Podcasts about Sixteenth Amendment

This Day in Legal History: Louisiana PurchaseOn this day in legal history, April 30, 1803, the United States signed the Louisiana Purchase Treaty with France, dramatically altering the legal and territorial landscape of the country. The treaty, signed in Paris by American envoys Robert Livingston and James Monroe, officially transferred approximately 828,000 square miles of land west of the Mississippi River from French to American control. President Thomas Jefferson, though uncertain whether the U.S. Constitution explicitly authorized such a land acquisition, ultimately supported the deal, citing the necessity of expanding the republic and securing trade access to the port of New Orleans.The purchase, which cost $15 million (roughly four cents an acre), effectively doubled the size of the United States and set a precedent for executive power in foreign affairs. It raised important legal questions regarding the role of the executive branch, the powers of Congress, and the interpretation of constitutional authority in territorial expansion. The acquisition also intensified debates over the expansion of slavery and the treatment of Indigenous peoples, both of which would become central legal and political issues throughout the 19th century.In addition to expanding national territory, the Louisiana Purchase laid the groundwork for the exploration and legal organization of new states. Soon after, Congress passed legislation governing how the territory would be divided and admitted into the Union. This required new legal frameworks for property rights, governance, and federal versus state authority in previously foreign lands.The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments on whether Oklahoma can fund a religious charter school—the first case of its kind. At issue is the state's attempt to establish St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, a K-12 online institution run by two Catholic dioceses, using public funds. A state court previously blocked the school, ruling it would act as a “governmental entity” and violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which bars government endorsement of religion.The school's supporters, including Oklahoma's governor and President Trump, argue that denying the school solely because it is religious constitutes a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Meanwhile, opponents, including the state's attorney general, warn that the move would amount to taxpayer-funded religious indoctrination and could erode public education standards, particularly around non-discrimination.Charter schools in Oklahoma are considered public entities, which complicates claims that St. Isidore would operate as a private, independent institution. Organizers maintain that contracting with the state doesn't make the school an arm of the government. The Supreme Court's decision, expected by June, could redefine the boundaries between church and state in education.The legal element worth highlighting here is the Establishment Clause vs. Free Exercise Clause tension—the case tests how far states can go in accommodating religious institutions without endorsing them. This clash sits at the core of modern debates about public funding and religious liberty. Under the current Supreme Court composition, it is likely we will see an expansion of the former at the cost of the limits in the latter. US Supreme Court mulls legality of milestone religious charter school | ReutersGoogle CEO Sundar Pichai is set to testify in a high-stakes antitrust trial where the U.S. Department of Justice is pushing to break up parts of Google's business to restore competition in online search. The DOJ is urging the court to force Google to divest its Chrome browser and stop paying major tech partners like Apple and Samsung to be the default search engine on their devices. Prosecutors argue these deals entrench Google's monopoly and hinder innovation, especially as search overlaps more with emerging generative AI tools like ChatGPT.U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta has already found that Google maintains a dominant position in the search market with no real rivals. The government is also asking the court to make Google share search data with competitors to level the playing field. Google, in response, claims that such measures would harm user privacy and undercut smaller partners like Mozilla that depend on Google funding.Pichai is expected to argue that the proposed remedies would have unintended consequences across the tech ecosystem. Google has already made some adjustments, allowing phone makers to pre-install alternative search and AI apps, but it still plans to appeal any adverse ruling. The case could have sweeping implications for the future of search, digital competition, and AI integration online.Google CEO Sundar Pichai to take the stand at search antitrust trial | ReutersPresident Trump issued an executive order directing the Justice Department to coordinate free legal defense for police officers accused of misconduct. The order calls on Attorney General Pam Bondi to organize pro bono support from private law firms, aiming to protect officers who, in the administration's view, face "unjust liability" for actions taken in the line of duty. Though the order doesn't name specific firms, it expands Trump's broader effort to harness the legal industry to support his administration's priorities.This follows recent agreements between the Trump administration and nine major law firms—including Paul Weiss, Skadden, and Kirkland & Ellis—to commit $940 million worth of pro bono work to causes the administration endorses, such as veterans' services and combating antisemitism. Critics, including the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and 20 Democratic state attorneys general, have raised concerns about political pressure and lack of transparency in how these firms were selected and what they've agreed to.The order also calls for improved pay and training for police while denouncing efforts to “demonize law enforcement.” Critics warn this could undermine accountability and place pressure on firms to align their legal services with political goals. Meanwhile, some firms have publicly stated they will maintain control over their pro bono work, even as Trump claims the right to “use” them for administration-selected causes.Trump executive order seeks law firms to defend police officers for free | ReutersIn a piece I wrote for Forbes this week, I examined President Trump's renewed push to replace income taxes with tariffs, particularly targeting relief for Americans making under $200,000. The idea sounds populist, but it's economically misleading. Tariffs, after all, are simply hidden taxes that show up in the form of higher prices on imported goods. For lower- and middle-income Americans—those Trump claims to want to help—this shift would likely increase, not reduce, their financial burden.The proposal doesn't change the amount of money the government needs—just where it's extracted. Instead of the IRS, the “bill collector” becomes stores, suppliers, and foreign producers, with consumers footing the bill at checkout. Trump's approach, I argue, banks on the psychological difference between writing a tax check and absorbing incremental price hikes, though the economic effect is the same.Historically, tariff-based revenue systems led to inequality and volatility—conditions that helped inspire the adoption of the income tax through the Sixteenth Amendment. And practically speaking, tariffs simply cannot generate the hundreds of billions needed to sustain modern federal programs. Relying on them also cedes revenue control to foreign exporters, which undermines national fiscal stability.Ultimately, this policy doesn't tackle the real issue—Americans' frustration with a high cost of living. Instead, it disguises taxation while dodging the deeper structural question of who should be paying more. I emphasized that real reform must address not just how taxes are collected, but also the fairness of who bears the burden.Trump Continues To Push Idea Of Replacing Income Tax With TariffsSpecial ThanksStephanie Himel-Nelson, Jennifer Porter Law, PLLC This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – Back in 1913, when the states ratified the Sixteenth Amendment, they fundamentally changed the relationship between the federal government and the American people, and it's more than just one day of strife. So, while you go around complaining about paying your taxes and the “Infernal Revenue Service,” let's take some time and consider why we...

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – Back in 1913, when the states ratified the Sixteenth Amendment, they fundamentally changed the relationship between the federal government and the American people, and it's more than just one day of strife. So, while you go around complaining about paying your taxes and the “Infernal Revenue Service,” let's take some time and consider why we...

This podcast provides an overview of federal income taxation, beginning with the historical and constitutional basis, particularly the Sixteenth Amendment, which granted Congress the power to tax income without apportionment. The lecture then discusses the roles of the IRS and Treasury Department. The main sources of tax law are the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), Treasury Regulations, Revenue Rulings, Revenue Procedures, and Judicial Decisions. Beyond raising revenue, tax policy is shaped by considerations such as encouraging homeownership or environmental responsibility.Gross income, as defined in IRC Section 61, includes "all income from whatever source derived" unless specifically excluded. Common examples are wages, salaries, interest, dividends, business income, and capital gains. Illegal income, gambling winnings, and prizes are also included. The Supreme Court defines gross income as undeniable accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion.Exclusions from gross income include gifts, inheritances, life insurance proceeds, certain fringe benefits, and municipal bond interest. Cancellation of Debt (COD) income is usually included unless it occurs during bankruptcy or insolvency.Filing statuses include single, married filing jointly or separately, head of household, and qualifying widow(er), which affect tax brackets, standard deductions, and credit eligibility. The U.S. tax system is progressive, meaning the marginal tax rate increases as income rises.The tax system encourages or discourages behaviors through charitable deductions, mortgage interest deductions, and retirement savings incentives. Tax considerations are integral to estate planning and business transactions.A hypothetical scenario illustrates these principles with an individual who has wages, side gig income, dividends, an inheritance, and installs solar panels. The analysis involves determining filing status, calculating gross income while considering exclusions, and identifying potential tax credits.

This lecture begins by outlining the historical and constitutional roots of the federal income tax. Early in American history, the federal government used excise taxes and tariffs to raise revenue, and only in special circumstances, such as the Civil War, did it introduce temporary income taxes. The Sixteenth Amendment in 1913 dramatically shifted the legal landscape, giving Congress the authority to impose an income tax without the need for apportionment among the states. This development paved the way for modern federal income taxation, removing most constitutional barriers that had previously hindered direct taxation of individual incomes.Next, the lecture covers how the federal tax system is organized. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) enforces tax laws and issues guidance, while the Treasury Department oversees both the IRS and broader financial policies. Various authorities define tax law: the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) enacted by Congress; Treasury Regulations that interpret and clarify the Code; official Revenue Rulings and procedures from the IRS; and judicial decisions at multiple levels, including the U.S. Tax Court, district courts, courts of appeal, and potentially the Supreme Court. Together, these sources form a complex legal framework that practitioners must navigate.Tax policy goals also factor into the system's structure. While the primary purpose of taxation is to fund government operations, Congress uses the tax code to shape economic and social behavior, encouraging homeownership via mortgage interest deductions or fostering charitable giving through donation write-offs. This means that the Code is more than just a revenue-raising tool; it's also a mechanism for incentivizing and discouraging certain activities.A significant portion of the lecture is devoted to gross income, a concept anchored by IRC Section 61. This broad definition—“all income from whatever source derived”—captures wages, business profits, interest, dividends, rents, and many other forms of economic gain. Even illegal proceeds and certain prizes count as gross income, reflecting the principle that if a taxpayer obtains a clear economic benefit, it is presumed taxable. Nevertheless, there are notable exclusions: gifts, inheritances, certain fringe benefits, and life insurance proceeds are among the items that Congress or the courts have decided should not be included in gross income. Sometimes, these exclusions further a policy objective, such as not penalizing individuals receiving gifts or not taxing life insurance benefits that mitigate financial burdens upon death.The lecture then introduces the importance of filing status: single, married filing jointly, married filing separately, head of household, and qualifying widow(er). Each status affects how taxpayers fall into brackets in the progressive tax system, where higher marginal rates apply to additional increments of income. The system aims to tax those with greater resources more heavily, though fairness and efficiency debates remain. Thus, individuals with the same gross income may pay different effective tax rates, influenced by both filing status and the presence of deductions or credits.Finally, the lecture underscores the policy rationales embedded in the tax code. Deductions for retirement contributions or energy-efficient home improvements reveal the government's intent to channel societal behaviors. Because these incentives directly affect how people earn, save, and invest, attorneys and other professionals must understand both the letter of the law and the broader purpose it serves.Overall, Lecture 1 underscores that modern federal income taxation rests on a constitutional foundation, shaped by the Sixteenth Amendment, enforced by a multi-tier system of statutes, regulations, and court rulings, and guided by deliberate policy goals. The core concept of “gross income”—and the many exceptions that reduce it—forms the building block for tax liability calculation

