NOTE: Regarding the Wage-Tax and the Income-Tax; both require using the census or the enumeration to determine how much to tax each class of financial-citizen based on how many are low-, middle-, and high-incomes, which presently and unconstitutionally includes wages. Thus the single flat percentage-rate income-tax on true income is the only way government can constitutionally tax incomes.
Now. When it comes to different types of income (business profits, rentals from real estate, or produce from a farm, etc.) Congress can tax one type of income at a different rate than other types of income. But cannot tax the people within the same type income different percentages based on volume/dollar amount.
Now. When it comes to different types of income (business profits, rentals from real estate, or produce from a farm, etc.) Congress can tax one type of income at a different rate than other types of income. But cannot tax the people within the same type income different percentages based on volume/dollar amount.
Wages and Income are not synonymous
Stop Unconstitutional Wage Tax — Wages are not income. We know this, because of the published, public definitions that existed a few years prior to the February 3, 1913 Amendment 16 ratification.
(1898) WAGE. n. 2. That for which one labors; mead; reward; stipulated payment; —at present, used in the plural. See Wages.
(1898) WAGES. n. A compensation given to a hired person for services; price paid for labor; recompense; hire. See Wage, n. #2
Vertical Divider
|
(1898) INCOME. n. 3.The gain which proceeds from labor, business, property, or capital of any kind, as the produce of a farm, the rent of houses, the proceeds of a professional business, the profits of commerce or of occupation, or the interest of money or stocks in funds, etc.; revenue; receipts; salary; especially, the annual receipts of a private person or a corporation, from property; as a large income.
|
Now: All the difference a few years in the dictionary definitions make
|
(1916) INCOME. n. 3. The gain which proceeds from labor, business, or property; revenue; receipts; wages or salary.
(1916) INCOME TAX. A tax on a person's income, emoluments, profits, etc. or on the excess over a certain amount. |
The Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment 16 grants to Congress, the power to tax Income — Not Wages: "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."
Amendment 16 is said to have been ratified February of 1913. Therefore, the 1916 definition for income, which now includes wages, is government's unethical and unconstitutional way of adjusting / amending The Constitution, without going through the Article 5 Amendment process.
Yes. The Constitution of the United States of America is a "living" document, in that it is supposed to be kept current with an ever-changing society. That is the purpose for Amendment 5. That amendment process does not include the use of more modern dictionaries to redefine constitutional content.
Congress possesses no authority to define what is income. That power has never been granted to Congress.
With respect to labor, income is "the gain which proceeds from labor" (1898 definition).
With respect to labor, wages is "the compensation for labor". (1898 definition).
Wages are not income. No place in The Constitution of the United States of America does it grant a tax on wages. Wage tax, is therefore, unjust and unconstitutional.
This executive order cannot force people to not donate some of their compensation to government by claiming that some portion of their wages is a sort of income; but can only inform people that it is not required by Amendment 16. Since the employee suffers a loss against the value of their labor, because of the employment, in that they are not paid full value for their labor (proved by the fact that the employer uses the extra receipts from the labor to pay business overhead and such); the employee should use the value of their wages that they are not paid (that are the gain by the employer) as a loss against any TRUE Income they might receive (such as: interest from investment, incoming rents, etc.) as defined under Income, in the above 1898 image.
This gives the wage-earner the largest income tax break since passing Amendment 16, which was unlawfully, unconstitutionally, and unethically enforced against wages. Remember, Congress has no authority to define words used in The Constitution, which is the LAW that governs their powers. Unless a specific section of The Constitution grants to Congress power to define or redefine those words in that section. Doing so otherwise, is TREASON (The Constitution of the United States of America, Article 3, Section 3 levying war against the people and our rights, which is the nation). Know... What is War.
Amendment 16 is said to have been ratified February of 1913. Therefore, the 1916 definition for income, which now includes wages, is government's unethical and unconstitutional way of adjusting / amending The Constitution, without going through the Article 5 Amendment process.
Yes. The Constitution of the United States of America is a "living" document, in that it is supposed to be kept current with an ever-changing society. That is the purpose for Amendment 5. That amendment process does not include the use of more modern dictionaries to redefine constitutional content.
Congress possesses no authority to define what is income. That power has never been granted to Congress.
With respect to labor, income is "the gain which proceeds from labor" (1898 definition).
With respect to labor, wages is "the compensation for labor". (1898 definition).
Wages are not income. No place in The Constitution of the United States of America does it grant a tax on wages. Wage tax, is therefore, unjust and unconstitutional.
This executive order cannot force people to not donate some of their compensation to government by claiming that some portion of their wages is a sort of income; but can only inform people that it is not required by Amendment 16. Since the employee suffers a loss against the value of their labor, because of the employment, in that they are not paid full value for their labor (proved by the fact that the employer uses the extra receipts from the labor to pay business overhead and such); the employee should use the value of their wages that they are not paid (that are the gain by the employer) as a loss against any TRUE Income they might receive (such as: interest from investment, incoming rents, etc.) as defined under Income, in the above 1898 image.
This gives the wage-earner the largest income tax break since passing Amendment 16, which was unlawfully, unconstitutionally, and unethically enforced against wages. Remember, Congress has no authority to define words used in The Constitution, which is the LAW that governs their powers. Unless a specific section of The Constitution grants to Congress power to define or redefine those words in that section. Doing so otherwise, is TREASON (The Constitution of the United States of America, Article 3, Section 3 levying war against the people and our rights, which is the nation). Know... What is War.