).

The Sixteenth Amendment

Republican President William Howard Taft (1909 - 1913) proposed a constitutional amendment in an address to Congress on June 16, 1909 to allow federal income taxes on individuals and an excise tax "upon the privilege of doing business as an artificial entity and of freedom from a general partnership liability enjoyed by those who own the stock". Taft was a member of the American chapter of Skull and Bones, the secret society co-founded by his father in 1832.

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. - 16th Amendment

The resolution proposing the Sixteenth Amendment was passed by the Sixty-first Congress and submitted to legislatures of the several states on July 12, 1909.

It was difficult for Congress to impose a national income tax that applied to all forms of income until the 16th Amendment was passed by Congress in 1909 and purportedly ratified in 1913. The Amendment, which overrules the effect of Pollock, essentially means that when imposing an income tax, the Congress may impose the tax on income "from whatever source derived" without having to apportion the total dollar amount of tax collected from each state according to each state's population in relation to the total national population. As a result, after the Sixteenth Amendment, no Federal income taxes are required to be apportioned, as per the U.S. Constitution, regardless of whether they are direct taxes (taxes on income from property) or indirect taxes (all other income taxes).

As soon as direct federal tax was legislated with the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, hundreds of bureaus and agencies, federal departments, sprung up, all of which cost money. All these organs, duplicated the function of the state organs and their jurisdictions and, thus, are illegal or at least utterly contrary to the intentions of the founding fathers, and the massive costs of this idiocy are the cause of most of our miseries, debts and deficits.

The United States Revenue Act of 1913 also known as the Tariff Act or Underwood Tariff (ch. 16, 38 Stat. 116, October 3, 1913), imposed the first federal income tax following the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment and lowered basic tariff rates from 40% to 25%. This act provided for the reinstitution of a federal income tax as a means to compensate for anticipated lost revenue because of the reduction of tariff duties. The incomes of couples exceeding $4,000, as well as those of single persons earning $3,000 or more, were subject to a one percent federal tax. Further, the measure provided a progressive tax structure, meaning that high income earners were required to pay at higher rates.

There was and is a conspiracy.

The men who wrote the U.S. Constitution knew by experience and from their forefathers that whenever in history a nation had a central direct power of taxation or central banking, that tyranny always followed. It might take half a century, but as power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

"A free and vigilant people should never have tolerated this for a minute. The income tax is an inherently communistic tax, because one of the prerequisites of freedom is a sphere of privacy. And if you destroy the material foundations of that sphere of privacy, you have destroyed the possibility of freedom." - Alan Keyes

Because the payment of tax has been made compulsory and enforced by a coercive police and justice system, it can be viewed as institutionalized violence equivalent to theft. And, to add insult to injury, tax protester constitutional arguments that assert that the imposition of the income tax in the United States violates the United States Constitution, have themselves been deemed unlawful (or frivolous) by the IRS, punishable by a $5,000 frivolous tax return penalty imposed under Internal Revenue Code section 6702(a). In addition, under the United States Supreme Court ruling in Cheek v. United States, a defendant in a tax evasion prosecution who has made arguments that the Federal income tax laws are unconstitutional may have the arguments turned against him (or her). Such arguments, even if based on honestly held beliefs, may constitute evidence that helps the prosecutor prove willfulness, one of the elements of tax evasion.

You cannot fully understand the awesome power to collect taxes from it's citizens without understanding the inter-relatedness of the Federal Reserve System. When the government enacted the Federal Reserve Act which gave total control of America's credit and currency to the Federal Reserve, it caused a 400 percent increase in the national debt within four years.

It became obvious to even the most dimwitted that a repayment scheme was necessary. So in 1917, these same bandits passed the Income War Tax Act which, too, was contrary to the letter and spirit of our Constitution, as direct taxation was the sole jurisdiction of the states and non-transferable.

The banking system now own the trust companies, investment dealers, stock brokers, and bond brokers and more, as the little people are bankrupted, put under power of sale, and rot unemployed while the stores are packed with goods.

Hello? Is anyone home ?

The Power of the Purse

The Federal Reserve Act has resulted in the creation of the most powerful monopoly that exists in the United States today. Not only is it powerful, but there is no greater nor more tyrannical combine (except possibly the IRS). They have powers that no other body in this country has in matters of bank trade within their jurisdiction. They have powers which are autocratic in themselves and in their exercise.

Its very existence is contrary to our constitution and the original intent of our founding fathers. This combined with our central governments' theft of the right to direct taxation from our local governments, has created financial slaves of American citizens, stripped of rights once protected by the original constitution.

"What is needed here is a return to the Constitution of the United States. We need to have a complete divorce of Bank and State. The old struggle that was fought out here in Jackson's day must be fought over again... The Federal Reserve Act should be repealed and the Federal Reserve Banks, having violated their charters, should be liquidated immediately. Faithless Government officers who have violated their oaths of office should be impeached and brought to trial. Unless this is done by us, I predict that the American people, outraged, robbed, pillaged, insulted, and betrayed as they are in their own land, will rise in their wrath and send a President here who will sweep the money changers out of the temple." - Congressman Louis McFadden

Selective Prosecution

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
- United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 9

In the simplest terms, Article 1, Sec 9 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits legislation punishing or penalizing a specific person or group without trial. In the Federalist Papers #44, James Madison wrote in 1788, "Bills of attainder, ex-post-facto laws, and laws impairing the obligation of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation."

The U.S. federal courts have muddied this part of the Constitution over the past two centuries, narrowing the ex-post-facto clauses that prohibit retroactive statutes, while greatly widening the bill-of-attainder clause. The once-mighty contract clause waned long ago. For example, until recently, I couldn't understand how credit card companies were allowed to change the terms of their contract with card holders enabling them to change interest rates whenever they wanted to.

In 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives including all but six Democrats and nearly half of the Republicans in the House passed an unconstitutional tax bill designed to recoup most of the bonus money given to AIG executives. In yet another example of Hegelian Dialectic, using public hysteria regarding taxpayer money used to enrich a group of people accused of causing a financial crisis, traitors in the House used a situation they created themselves as an excuse to further dismantle the Constitution. Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd acknowledged he was responsible, with the support of the Treasury Department, for inserting an amendment to the $787 billion economic stimulus bill that prevented the imposition of retroactive limits on bonuses paid to executives at bailed-out firms. And, of course had President Obama not signed the stimulus bill in the first place, AIG executives wouldn't be getting $165 million in bonuses funded by American taxpayers.

It's not totally surprising that Congress might pass unjust and oppressive statutes that target highly specific groups of people. AIG executives might be in the crosshairs right now, but it wasn't that long ago that Tobacco executives were the target of indignant lawmakers. The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 imposed ex post facto laws to sex offenders, as did the so-called Lautenberg law where firearms prohibitions were imposed on those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses and subjects of restraining orders (which do not require a criminal conviction).

Dismantling ex post facto law prohibitions is necessary for collectivists in our government to eventually pass a form of ex post facto law commonly known as an amnesty law that will decriminalize the millions of illegal aliens in our country. Watch for it... it's coming soon.

If we the people continue to allow our Congress and the courts to destroy our countries founding documents, the next person to be targeted for oppression might just be you.