Another day, another danger as an heiress finds herself in double trouble, but a minor medical emergency is nothing compared to the tax man.September – October 1933, Doris Duke finds herself in the hospital only weeks before her tax case heads to the Supreme Court. In both instances, more attention is given to her vast fortune in the press.Other people and subjects include: Nanaline Duke, James “Buck” Duke, Walker Inman, E.T. Stotesbury, Eva Stotesbury, James H.R. Cromwell aka “Jimmy,” Mdivani brothers (Serge Mdivani), tonsillectomy, President Franklin Roosevelt - FDR, New Deal, Chief Justice Hughes, George Allen, William Perkins, Uncle Sam, tax commissioner, Bureau of Internal Revenue – Internal Revenue Service – IRS, Supreme Court, Board of Tax Appeals, Third Circuit Court of Tax Appeals, levy, tax exile, tax evader, first richest list, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Vincent Astor, public fascination with millionaires, robber barons, breeder bureaucracy, trusts, Duke Foundation, Sixteenth Amendment, Revenue Act of 1924, tariffs, sales tax, Gilded Age, Prohibition, World War I, World War II, St. Luke's Hospital, President Donald Trump, Ferdinand Pecora, Wall Street investigation, J.P. Morgan Jr. Al Capone, biographies, missing information, uncovering new details, story restructure, empathy, Los Angeles fires, empathy, Heraclitus, tax audit, divorce, cancer, home loss, trauma, anger, phishing scam, Matt Taibibi, rich people problems, problems, Hurricane Helene, Carolinas, envy, bitterness, poison,…--Extra Notes / Call to Action:Check out and answer polls for As The Money Burns via social mediaX / Twitter – https://x.com/asthemoneyburnsInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/asthemoneyburns/Share, like, subscribe--Archival Music provided by Past Perfect Vintage Music, www.pastperfect.com.Opening Music: My Heart Belongs to Daddy by Billy Cotton, Album The Great British Dance BandsSection 1 Music: Temptation Rag by Harry Roy, Album The Great British Dance BandsSection 2 Music: Ain't She Sweet by Piccadilly Revels Band, Album Charleston – Great Stars Of the 20sSection 3 Music: Swingin' The Blues by Benny Carter & His Orchestra, Album Perfect BluesEnd Music: My Heart Belongs to Daddy by Billy Cotton, Album The Great British Dance Bands--https://asthemoneyburns.com/X / TW / IG – @asthemoneyburnsX / Twitter – https://x.com/asthemoneyburnsInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/asthemoneyburns/Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/asthemoneyburns/

Mandy was EPA Chief of Staff, working in both the Senate and related international environmental work. She became the architect and point person on the Paris Accord withdrawal that President Trump announced in the summer of 2017. She reflects upon the "Obama Climate Cabal", which is when Obama sold out America, the U.S. economy and workers, giving China and India a 'free pass'. Mandy developed many Democrat-Obama enemies when following Trump's orders in getting out of the failed Paris Climate Accord. Her new-found enemies in the deep state perpetrated a nasty prank. She became another victim of the Obama/Democrat vitriol at a climate conference in Bonn, Germany..Trump asked Mandy to come up with a better climate deal for America at the conference. With over 120 delegates in Bonn in attendance, "everything that could go wrong went wrong." Booking arrangements that were made placed her and another staff person 45 minutes away, in the wrong direction in a German sex hotel! She claims this was not an innocent mistake. This was clearly a deep state form of harassment. This vial stunt was set up by the Consulate in Germany. It was an intentional act by people angry with Mandy in fulfilling Trump's mission.When Mandy worked at the EPA for Donald Trump, she reports that Donald Trump was clear. The direction of the EPA under his watch was to clean of the air, water, address legacy pollution in the soils and to make our economy run more efficiently. She reports that under Trump the EPA went 'gangbusters' to better the environment and still roll back unnecessary regulations.About the Book:From a State Department-arranged German sex hotel to costly, unsubstantiated investigations brought on by anonymous sources, Y'all Fired shows readers the unfortunate reality of a young woman's fight to institute America First reforms and what the permanent government of DC will do to resist it. Buckle up, because this gets personal.Y'all Fired: A Southern Belle's Guide to Restoring Federalism and Draining the Swamp provides an insider account of an outsider's service in the Trump Administration. It brings to life first-hand experiences of deep state bullying and the frustrating reality of having few tools to effectively push back.Y'all Fired cuts through the politics and provides a substantive assessment of how we got here by explaining the enduring institutional challenges to reform, including passage of the Sixteenth Amendment that forever changed the relationship between the federal government and the states, and the broken promises of FDR's New Deal.Get Mandy's Book: "Y'all Fired: A Southern Belle's Guide to Restoring Federalism and Draining the Swamp" Mandy's Book “Y'all Fired” Describes Needed Reforms to Quash Deep Stateon the GrassRoots TruthCast with Gene ValentinoORIGINAL MEDIA SOURCE(S):‣ O➡️ Join the Conversation: https://GeneValentino.com➡️ WMXI Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/NewsRadio981➡️ More WMXI Interviews: https://genevalentino.com/wmxi-interviews/➡️ More GrassRoots TruthCast Episodes: https://genevalentino.com/grassroots-truthcast-with-gene-valentino/➡️ More Broadcasts with Gene as the Guest: https://genevalentino.com/america-beyond-the-noise/ ➡️ More About Gene Valentino: https://genevalentino.com/about-gene-valentino/

This Day in Legal History: 16th Amendment PassedOn July 12, 1909, Congress passed the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, marking a significant shift in the country's fiscal policy. This amendment granted Congress the authority to levy income taxes without apportioning it among the states or basing it on the United States Census. Prior to this amendment, the federal government primarily relied on tariffs and excise taxes for revenue, which were often seen as regressive and unfair to lower-income citizens.The push for the Sixteenth Amendment stemmed from the need for a more stable and equitable source of federal revenue. Advocates argued that an income tax would be a fairer method of taxation, ensuring that wealthier individuals contributed a larger share to the government's coffers. After its passage by Congress, the amendment was sent to the states for ratification.By February 3, 1913, the necessary three-fourths of the states had ratified the amendment, officially making it part of the Constitution. The ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment allowed for the creation of a progressive income tax system, which has since become a cornerstone of the federal government's revenue structure. This change enabled the federal government to fund essential services and public goods, shaping the modern American fiscal landscape.Donald Trump's lawyers argued that the conviction in his hush money trial should be overturned, citing improper use of evidence related to his presidential duties. The defense referred to a recent Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity, asserting that Trump's official acts, including conversations with Hope Hicks and certain tweets, were wrongly presented to the jury. They claimed this constituted a constitutional error that invalidated the May 30 guilty verdict.Judge Juan Merchan delayed Trump's sentencing by two months to consider these arguments, while Manhattan prosecutors have until July 24 to respond. They previously dismissed Trump's claims as baseless but agreed to postpone sentencing. Legal experts suggest that overturning the conviction is unlikely, as much of the evidence pertains to Trump's actions before his presidency. The Supreme Court ruling cited by Trump's lawyers originated from another case involving his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. This decision could also delay his trial on charges of mishandling classified documents. Trump, who denies the allegations, pled not guilty to all charges and plans to appeal the hush money case verdict. The next decision on his arguments is expected by September 6, with potential sentencing set for September 18.Trump Asks to Toss Hush Money Verdict Over Immunity Ruling (2)Trump lawyers invoke immunity ruling in bid to toss hush money verdict | ReutersOn July 11, 2024, a U.S. House committee voted to release a transcript from a March hearing on TikTok's potential threats to aid the Justice Department in defending a new law. This law, signed by President Biden in April, requires TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to divest its U.S. assets by January 19, 2025, or face a potential ban. TikTok, ByteDance, and a group of TikTok creators have filed lawsuits against the law.The Justice Department requested the transcript to strengthen its litigation position. Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers stated that the intelligence community highlighted the dangers of foreign-controlled apps during the March hearing. Lawmakers do not plan to make the transcript public.Rodgers emphasized that China's refusal to relinquish control over such apps indicates malicious intent towards American users. TikTok argued that the legislation process was secretive and rushed. A U.S. court will hear oral arguments on the legal challenges on September 16, with the Justice Department responding by July 26.A previous attempt to ban TikTok by President Trump in 2020 was blocked by the courts. The March hearing revealed that TikTok's massive data collection and Chinese ownership pose significant national security risks, potentially allowing the Chinese government to access and control U.S. user data.TikTok crackdown law: US House seeks to boost DOJ defense | ReutersThe U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee narrowly rejected President Joe Biden's judicial nominee, U.S. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn, for a district court judge position. The vote was 10-11, with Senator Jon Ossoff breaking ranks with his fellow Democrats to join Republicans in opposition. This marks the first rejection of a Biden judicial nominee by the panel during his presidency. The controversy centered on Netburn's 2022 decision recommending the transfer of a transgender inmate convicted of child sex abuse to a women's prison, which Republicans argued compromised prison safety. Despite Netburn's rejection, the committee approved eight other nominees, including Embry Kidd for the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Netburn and the White House did not comment on the decision, while Ossoff's spokesperson stated that the senator applied "rigorous and independent judgment."The debate highlighted concerns over Netburn's application of the Eighth Amendment in her ruling, which was later upheld by a district judge. Senator Dick Durbin defended Netburn, asserting that her decision adhered to the law and facts of the case.In a first, US Senate panel rejects Biden judicial nominee in New York | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Gustav Mahler.Gustav Mahler, born on July 7, 1860, in Bohemia (now the Czech Republic), was an Austrian composer and conductor renowned for his symphonies and lieder. His works bridge the late-Romantic and early-modern eras of classical music, blending profound emotional depth with intricate orchestration. As a conductor, Mahler was celebrated for his interpretations of Wagner, Beethoven, and Mozart, serving in prestigious posts such as the Vienna Court Opera and the New York Philharmonic.Mahler's Symphony No. 5 in C-sharp minor, composed between 1901 and 1902, stands as one of his most celebrated works. The symphony is structured in five movements, each exploring a vast range of emotions and musical ideas. The first movement, "Trauermarsch" (Funeral March), opens the symphony with a solemn and powerful tone. This movement reflects Mahler's ability to convey profound sorrow and grandeur through his music. The "Trauermarsch" begins with a solo trumpet call, followed by a procession-like theme in the strings, evoking a sense of grief and mourning. This movement's intricate orchestration and dramatic contrasts showcase Mahler's skill in creating deeply moving and evocative music. Without further ado, this is "Symphony No. 5 in C-sharp minor – I. Trauermarsch." This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

As April 15th approaches, and people spend valuable time and money on filing their income tax return. While plenty of people grouse and complain about paying income taxes, most don't realize that the cause of their pain is the actions of the states back in 1913. When the states ratified the Sixteenth Amendment they did more than just help the feds collect income taxes, they fundamentally changed the republic for the worse.

The Sixteenth Amendment authorizes Congress to lay "taxes on incomes ... without apportionment among the several States." Beginning with Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), this Court's decisions have uniformly held "income," for Sixteenth Amendment purposes, to require realization by the taxpayer. In the decision below, however, the Ninth Circuit approved taxation of a married couple on earnings that they undisputedly did not realize but were instead retained and reinvested by a corporation in which they are minority shareholders. It held that "realization of income is not a constitutional requirement" for Congress to lay an "income" tax exempt from apportionment. App.12. In so holding, the Ninth Circuit became "the first court in the country to state that an 'income tax' doesn't require that a 'taxpayer has realized income."' App.38 (Bumatay, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc). The question presented is: Whether the Sixteenth Amendment authorizes Congress to tax unrealized sums without apportionment among the states.

Tax: Does the Sixteenth Amendment authorizes Congress to tax unrealized sums without apportionment among the states? - Argued: Tue, 05 Dec 2023 12:34:28 EDT

On this day in history, in 1909, the Sixteenth Amendment was passed, which gave Congress the power to collect income taxes. Passed in 1909, the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified on February 3, 1913. This came after a series of economically destabilizing events, including a period of economic disparity between eastern industries and farmers in the south and west post-Civil War. The first federal income tax had been imposed in 1861 to fund the Civil War, but it was repealed in 1872. From that point, several political organizations, like the Grange and the Populist Party, pushed for a graduated income tax.In 1894, a 2-percent tax on income over $4,000 was enacted as part of a tariff bill, but the Supreme Court struck it down, despite having upheld the aforementioned Civil War-era income tax. Progressive Democrats and Republicans persisted in advocating for the income tax. A constitutional amendment for income tax was proposed in 1909, with conservatives believing it would fail ratification and put the issue to bed. Surprisingly, the amendment was ratified by the majority of the states, and the 16th Amendment came into effect in 1913. Despite this, in its initial year, due to numerous exemptions and deductions, only about 1 percent of the population paid income taxes. This decision substantially altered the American economic landscape.A California judge has allowed Microsoft to proceed with its acquisition of Activision Blizzard despite an ongoing antitrust case led by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley rejected the FTC's request for a preliminary injunction after five days of intensive testimony. Corley affirmed that while the merger merited scrutiny, the FTC failed to prove the deal would significantly reduce competition. Microsoft's commitments to extend Call of Duty to PlayStation and Nintendo Switch and bring Activision's content to cloud gaming services were considered as factors increasing consumer access.Microsoft, Activision Blizzard, and their respective leaders expressed gratitude and optimism for the outcome. FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar expressed disappointment and stated that the FTC would determine its next steps. However, Microsoft still faces regulatory hurdles in the UK, with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) previously blocking the acquisition. Both CMA and Microsoft are currently negotiating possible modifications to the deal to address cloud gaming concerns. If Judge Corley's decision is not appealed by the FTC by July 14th, it could indicate the regulator might abandon the case against Microsoft and Activision Blizzard.Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard - The VergeFTC would face tough appeal of Microsoft-Activision order, experts say | ReutersThe International Brotherhood of Teamsters' recent concessions from United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS) could influence the union's approach to other delivery companies like Amazon and the auto industry's "Big Three". Prior to July 5, UPS agreed to end a two-tier wage system and to equip delivery trucks with air conditioning. This outcome potentially sets a precedent for union negotiations elsewhere, despite current disputes about wages and other economic issues. The successful negotiations illustrate the union's potential to reclaim losses incurred since the late 1980s.Teamsters President, Sean O'Brien, plans to use this success as a selling point for Amazon workers. The union aims to present itself as an entity capable of securing strong contracts. As previously stated, these successes could influence negotiations between the United Auto Workers and Detroit's Big Three automakers, whose master contract expires in September. The union rate, though at a record low of 10.1%, is highest in the transportation and warehousing sector at 14.5%, indicating potential union interest among these workers.Teamsters Look for UPS Wins to Carry Over to Amazon, Big ThreeTax and law firms are experiencing expansion due to the increased demand for clean energy and corporate clients seeking to capitalize on the tax credits offered by the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act, or tax-and-climate law, passed in August 2022. This law encourages companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and has led to a surge of interest in the clean energy sector. The law allows tax credits to cover up to 70% of a project's costs and provides a 10-year certainty for incentives. Firms are witnessing a growing number of clients seeking assistance with multifaceted projects involving multiple technologies.Furthermore, the legislation allows tax credits to be sold or transferred to a third party. This provision has sparked a new market for clean energy developers to sell credits to any corporation looking to offset taxes, potentially increasing investments in renewable energy. The law also includes a direct pay option, which allows tax-exempt entities to receive a cash refund in lieu of a credit.In response to the increased demand, firms like Holland & Knight and Clifford Chance are expanding their clean energy expertise and resources. Holland & Knight merged with Thompson & Knight to expand its energy practice, while Clifford Chance announced a new office in Houston, a well-known energy transition capital.Tax Firms Build Up Energy Teams in Wake of Tax-and-Climate LawA lawsuit filed by Jaime Rogozinski, the founder of /r/WallStreetBets, against Reddit was dismissed by a U.S. judge. Rogozinski accused Reddit of unlawfully banning him from moderating WallStreetBets and infringing upon his trademark rights. He founded WallStreetBets in 2012 and applied to trademark the name in March 2020 when the community reached 1 million subscribers (now 14 million). However, the judge rejected Rogozinski's claim, stating he doesn't own the WallStreetBets trademark and dismissed his state law claims related to his ouster, indicating he lacked the standing to sue. Reddit termed Rogozinski's lawsuit a "transparent attempt to enrich himself."Reddit beats lawsuit by WallStreetBets founder | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On this day, June 28th, in legal history, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down their decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke and ruled that quota systems could not be used in college admissions, but programs that incentivize accepting minority applicants are permissible. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke was a landmark Supreme Court case decided on June 28th, 1978. The Court ruled that a university's admissions criteria, which used race as the sole basis for admission decisions, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case revolved around Allan Bakke, a white male applicant who was rejected from medical school at the University of California at Davis due to a racial quota system. The Court determined that the quota system was unconstitutional and a violation of civil rights laws. They applied strict scrutiny, stating that the government must have a compelling interest and narrowly tailored means to justify race-based actions. The Court acknowledged that race could be considered as a factor in admissions, but rejected the use of a quota system that excluded candidates based solely on race.The Supreme Court has upheld a Pennsylvania law in a narrow 5-4 decision that requires companies to face lawsuits within the state when they register to do business there. The ruling leaves room for a potential future challenge to the law on different constitutional grounds. Opponents of the law expressed concern that it could lead to other states adopting similar registration requirements. The case involved a former employee of Norfolk Southern Railway Co. who wanted to bring a lawsuit against the company in Pennsylvania, even though it is not based there. Justice Samuel Alito, while ruling in favor of the plaintiff in this case, suggested that the law could be challenged under the commerce clause in the future. The court's decision was based on a precedent set in a 1917 case involving a similar law in Missouri. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh, dissented, arguing that the ruling infringed upon the authority of other states to adjudicate disputes involving their citizens.State Registration Law Feared by Business Upheld by Justices (1)The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear a tax case regarding foreign earnings, raising concerns about the extent of Congress' taxing powers. The case revolves around internal revenue code Section 965, which aimed to prevent foreign earnings from permanently evading US taxation during a transition to a new international tax regime. The plaintiffs, Charles and Kathleen Moore, are seeking a refund of $14,729 through their challenge to the tax. However, the case has broader implications, as the government estimates the tax will generate $340 billion over a decade. The Moores and other groups argue that allowing the tax would provide Congress with the authority to pursue new revenue streams, such as a federal wealth tax. The Moores' representatives argue that the tax is not authorized under the federal government's power to tax income as defined by the Sixteenth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals previously dismissed the suit, ruling that taxable income doesn't have to be realized. The Moores argue that only realized income is taxable under the Sixteenth Amendment, and the tax violates the constitutional requirement for direct taxes to be proportionally applied to each state's population. The case has garnered interest from organizations like the US Chamber of Commerce and the Cato Institute, which submitted briefs urging the Supreme Court to take up the case. The outcome of the case will have implications for Congress' taxing powers and the interpretation of the Sixteenth Amendment.Galvanizing International Tax Case Accepted by Supreme Court (2)(ORDER LIST: 599 U.S.) MONDAY, JUNE 26, 2023 CERTIORARI -- SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS 21-1596 ARDOIN, LA SEC. OF STATE, ET AL. V. ROBIThe US Supreme Court has rejected a legal theory that would grant state legislatures unchecked power over elections. In a 6-3 decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled against Republican state legislators in a case involving North Carolina's House of Representatives districts. The legislators sought to embrace the "independent state legislature" doctrine, which would remove the role of state courts and state constitutions in regulating federal elections. Critics argue that the doctrine poses a threat to democratic norms and could lead to further voter restrictions and extreme partisan gerrymandering. The Supreme Court's ruling still allows federal courts to review certain election-related cases and potentially challenge state court decisions. The decision does not establish a clear legal test for determining when state courts have overstepped their bounds in election matters. The issue is expected to resurface in future cases when state courts reject legislatively drawn maps and take it upon themselves to draw districts.US Supreme Court rejects bid to give lawmakers unchecked power over elections | ReutersA law professor at the University of Colorado, Paul Campos, has filed a lawsuit against the university and its law school dean, Lolita Buckner Inniss, alleging pay discrimination and retaliation. Campos, who is the only Latino faculty member, claims that he is paid less than his white colleagues. He also accuses Inniss of retaliating against him for raising concerns about his compensation and for taking parental leave. According to a 2021 pay study conducted by the university, Campos earned nearly $14,000 less per year than white law faculty. In addition, Campos alleges that he received a low faculty rating, which he believes was influenced by racial bias and retaliation for taking paternity leave. He claims that Inniss further retaliated against him by removing him from the law school's faculty evaluations committee and preventing him from teaching a course. Campos argues that the university has failed to provide evidence of offensive and biased language, as alleged.Law professor sues University of Colorado over discrimination claims | ReutersSam Bankman-Fried, the founder of FTX cryptocurrency exchange, has lost his bid to dismiss most of the criminal charges brought against him by the U.S. government. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan denied Bankman-Fried's request, clearing the way for his trial scheduled for October 2. Bankman-Fried is accused of orchestrating a multibillion-dollar fraud by stealing funds from FTX customers to cover losses at his hedge fund, Alameda Research. Prosecutors also allege that he misled investors and made illegal contributions to U.S. political campaigns in the names of his colleagues. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty and denied stealing funds but admitted to inadequate risk management at FTX. The judge ruled that the charges against Bankman-Fried were valid and that the alleged misappropriated funds constituted property. Bankman-Fried had also argued that some charges were improperly brought without consent from the Bahamas, where he was arrested and extradited. A second trial is scheduled for March 11 on charges brought after his extradition.Bankman-Fried loses bid to toss criminal charges over FTX's collapse | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The passage of an income tax in the early twentieth century was an enormous shift toward a far more centralized and powerful US state. Original Article: "The Income Tax: Lessons from the Sixteenth Amendment"

The passage of an income tax in the early twentieth century was an enormous shift toward a far more centralized and powerful US state. Original Article: "The Income Tax: Lessons from the Sixteenth Amendment"

Monday March 6, 2023 - The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution provides Congress with the “power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived.” Gambling can be a fun and exciting activity. Remember, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recognizes winnings from casinos, lotteries, horse racing, sports betting and other gambling activities as income and subject to taxes. Gambling losses may be deductible on your federal tax return, but only up to the amount of winnings. To claim any deductions for your gambling losses, though, it's important to keep contemporaneous records of all your gambling activity throughout the year. Whether it's a casino or sportsbook ticket stub, an online receipt or bank statement with the transaction listed, having documentation of your losses is essential. Depending on where you live, additional state taxes may also apply to your gambling winnings. Some states require that you pay taxes on all your gaming revenue (not just the amount over a certain threshold), while others might not have any rules in place at all. In Illinois, where I live, the State taxes all winnings, and does not allow deductions for losses. I have had at least one client with larges winnings – hundreds of thousands of dollars. But larger losses. The State of Illinois taxed the full amount of winnings. In this case, that meant a very large State Tax bill. Professional gamblers (not an easy designation) may be subject to additional tax requirements. Professional gamblers are considered self-employed and must pay self-employment taxes on their winnings. They may also be required to pay estimated taxes throughout the year. So, if you don't keep good records and you get audited, it's a gamble. Good Luck. Attorney Steven A. Leahy discusses IRS taxes on Gambling on Today's Tax Talk. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxvi https://www.capjournal.com/arena/finance/las-vegas-casinos-gamblers-may-get-a-surprise-irs-jackpot/article_4a468745-4db3-512a-b5d3-04568f0b8c04.html https://ktla.com/news/nexstar-media-wire/as-march-madness-looms-so-do-sports-betting-taxes/ https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc419 --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/steven-leahy1/message

Thursday February 9, 2023 - As tax season begins, the IRS has yet to decide an important question: are state payments or refunds received in 2022 taxable? So, The IRS is asking people to hold off filing their Tax Returns. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tells us they have been working for months with state tax officials about these special payments and refunds that were made available by some states in 2022. “The IRS is aware of the complexity surrounding these payments and is doing its best to provide additional information that will help taxpayers make an informed decision.” In the meantime – Hurry up and Wait. The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution proclaims, “Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived.” There are, however, some statutory exceptions. Do these state rebate checks fit into the exceptions? The IRS doesn't know yet. The IRS tells taxpayers “the rules surrounding them are complex.” In the meantime “the IRS recommends [taxpayers] wait until additional guidance is available.” “[T}he best course of action is to wait for additional clarification on state payments rather than calling the IRS.” Attorney Steven A. Leahy looks at the IRS February 3, 2023 Statement on Today's Tax Talk. https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-statement-taxability-of-state-payments https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-irs-fails-at-the-basics/ https://www.marketplace.org/2023/02/09/were-last-years-state-payments-taxable-taxpayers-in-24-states-wait-while-the-irs-decides/ https://www.fatherly.com/news/wait-to-file-your-tax-return-irs-warns --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/steven-leahy1/message

A very taxing proposition.

There are few things more universally feared and hatred than the IRS. When I'm asked about unconstitutional government agencies, and I point out that the IRS does exercise a power delegated to the United States, most people are gravely disappointed. While the IRS may legally exist, that does not mean that everything they do is constitutional. IRS's rule to gather data from those in the gig economy went to far. While the Sixteenth Amendment does allow Congress to collect taxes on income from any source without apportionment to the states, the IRS used the threat of unreasonable searches to “encourage” compliance. But for those of us who read and study the Constitution, we can see that this is just the latest in a long line of abuses this agency has engaged in. Let's face it, this $600 reporting requirement is less about collecting taxes and more about gathering intelligence on the American population.

Thursday December 29, 2022 - There is much confusion about the 1099-K, no thanks to the IRS changing the reporting threshold rules – after the reporting threshold rules were changed by the American Rescue Plan in 2021. You may ask “what is 1099-K form used for?” In short, 1099-Ks are sent to merchants, financial institutions, and other businesses that accept payments from customers through credit cards, debit cards, PayPal or other online payment systems to report gross transactions to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Information Returns 1099-K is a version of what the IRS calls an information return. The IRS uses information returns to help ensure that individuals and businesses report all their income and pay the appropriate amount of taxes on that income. By requiring organizations to report certain types of payments made to individuals or businesses, the IRS can more easily track and verify the income that is being reported on tax returns. Reporting helps to improve voluntary tax compliance Reporting Thresholds Since 2011 the reporting threshold was: • Gross payments that exceed $20,000, AND • More than 200 such transactions The American Rescue Plan of 2021 changed the reporting threshold for third-party settlement organizations, including payment apps and online third-party settlement organizations. The new threshold required these organizations to report transactions in excess of $600 per year, without regard to the number of transactions. On December 23, 2022, the IRS announced that calendar year 2022 will be treated as a transition year for the reduced reporting threshold of $600. For calendar year 2022, third-party settlement organizations who issue Forms 1099-K are only required to report transactions where gross payments exceed $20,000 and there are more than 200 transactions. Back to the original threshold. Conclusion: I hope this helps clear up some of the confusion. Remember, the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution makes all income, “from whatever source derived” taxable. So, even if you do not receive a 1099 – all income must be reported on your tax return. Attorney Steven A. Leahy reveals What a 1099-K is used for on Today's Tax Talk. https://www.irs.gov/businesses/understanding-your-form-1099-k https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/a-guide-to-information-returns https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/us-news/personal-finance/2022/12/29/63adb4cd22601d9b2c8b45f5.html --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/steven-leahy1/message

Income tax. Taxes based on income are imposed at the federal, most state, and some local levels within the United States. The tax systems within each jurisdiction may define taxable income separately. Many states refer to some extent to federal concepts for determining taxable income. History of the income tax. The first Income tax in the United States was implemented with the Revenue Act of 1861 by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. In 1895 the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. federal income tax on interest income, dividend income and rental income was unconstitutional in Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., because it was a direct tax. The Pollock decision was overruled by the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913, and by subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Graves v New York ex rel. O'Keefe, South Carolina v Baker, and Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co. Basic concepts. The U.S. income tax system imposes a tax based on income on individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts. The tax is taxable income, as defined, times a specified tax rate. This tax may be reduced by credits, some of which may be refunded if they exceed the tax calculated. Taxable income may differ from income for other purposes (such as for financial reporting). The definition of taxable income for federal purposes is used by many, but far from all states. Income and deductions are recognized under tax rules, and there are variations within the rules among the states. Book and tax income may differ. Income is divided into "capital gains", which are taxed at a lower rate and only when the taxpayer chooses to "realize" them, and "ordinary income", which is taxed at higher rates and on an annual basis. Because of this distinction, capital is taxed much more lightly than labor. Under the U.S. system, individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts are subject to income tax. Partnerships are not taxed; rather, their partners are subject to income tax on their shares of income and deductions, and take their shares of credits. Some types of business entities may elect to be treated as corporations or as partnerships. Taxpayers are required to file tax returns and self assess tax. Tax may be withheld from payments of income (for example, withholding of tax from wages). To the extent taxes are not covered by withholdings, taxpayers must make estimated tax payments, generally quarterly. Tax returns are subject to review and adjustment by taxing authorities, though far fewer than all returns are reviewed. Taxable income is gross income less exemptions, deductions, and personal exemptions. Gross income includes "all income from whatever source". Certain income, however, is subject to tax exemption at the federal or state levels. This income is reduced by tax deductions including most business and some nonbusiness expenses. Individuals are also allowed a deduction for personal exemptions, a fixed dollar allowance. The allowance of some nonbusiness deductions is phased out at higher income levels. The U.S. federal and most state income tax systems tax the worldwide income of citizens and residents. A federal foreign tax credit is granted for foreign income taxes. Individuals residing abroad may also claim the foreign earned income exclusion. Individuals may be a citizen or resident of the United States but not a resident of a state. Many states grant a similar credit for taxes paid to other states. These credits are generally limited to the amount of tax on income from foreign (or other state) sources. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

A tax protester is someone who refuses to pay a tax claiming that the tax laws are unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Tax protesters are different from tax resisters, who refuse to pay taxes as a protest against a government or its policies, or a moral opposition to taxation in general, not out of a belief that the tax law itself is invalid. The United States has a large and organized culture of people who espouse such theories. Tax protesters also exist in other countries. Legal commentator Daniel B Evans has defined tax protesters as people who "refuse to pay taxes or file tax returns out of a mistaken belief that the federal income tax is unconstitutional, invalid, voluntary, or otherwise does not apply to them under one of a number of bizarre arguments" (divided into several classes: constitutional, conspiracy, administrative, statutory, and arguments based on 16th Amendment and the "861" section of the tax code; see the Tax protester arguments article for an overview). Law Professor Allen D Madison has described tax protesters as "those who refuse to pay income tax on the basis of some nonsensical legal argument that he or she does not owe tax." An illegal tax-protest scheme has been defined as "any scheme, without basis in law or fact, designed to express dissatisfaction with the tax laws by interfering with their administration or attempting to illegally avoid or reduce tax liabilities." The United States Tax Court has stated that "tax protester" is a designation "often given to persons who make frivolous antitax arguments". Tax protesters raise a number of different kinds of arguments. In the United States, these typically include constitutional arguments, such as claims that the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution was not properly ratified or that it is unconstitutional generally, or that being forced to file an income tax return violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Others are statutory arguments suggesting that the income tax is constitutional but the statutes enacting the income tax are ineffective, or that Federal Reserve Notes or other relevant currencies do not constitute cash or income. Yet another collection of arguments centers on general conspiracies involving numerous government agencies. Some tax protesters refuse to file a tax return or file returns with no income or tax data supplied. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

The history of taxation in the United States begins with the colonial protest against British taxation policy in the 1760s, leading to the American Revolution. The independent nation collected taxes on imports ("tariffs"), whiskey, and (for a while) on glass windows. States and localities collected poll taxes on voters and property taxes on land and commercial buildings. In addition, there were the state and federal excise taxes. State and federal inheritance taxes began after 1900, while the states (but not the federal government) began collecting sales taxes in the 1930s. The United States imposed income taxes briefly during the Civil War and the 1890s. In 1913, the 16th Amendment was ratified, however, the United States Constitution Article 1, Section 9 defines a direct tax. The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution did not create a new tax. Colonial taxation. Taxes were low at the local, colonial, and imperial levels throughout the colonial era. The issue that led to the Revolution was whether parliament had the right to impose taxes on the Americans when they were not represented in parliament. Stamp Act. The Stamp Act of 1765 was the fourth Stamp Act to be passed by the Parliament of Great Britain and required all legal documents, permits, commercial contracts, newspapers, wills, pamphlets, and playing cards in the American colonies to carry a tax stamp. It was enacted on November 1, 1765, at the end of the Seven Years' War between the French and the British, a war that started with the young officer George Washington attacking a French outpost. The stamp tax had the scope of defraying the cost of maintaining the military presence protecting the colonies. Americans rose in strong protest, arguing in terms of "No Taxation without Representation". Boycotts forced Britain to repeal the stamp tax, while convincing many British leaders it was essential to tax the colonists on something to demonstrate the sovereignty of Parliament. Townshend Revenue Act. The Townshend Revenue Act were two tax laws passed by Parliament in 1767; they were proposed by Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the Exchequer. They placed a tax on common products imported into the American Colonies, such as lead, paper, paint, glass, and tea. In contrast to the Stamp Act of 1765, the laws were not a direct tax that people paid daily, but a tax on imports that was collected from the ship's captain when he unloaded the cargo. The Townshend Acts also created three new admiralty courts to try Americans who ignored the laws. Sugar Act 1764. The tax on sugar, cloth, and coffee. These were non-British exports. Boston Tea Party. The Boston Tea Party was an act of protest by the American colonists against Great Britain for the Tea Act in which they dumped many chests of tea into Boston Harbor. The cuts to taxation on tea undermined American smugglers, who destroyed the tea in retaliation for its exemption from taxes. Britain reacted harshly, and the conflict escalated to war in 1775. Capitation tax. An assessment levied by the government upon a person at a fixed rate regardless of income or worth. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Pollock overruled. The Sixteenth Amendment removed the precedent set by the Pollock decision. Professor Sheldon D Pollack at the University of Delaware wrote: On February 25, 1913, in the closing days of the Taft administration, Secretary of State Philander C Knox, a former Republican senator from Pennsylvania and attorney general under McKinley and Roosevelt, certified that the amendment had been properly ratified by the requisite number of state legislatures. Three more states ratified the amendment soon after, and eventually the total reached 42. The remaining six states either rejected the amendment or took no action at all. Notwithstanding the many frivolous claims repeatedly advanced by so-called tax protestors, the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution was duly ratified as of February 3, 1913. With that, the Pollock decision was overturned, restoring the status quo ante. Congress once again had the "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". From William D Andrews, Professor of Law, Harvard Law School: In 1913 the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution was adopted, overruling Pollock, and the Congress then levied an income tax on both corporate and individual incomes. From Professor Boris Bittker, who was a tax law professor at Yale Law School: As construed by the Supreme Court in the Brushaber case, the power of Congress to tax income derives from Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, of the original Constitution rather than from the Sixteenth Amendment; the latter simply eliminated the requirement that an income tax, to the extent that it is a direct tax, must be apportioned among the states. A corollary of this conclusion is that any direct tax that is not imposed on "income" remains subject to the rule of apportionment. Because the Sixteenth Amendment does not purport to define the term "direct tax," the scope of that constitutional phrase remains as debatable as it was before 1913; but the practical significance of the issue was greatly reduced once income taxes, even if direct, were relieved from the requirement of apportionment. Professor Erik Jensen at Case Western Reserve University Law School has written: was a response to the Income Tax Cases (Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.), and it exempts only "taxes on incomes" from the apportionment rule that otherwise applies to direct taxes. Professor Calvin H. Johnson, a tax professor at the University of Texas School of Law, has written: The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1913, was written to allow Congress to tax income without the hobbling apportionment requirement. ... Pollock was itself overturned by the Sixteenth Amendment as to apportionment of income ...

The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution allows Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states on the basis of population. It was passed by Congress in 1909 in response to the 1895 Supreme Court case of Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. The Sixteenth Amendment was ratified by the requisite number of states on February 3, 1913, and effectively overruled the Supreme Court's ruling in Pollock. Prior to the early 20th century, most federal revenue came from tariffs rather than taxes, although Congress had often imposed excise taxes on various goods. The Revenue Act of 1861 had introduced the first federal income tax, but that tax was repealed in 1872. During the late nineteenth century, various groups, including the Populist Party, favored the establishment of a progressive income tax at the federal level. These groups believed that tariffs unfairly taxed the poor, and they favored using the income tax to shift the tax burden onto wealthier individuals. The 1894 Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act contained an income tax provision, but the tax was struck down by the Supreme Court in the case of Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. In its ruling, the Supreme Court did not hold that all federal income taxes were unconstitutional, but rather held that income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were direct taxes and thus had to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. For several years after Pollock, Congress did not attempt to implement another income tax, largely due to concerns that the Supreme Court would strike down any attempt to levy an income tax. In 1909, during the debate over the Payne–Aldrich Tariff Act, Congress proposed the Sixteenth Amendment to the states. Though conservative Republican leaders had initially expected that the amendment would not be ratified, a coalition of Democrats, progressive Republicans, and other groups ensured that the necessary number of states ratified the amendment. Shortly after the amendment was ratified, Congress imposed a federal income tax with the Revenue Act of 1913. The Supreme Court upheld that income tax in the 1916 case of Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co., and the federal government has continued to levy an income tax since 1913.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is the revenue service for the United States federal government, which is responsible for collecting taxes and administering the Internal Revenue Code, the main body of the federal statutory tax law. It is part of the Department of the Treasury and led by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, who is appointed to a five-year term by the President of the United States. The duties of the IRS include providing tax assistance to taxpayers; pursuing and resolving instances of erroneous or fraudulent tax filings; and overseeing various benefits programs, including the Affordable Care Act. The IRS originates from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, a federal office created in 1862 to assess the nation's first income tax to fund the American Civil War. The temporary measure provided over a fifth of the Union's war expenses before being allowed to expire a decade later. In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified authorizing Congress to impose a tax on income, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue was established. In 1953, the agency was renamed the Internal Revenue Service, and in subsequent decades underwent numerous reforms and reorganizations, most significantly in the 1990s. Since its establishment, the IRS has been responsible for collecting most of the revenue needed to fund the federal government, albeit while facing periodic controversy and opposition over its methods, constitutionality, and the principle of taxation generally. In recent years the agency has struggled with budget cuts and reduced morale. As of 2018, it saw a 15 percent reduction in its workforce, including a decline of more than 25 percent of its enforcement staff. Nevertheless, during the 2017 fiscal year, the agency processed more than 245 million tax returns. History. American Civil War (1861–65). In July 1862, during the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1862, creating the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacting a temporary income tax to pay war expenses. The Revenue Act of 1862 was passed as an emergency and temporary war-time tax. It copied a relatively new British system of income taxation, instead of trade and property taxation. The first income tax was passed in 1862: The initial rate was 3% on income over $800, which exempted most wage-earners. In 1862 the rate was 3% on income between $600 and $10,000, and 5% on income over $10,000. By the end of the war, 10% of Union households had paid some form of income tax, and the Union raised 21% of its war revenue through income taxes. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Sixteenth Amendment; Medical Cost Shifts; Banks Failures; Reagan Defense Policy; China; Russia; Slavery with RJR

Thursday February 10, 2022 - The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution 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." This year the IRS is driving that point home. Today, IRS Tax Tim 2022-23 warns "Taxpayers must report tip money as income on their tax return." Most of those accepting tips as part of their income already know that tips are taxable - although some don't report all of their tips. Remember, in IRS Publication 17 (2021) issued December 16, 2021, the IRS reminded us "If you steal property, you must report its fair market value in your income in the year you steal it unless you return it to its rightful owner in the same year." Or the sports fan who receives gifts in return for giving back a record ball - The value of the gifts are taxable. Attorney Steven A. Leahy reminds taxpayers EVERYTHING is taxable in today's episode. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/steven-leahy1/message

Modern interpretation of the power to tax incomes. The modern interpretation of the Sixteenth Amendment taxation power can be found in Commissioner v Glenshaw Glass Company (1955). In that case, a taxpayer had received an award of punitive damages from a competitor for antitrust violations and sought to avoid paying taxes on that award. The Court observed that Congress, in imposing the income tax, had defined gross income, under the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, to include: gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, or from professions, vocations, trades, businesses, commerce, or sales, or dealings in property, whether real or personal, growing out of the ownership or use of or interest in such property; also from interest, rent, dividends, securities, or the transaction of any business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever. (Note: The Glenshaw Glass case was an interpretation of the definition of "gross income" in section 22 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939. The successor to section 22 of the 1939 Code is section 61 of the current Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.) The Court held that "this language was used by Congress to exert in this field the full measure of its taxing power", and that "the Court has given a liberal construction to this broad phraseology in recognition of the intention of Congress to tax all gains except those specifically exempted." The Court then enunciated what is now understood by Congress and the Courts to be the definition of taxable income, "instances of undeniable accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion." The defendant in that case suggested that a 1954 rewording of the tax code had limited the income that could be taxed, a position which the Court rejected, stating: The definition of gross income has been simplified, but no effect upon its present broad scope was intended. Certainly punitive damages cannot reasonably be classified as gifts, nor do they come under any other exemption provision in the Code. We would do violence to the plain meaning of the statute and restrict a clear legislative attempt to bring the taxing power to bear upon all receipts constitutionally taxable were we to say that the payments in question here are not gross income. Tax statutes passed after the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913 are sometimes referred to as the "modern" tax statutes. Hundreds of Congressional acts have been passed since 1913, as well as several codifications (for example, topical reorganizations) of the statutes (see Codification). --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

IRS recently issued Publication 17 (2021), Your Federal Income Tax designed to help individual taxpayers prepare their 2021 tax return. Think of it as the Instruction sheet for Form 1040 or 1040 -SR. The publication covers everything, from the date your tax return is due (April 18, 2022 because of the Emancipation Day holiday in the District of Columbia) to deducting Personal protective equipment (PPE). Part Two of the publication, Income and Adjustments to Income explains which income is and isn't taxed and discusses some of the adjustments to income that you can make in figuring your adjusted gross income. Remember, the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution, granted Congress the "power to lay an collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived" .Well the IRS spells out some of the of those taxable incomes here. Attorney Steven A. Leahy demonstrates the awesome power granted to the IRS in this epoxide of "Today's Tax Talk." --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/steven-leahy1/message

Income tax Taxes based on income are imposed at the federal, most state, and some local levels within the United States. The tax systems within each jurisdiction may define taxable income separately. Many states refer to some extent to federal concepts for determining taxable income. History of the income tax. The first Income tax in the United States was implemented with the Revenue Act of 1861 by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. In 1895 the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. federal income tax on interest income, dividend income and rental income was unconstitutional in Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., because it was a direct tax. The Pollock decision was overruled by the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913, and by subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Graves v New York ex rel. O'Keefe, South Carolina v Baker, and Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co. Basic concepts. The U.S. income tax system imposes a tax based on income on individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts. The tax is taxable income, as defined, times a specified tax rate. This tax may be reduced by credits, some of which may be refunded if they exceed the tax calculated. Taxable income may differ from income for other purposes (such as for financial reporting). The definition of taxable income for federal purposes is used by many, but far from all states. Income and deductions are recognized under tax rules, and there are variations within the rules among the states. Book and tax income may differ. Income is divided into "capital gains", which are taxed at a lower rate and only when the taxpayer chooses to "realize" them, and "ordinary income", which is taxed at higher rates and on an annual basis. Because of this distinction, capital is taxed much more lightly than labor. Under the U.S. system, individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts are subject to income tax. Partnerships are not taxed; rather, their partners are subject to income tax on their shares of income and deductions and take their shares of credits. Some types of business entities may elect to be treated as corporations or as partnerships. Taxpayers are required to file tax returns and self-assess tax. Tax may be withheld from payments of income (for example, withholding of tax from wages). To the extent taxes are not covered by withholdings, taxpayers must make estimated tax payments, generally quarterly. Tax returns are subject to review and adjustment by taxing authorities, though far fewer than all returns are reviewed. Taxable income is gross income less exemptions, deductions, and personal exemptions. Gross income includes "all income from whatever source". Certain income, however, is subject to tax exemption at the federal or state levels. This income is reduced by tax deductions including most business and some nonbusiness expenses. Individuals are also allowed a deduction for personal exemptions, a fixed dollar allowance. The allowance of some nonbusiness deductions is phased out at higher income levels. The U.S. federal and most state income tax systems tax the worldwide income of citizens and residents. A federal foreign tax credit is granted for foreign income taxes. Individuals residing abroad may also claim the foreign earned income exclusion. Individuals may be a citizen or resident of the United States but not a resident of a state. Many states grant a similar credit for taxes paid to other states. These credits are generally limited to the amount of tax on income from foreign (or other state) sources. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

The Sixteenth Amendment to the US Constitution establishes a federal income tax. There had only been one tax of this type before, to pay for the Civil War, and it was canceled not long after the end of that war. Those who supported an income tax thought it would help lower-income individuals by putting a greater tax burden on wealthier people. This is what you need to know about this most contentious of amendments. Podcast Show Notes: https://ancestralfindings.com/the-sixteenth-amendment-the-constitutional-amendments/  Click Here to listen to the weekly podcast: https://ancestralfindings.com/podcast Weekly Giveaways: https://ancestralfindings.com/drawing Genealogy eBooks: https://ancestralfindings.com/ebooks Hard To Find Surnames: https://ancestralfindings.com/surnames Social Media: https://www.facebook.com/AncestralFindings https://www.instagram.com/ancestralfindings https://www.twitter.com/ancestralstuff Support Ancestral Findings: https://ancestralfindings.com/donation #Genealogy #AncestralFindings #Amendments

We are having a bit of fun with the title of this podcast because it poses a trick question? You see... if Mr. Biden was president in 1821... aside from the fact that there was no "Democratic" political party then, he would have another issue on his hand: there were no corporate or income taxes back then either.  And no! As much as our current political skirmishes suggest, it wasn't a Democratic US President that ushered in the income tax. It was a Republican president - Honest Abe! And later, it was during another Republican President's term that the income tax became permanent - William Taft. The irony of it is that the poor masses and the progressive middle class pushed for the income tax to get the rich to pay their fair share. Now, the poor and the middle American families seem to shoulder most of the income tax burden.  So this begs the following question: how did the federal government pay for itself all these years before the income tax? How and why did it grow so large, needing ever more income to pay for its many programs?  So that we better understand our present, we spoke with Mr. David Thomson, an assistant professor of American history at Sacred Heart University in Connecticut (link to the academic homepage: https://www.sacredheart.edu/phonebook/david-thomson.php). In his research, Professor Thomson focuses on the Civil War period, including the financing of that war through the sale of government bonds. He recently received a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities. He is the recipient of numerous fellowships and has won many awards and honors. He is also a contributor to prominent publications, such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Boston Globe magazine. See more information on his website: http://davidkthomson.com/. Professor Thomson has an upcoming book titled Bonds of War: How Civil War Financial Agents Sold the World on the Union. His book will be published in the Spring of 2022 with the University of North Carolina Press. Tune in to ThePeel.news podcast as Professor Thomson takes us from our very beginning - no taxation without representation - through Shays' Rebellion, the US Constitution, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, the Civil War, great depressions before the GREAT DEPRESSION, the Gilded Age, the Sixteenth Amendment, World War I, the Roaring '20s, the GREAT DEPRESSION, and World War II.  Image attribution: The chart title "Federal Revenue by type" is by Wikideas1, from this source, and provided under CC BY-SA 4.0 license in Wikipedia. The sides and top margins of the chart were cropped for better fitting. Some descriptions & titles were superimposed on the chart for better reading. The chart was turned sideways for better fit into the frame. 

RE-RUN OF JULY 5, 2020 DEBUT EPISODE OF JEDI.TAX RADIO.

RE-RUN OF JULY 5, 2020 DEBUT EPISODE OF JEDI.TAX RADIO.

What would you say if I told you the federal income tax is unconstitutional? You most likely would say, "How can that be? I thought we have a constitutional amendment that covers the income tax?" In this episode we are going to examine a perspective that you’ve likely never heard before and look at the truth about the federal income tax and the Sixteenth Amendment. You may be surprised to know that the manner in which the federal income tax is levied may not be in compliance with the Sixteenth Amendment nor with Supreme Court opinions on income tax cases. Show Notes The Great Income Tax Hoax – Irvin Schiff Two Negative Consequences of the Income Tax – Daniel J. Mitchell Is Today the Anniversary of the Income Tax the Worse Day in American History Prior to 1913 No One Paid Income Tax - Why Now? The Truth Quest Podcast Patron Page Join the conversation at The Truth Quest Facebook Fan Page Order a copy of Shawn's books, Pritical Thinking, The Proverbs Project, The Termite Effect. The video of this episode is available on The Truth Quest Podcast YouTube Channel, BitChute.com and Brighteon.com.

We WILL find a new world order! But not this week.The Confederacy of Andropolia | The United States of Sebmerica | The Democracy of ZanstraliaLet us know what you think about how we deal with these issues by contacting/arguing with us on social media!Please consider supporting us on PatreonLike us on Facebook!Follow us on twitter @worldorderpodEmail us: anewworldorderpodcast@gmail.comOr visit our Website: www.thatsnotcanonproductions.comHosts: Sebastian Briguglio, Andrew Szosler & Zane C WeberRecorded and Produced by Zane C Weber Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

GamerDude loves trivia, history, and little known facts about nothing, and has collected them for years. In this episode, he shares some of the information he's learned over the years revolving around "facts" we were once told that turned out to be anything but factual. He talks about the Sixteenth Amendment to the constituion, which relates to the income tax, and wonders whether it was ever actually, formally passed.  He talks about how big pharmaceutical companies used to market morphine, and then heroin, as miracle drugs, before it turned out they weren't. He talks about how smoking was marketed by actors and athletes, and promoted by doctors, and even touted as a diet aid, before the federal government finally issued its health warning in 1964. He shares the tale of Pope Gregory IX's hatred of cats, and how that hatred could have helped lay the groundwork for the spread of The Black Death (the bubonic plague) back in the 1300s.  To lighten things up, he shares some trivia about Oxford University, Nintendo, Queen Elizabeth II, and Betty White.

Progressivism has become a huge part of American Society. But where did it come from? What are the underlying ideas? Where is it going? This podcast dives into all of those questions as well as offer the solution to slowing the spread of acceptance of Progressivism. Below are some the notes from my podcast, and are not a complete list of the topics discussed: Global Warming "Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make," Ehrlich confidently predicted in a 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. "The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next 10 years." He assured readers of The Progressive in 1970 that between 1980 and 1989, 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the "Great Die-Off." In a 1969 essay titled "Eco-Catastrophe!" Ehrlich said "most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born." Progressives' Quotes: Woodrow Wilson "All that progressives ask or desire," wrote Woodrow Wilson, "is permission -- in an era when development, evolution, is a scientific word -- to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine." John Dewey: "something that individuals have as a ready-made possession." It is "something to be achieved." In this view, freedom is not a gift of God or nature. It is a product of human making, a gift of the state. Man is a product of his own history, through which he collectively creates himself. He is a social construct. Since human beings are not naturally free, there can be no natural rights or natural law. Therefore, Dewey also writes, "Natural rights and natural liberties exist only in the kingdom of mythological social zoology." "the state has the responsibility for creating institutions under which individuals can effectively realize the potentialities that are theirs." So although "it is true that social arrangements, laws, institutions are made for man, rather than that man is made for them," these laws and institutions "are not means for obtaining something for individuals, not even happiness. They are means of creating individuals…. Individuality in a social and moral sense is something to be wrought out." Elected Senators The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution. Income Tax “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.” -The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Join the Conversation of Our Generation!!! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/conofourgen/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/conofourgen/support

We WILL find a new world order! But not this week. This week we discuss and/or argue about Crime and Punishment. The Confederacy of Andropolia | The United States of Sebmerica | The Democracy of ZanstraliaLet us know what you think about how we deal with these issues by contacting/arguing with us on social media!Please consider supporting us on PatreonLike us on Facebook!Follow us on twitter @worldorderpodEmail us: anewworldorderpodcast@gmail.comOr visit our Website: www.thatsnotcanonproductions.comHosts: Sebastian Briguglio, Andrew Szosler & Zane C WeberRecorded and Produced by Zane C Weber Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

House votes to partially repeal & replace Obamacare. Left goes batty and says GOP LOL-ing that they're taking away people's healthcare. The Nutty Professor Bernie Sanders says Republicans will let thousands of Americans die so they can cut taxes for billionaires. There is a genuine debate to have about healthcare - but this sophistry isn't it. Dems sing "Goodbye" song to Republicans who voted for AHCA. Americans for Tax Reform list Obamacare taxes repealed by AHCA vote - and contrary to what Bernie tells us - they're exclusively for billionaires. Trump signs Executive Order regarding religious liberty. Johnson Amendment. Free speech in the pulpit. Sixteenth Amendment. Why must we give up some of our free speech rights to maintain an arbitrary tax exemption status with the IRS? Some criticize Trump executive order on religious freedom for not doing enough. Others praise it. Stand to Honor fundraiser this weekend.

House votes to partially repeal & replace Obamacare. Left goes batty and says GOP LOL-ing that they're taking away people's healthcare. The Nutty Professor Bernie Sanders says Republicans will let thousands of Americans die so they can cut taxes for billionaires. There is a genuine debate to have about healthcare - but this sophistry isn't it. Dems sing "Goodbye" song to Republicans who voted for AHCA. Americans for Tax Reform list Obamacare taxes repealed by AHCA vote - and contrary to what Bernie tells us - they're exclusively for billionaires. Trump signs Executive Order regarding religious liberty. Johnson Amendment. Free speech in the pulpit. Sixteenth Amendment. Why must we give up some of our free speech rights to maintain an arbitrary tax exemption status with the IRS? Some criticize Trump executive order on religious freedom for not doing enough. Others praise it. Stand to Honor fundraiser this weekend.

House votes to partially repeal & replace Obamacare. Left goes batty and says GOP LOL-ing that they're taking away people's healthcare. The Nutty Professor Bernie Sanders says Republicans will let thousands of Americans die so they can cut taxes for billionaires. There is a genuine debate to have about healthcare - but this sophistry isn't it. Dems sing "Goodbye" song to Republicans who voted for AHCA. Americans for Tax Reform list Obamacare taxes repealed by AHCA vote - and contrary to what Bernie tells us - they're exclusively for billionaires. Trump signs Executive Order regarding religious liberty. Johnson Amendment. Free speech in the pulpit. Sixteenth Amendment. Why must we give up some of our free speech rights to maintain an arbitrary tax exemption status with the IRS? Some criticize Trump executive order on religious freedom for not doing enough. Others praise it. Stand to Honor fundraiser this weekend.

Prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the United States did not have a national system of taxation–it had a regional system, a system linked to political parties, and a system that, in many instances, preserved and protected trade. In his superbly written and thoughtful book Making the Modern American Fiscal State (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Ajay K. Mehrotra argues that “the rise of direct and graduated taxation in the early twentieth century signaled the start of a more complex and sophisticated system of fiscal governance.” Indeed, the introduction of a federal income did not merely create a completely new and soon dominate stream of revenue for the federal government, but created new institutions for the collection, accounting and distribution of revenue, and, most importantly, changed the way Americans viewed and related to each other. Drawing fascinating portraits of economists and legal scholars and pulling together intellectual threads from economics, institutional and political histories, Mehrotra has produced a work at the leading edge of new U.S. intellectual history. Ajay K. Mehrotra is Associate Dean for Research, Professor of Law, and Louis F. Niezer Faculty Fellow Adjunct Professor of History at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is the co-editor (with Isaac William Martin and Monica Prasad) of The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). His writings have also appeared in student-edited law reviews and interdisciplinary journals including Law & Social Inquiry, Law & History Review, and Law & Society Review. His scholarship and teaching have been supported by grants and fellowships from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council.

Prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the United States did not have a national system of taxation–it had a regional system, a system linked to political parties, and a system that, in many instances, preserved and protected trade.  In his superbly written and thoughtful book Making the Modern American Fiscal State (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Ajay K. Mehrotra argues that “the rise of direct and graduated taxation in the early twentieth century signaled the start of a more complex and sophisticated system of fiscal governance.” Indeed, the introduction of a federal income did not merely create a completely new and soon dominate stream of revenue for the federal government, but created new institutions for the collection, accounting and distribution of revenue, and, most importantly, changed the way Americans viewed and related to each other. Drawing fascinating portraits of economists and legal scholars and pulling together intellectual threads from economics, institutional and political histories, Mehrotra has produced a work at the leading edge of new U.S. intellectual history. Ajay K. Mehrotra is Associate Dean for Research, Professor of Law, and Louis F. Niezer Faculty Fellow Adjunct Professor of History at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is the co-editor (with Isaac William Martin and Monica Prasad) of The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). His writings have also appeared in student-edited law reviews and interdisciplinary journals including Law & Social Inquiry, Law & History Review, and Law & Society Review. His scholarship and teaching have been supported by grants and fellowships from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the United States did not have a national system of taxation–it had a regional system, a system linked to political parties, and a system that, in many instances, preserved and protected trade.  In his superbly written and thoughtful book Making the Modern American Fiscal State (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Ajay K. Mehrotra argues that “the rise of direct and graduated taxation in the early twentieth century signaled the start of a more complex and sophisticated system of fiscal governance.” Indeed, the introduction of a federal income did not merely create a completely new and soon dominate stream of revenue for the federal government, but created new institutions for the collection, accounting and distribution of revenue, and, most importantly, changed the way Americans viewed and related to each other. Drawing fascinating portraits of economists and legal scholars and pulling together intellectual threads from economics, institutional and political histories, Mehrotra has produced a work at the leading edge of new U.S. intellectual history. Ajay K. Mehrotra is Associate Dean for Research, Professor of Law, and Louis F. Niezer Faculty Fellow Adjunct Professor of History at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is the co-editor (with Isaac William Martin and Monica Prasad) of The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). His writings have also appeared in student-edited law reviews and interdisciplinary journals including Law & Social Inquiry, Law & History Review, and Law & Society Review. His scholarship and teaching have been supported by grants and fellowships from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the United States did not have a national system of taxation–it had a regional system, a system linked to political parties, and a system that, in many instances, preserved and protected trade.  In his superbly written and thoughtful book Making the Modern American Fiscal State (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Ajay K. Mehrotra argues that “the rise of direct and graduated taxation in the early twentieth century signaled the start of a more complex and sophisticated system of fiscal governance.” Indeed, the introduction of a federal income did not merely create a completely new and soon dominate stream of revenue for the federal government, but created new institutions for the collection, accounting and distribution of revenue, and, most importantly, changed the way Americans viewed and related to each other. Drawing fascinating portraits of economists and legal scholars and pulling together intellectual threads from economics, institutional and political histories, Mehrotra has produced a work at the leading edge of new U.S. intellectual history. Ajay K. Mehrotra is Associate Dean for Research, Professor of Law, and Louis F. Niezer Faculty Fellow Adjunct Professor of History at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is the co-editor (with Isaac William Martin and Monica Prasad) of The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). His writings have also appeared in student-edited law reviews and interdisciplinary journals including Law & Social Inquiry, Law & History Review, and Law & Society Review. His scholarship and teaching have been supported by grants and fellowships from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the United States did not have a national system of taxation–it had a regional system, a system linked to political parties, and a system that, in many instances, preserved and protected trade.  In his superbly written and thoughtful book Making the Modern American Fiscal State (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Ajay K. Mehrotra argues that “the rise of direct and graduated taxation in the early twentieth century signaled the start of a more complex and sophisticated system of fiscal governance.” Indeed, the introduction of a federal income did not merely create a completely new and soon dominate stream of revenue for the federal government, but created new institutions for the collection, accounting and distribution of revenue, and, most importantly, changed the way Americans viewed and related to each other. Drawing fascinating portraits of economists and legal scholars and pulling together intellectual threads from economics, institutional and political histories, Mehrotra has produced a work at the leading edge of new U.S. intellectual history. Ajay K. Mehrotra is Associate Dean for Research, Professor of Law, and Louis F. Niezer Faculty Fellow Adjunct Professor of History at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is the co-editor (with Isaac William Martin and Monica Prasad) of The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). His writings have also appeared in student-edited law reviews and interdisciplinary journals including Law & Social Inquiry, Law & History Review, and Law & Society Review. His scholarship and teaching have been supported by grants and fellowships from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Prior to the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, the United States did not have a national system of taxation–it had a regional system, a system linked to political parties, and a system that, in many instances, preserved and protected trade.  In his superbly written and thoughtful book Making the Modern American Fiscal State (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Ajay K. Mehrotra argues that “the rise of direct and graduated taxation in the early twentieth century signaled the start of a more complex and sophisticated system of fiscal governance.” Indeed, the introduction of a federal income did not merely create a completely new and soon dominate stream of revenue for the federal government, but created new institutions for the collection, accounting and distribution of revenue, and, most importantly, changed the way Americans viewed and related to each other. Drawing fascinating portraits of economists and legal scholars and pulling together intellectual threads from economics, institutional and political histories, Mehrotra has produced a work at the leading edge of new U.S. intellectual history. Ajay K. Mehrotra is Associate Dean for Research, Professor of Law, and Louis F. Niezer Faculty Fellow Adjunct Professor of History at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. He is the co-editor (with Isaac William Martin and Monica Prasad) of The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). His writings have also appeared in student-edited law reviews and interdisciplinary journals including Law & Social Inquiry, Law & History Review, and Law & Society Review. His scholarship and teaching have been supported by grants and fellowships from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Chuck Morse is joined by Chris Blystone in a talk about Operation American Spring set to commence May 16, 2014. Description Mission: PRIME DIRECTIVE: Restoration of OUR Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws which limit Republicans and Democrats in Congress and the Executive Branch to eighteen powers and spending itemized under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution in accordance with the Supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2. SECOND DIRECTIVE: Inform and ENCOURAGE all Americans and our home Countries, which form "a more perfect Union" of fifty free and sovereign States, to SPONSOR AND PASS "Joint State Sovereignty Resolutions with ARREST Provisions along with vital companion legislation which shall lead up to well contemplated, well deliberated, well organized, well orchestrated, incremental State NULLIFICATION of ALL Federal Spending, without prejudice, all Unlawful Acts and all usurpations by Congress and the Executive branch that exceed the eighteen limited powers and spending items granted them under Article I Section 8, of The Constitution, pursuant to our Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws on them and the supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2 as well. All other powers and spending, according to our Tenth Amendment law shall be handled by and/or paid for by the States or the people. THIRD DIRECTIVE: Restore the balance of OUR Bill of Rights and The Constitution. FOURTH DIRECTIVE: Along with the incremental State nullification of all spending not granted to Congress or the Executive branch, shall be incremental State nullification of all withholding taxes, all employment taxes, and all income taxes in obedience to the findings and rulings of The Supreme Court of The United States who ruled; "The Sixteenth Amendment confers NO NEW TAXES on anyone who wasn't taxable before it." This will nearly double the current size of all Middle Class American paychecks so that We and our home Countries can pay for whatever WE desire, want or need for ourselves. FIFTH DIRECTIVE: Replace a handful of the worst Republican and Democrat usurpers and despots, including President Barry Soetaro, with temporary replacements, pending an emergency election, with our replacements, as well as all remaining Republican and Democrat officials, all limited to the eighteen powers and spending enumerated under Article I Section 8 of The Constitution. Assumptions: Millions of Americans will participate. American veterans and patriots are energized to end the tyranny, lawlessness, and shredding of the US Constitution. Government is not the target, it is sound; corrupt and criminal leadership must be removed, and the balance must be limited to the powers and spending granted them, with all usurpations in power, spending and gross wages and salaries restored to the States and the people from whom they were stolen without a law to do so. Those in power will not hesitate to use force against unarmed, peaceful patriots exercising their constitutional rights. Patriots may be killed, wounded, incarcerated. There is no hope given today’s technology of secrecy for the effort nor do we want it secret. Concept of Operations: Phase 1 - Field millions, as many as ten million, patriots who will assemble in a peaceful, non-violent, physically unarmed (Spiritually/Constitutionally armed), display of unswerving loyalty to the Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws and the balance of the US Constitution and against the incumbent government leadership, in Washington, D.C., with the mission to bring down the existing leadership. Go full-bore, no looking back, steadfast in the mission. Phase 2 - One million or more of the assembled 10 million must be prepared to stay in D.C. as long as it takes to see Obama, Biden, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi, and Attorney General Holder removed from office. Consistent with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, The Declaration of Independence, our Bill of Rights and the US Constitution, as required, the U.S. Congress will take appropriate action, execute appropriate legislation, deal with vacancies, or U.S. States will appoint replacements for positions vacated consistent with established constitutional requirements. Phase 3 – Those with the principles of a Cruz, Dr. Ben Carson, Lee, DeMint, Sessions, Gowdy, Jordan, should comprise a tribunal and assume positions of authority to convene investigations, recommend appropriate charges against politicians and government employees to the new U.S. Attorney General appointed by the new President. *All actions in Phase 2 & 3 will be consistent with the U.S. Constitution. Date of Operation: “OPERATION AMERICAN SPRING – Beginning Of Tyranny Housecleaning, May 16, 2014, completion to be determined We are past the point of no return, thus must move forward with an effort to save our nation, as there is no other choice. We are asking, pleading with you, and any others that have resources, national voices, email lists, blogs, FB, Twitter, to call for a non-violent American Spring May 16 2014 in Washington D.C. We must appeal to ten million and more American patriots to come and stay in Washington, D.C. to stop the White House and Congress from total destruction of the United States. It’s now or never. God help us. .....the law of nature rules. A fluffy, cuddly lamb gets eaten by a mean old wolf is not an illegal or immoral event...the law of nature. When some greedy, self-serving occupant of the White House or Congress, or elements outside America, is threatening our existence, our freedom, our liberty, our Constitution, our life resources, our America, then we fight back to destroy the threat and there is nothing immoral or illegal about it. When the government becomes lawless, then "we the people" no longer are obligated to follow the government......there is no law when government picks and chooses for political purposes or personal agenda. At this time the government is performing as a lawless entity...... A duck cannot be turned into a fox; an elephant cannot be turned into a flea; the laws of nature will not permit. Likewise, a nation ordained and principled by the laws of nature, sovereign, free, with liberty for all cannot naturally become a nation guided by royalty, decrees, tyranny, elitist, self-serving criminals. The former has proven desirable, the latter has proven human pain. “We can become a nation guided by royalty IF "we the people" beguiled by the government in surrender to our lusts for that which we have not earned --for what is not natural --if we have become intoxicated by unbroken success" as Lincoln proclaimed in March 30 ,1863 call for fasting, humiliation, and prayer--we can very easily heap to ourselves leaders, and with itching ears, be turned from the Truth to become enslaved by the LIE.” The United States of America (elephant) while embracing the "LIE" is teetering on the abyss of becoming a sniveling, blood sucking, undesirable nation (flea). OPERATION AMERICAN SPRING will be a gigantic step in removing the flea infestation that is sucking the blood out of America. We see no reasonable, hopeful sign that indicates there are honorable, loyal, mature, critical thinking, experienced people in government that understands the chaos about to rain down on America, nor do they care....our only hope is that "we the people" call, organize, and draw a few million patriots to stay in D.C. for an "American Spring". It would be the catalyst to draw the line and bring to a conclusion a decision on the out of control government, one way or the other. America will rise up or surrender.........for me, I only go to my knees in the presence of God Almighty...........my knees will not touch the surface as a result of some piss ant occupant of the White House or a corrupt legislator, or outside element...I will fall to my death standing if necessary. http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topics/purging-senior-military-officers-ncos-martial-law-in-the-not?xg_source=activity http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topics/any-doubt-an-american-spring-is-needed http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topics/the-uber-presidency-by-general-paul-vallely There is not much time and the only planning necessary is to select a starting date, which we have done, and then show up in Washington, D.C. on that date, and plan to stay for the duration. The goal is restoring our Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws, The Declaration of Independence, our Bill of Rights and our US Constitution as the law of the land, removing the lawless, usurping, despotic leadership. Will this be a cake-walk? No, it will be painful, and some people may die because the government will not be non-violent; some of us will end up in a cell, and some may be injured. If that’s what it will take to save our nation, do we have any choice? Freedom loving Americans will say there is no choice, we must begin the second American Revolution. Not with guns, but with millions of Americans demanding a return to constitutional government and the resignation of Obama, Biden, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi, and Holder as a start...then the constitutional restoration process can begin UNDER the Rule of OUR Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws. An AMERICAN SPRING can be avoided only if the above mentioned officials resign and the balance of Congress and the Executive branch returns all powers and taxes usurped, which exceed that granted to them under Article I Section 8, pursuant to our Ninth and Tenth Amendment laws and the supremacy clause of Article VI clause 2, to the States and the people. Will our national patriot leaders step forward and declare, “send me”, I’ll lead? There are millions of veterans and patriots ready to follow and have said “I will go”. I urge all organizations, groups, particularly veterans and military retirees begin planning to visit Washington, D.C beginning May 16, 2014. Keep tuned to this facebook site and Constitutional Emergency/Patriots for America www.patriotsforamerica.ning.com for updates and guidance. Please bathe this effort in prayer as there is no personal agenda or gain save liberty, freedom, and restoration of constitutional government for "we the people".

Alan talks about the winter storm currently underway in Atlanta and weighs in on last nights vote by the GOP controlled House to suspend the debt ceiling. Todd talks about the similarity in chart patterns between now and the months leading up to the crashes of 1929 and 1987. Dr. Elaina George explains how patients with existing conditions are being denied Obamacare insurance for those conditions. Ileana Johnson expresses her reaction to an Olympics related puff pieces on communism in the former Soviet Union. Dan Holler explains last nights vote by the House of Representatives to suspend the debt ceiling. Alan talks about Social Security and the Sixteenth Amendment. The show ends with Jim Zauderer and his reaction to the GOP leadership.

The federal government is totally out of control. It is time to start shutting things down. Ignore the fearmongers. To quote FDR, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Here is a starting point: NSA: Defund that huge data repository in Bluffdale Utah that was constructed to store all of our private communications in perpetuity.Debt Limit: Don't raise it. It is not a limit if they raise it every time the national debt hits the ceiling.Obamacare: It was designed to fail so the libtards can double down on failure and demand "single payer."Government Shutdown: Go ahead and do it. I doubt if many will notice. The House did fund it minus Obamacare, so if the Dems kill the bill, they are responsible for a shutdown.Hillary Clinton: It is not too early to shut down her inevitable presidentiol campaign. If you think it's bad now, just wait.IRS: Pass the Fair Tax, repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, and apolish the IRS. It is a vehicle for repression, masquerading as a source of revenue.Federal Reserve: It is time to kill this privately owned cartel and let Congress resume its constitutional duty to issue the currency.   Where will this end? What do you think? Call in to express your views: 310-807-5158  or 877-878-1431.

As this show airs, the Federal Income Tax filing deadline is ten days away. The income tax is undoubtedly the least efficient, unfair, corrupt, and expensive way ever devised to collect taxes.  Actually, it is about more than taxes. It is about letting the government pry into, spy on, and control every aspect of your life--a massive invasion of privacy. With the IRS now linked to "Obamacare," the situation only gets worse. Fortunately, there is a better way to collect taxes. The Fair Tax was devised to implement a simple, equitable, revenue neutral, and efficient system of tax collection where every individual is treated equally. Steven Hayes, a national spokesperson for the Fair Tax, is our featured guest for the evening. He is here to explain the Fair Tax, why it is superior to the present system, and what you can do to get it implemented. Further information about the Fair Tax is available from Americans For Fair Taxation. Call in with your questions and comments: 310-807-5158  or 877-878-1431.