Replies

Ancient geezer, you continually use the phrase “income tax”. Is that phrase in the federal constitution, or is the phrase “taxes on incomes” in the constitution and the proper wording you are searching for?

I merely use the common vernacular expression "income tax",

I do mean taxes on incomes as they are referred to in the Constitution.

And no I am not searching for the term I use the vernacular merely for convenience.

JWK has stated

The most fundamental rule of constitutional law, Ancient geezer, is to carry out the intent of the constitution as contemplated by those who framed it and the people who adopted it.

and I do agree:

Furthermore JWK has encouraged us to :

Also see the various times this direct tax was laid by Congress.

So For reference so we know what a direct tax really meant at the time of the ratification of the Constitution, and how it was imposed upon the people of the states.

Here as a hyperlink to an actual example, the first law describing the administration of direct taxes apportioned among the states as actually implemented by those who ratified the Constitution.

United States Statutes at Large
Thirteenth Congress Session. I. Ch. 16. 1813 Chapter XVI. An Act for the assesment and collection of direct taxes and internal duties.(a)

Do take a look, it is indeed eye opening as to what JWK actually proposes in encouraging the adoption of "direct taxes":

Hylton v. United States(1796), 3 U.S. 171

"[T]he DIRECT TAXES contemplated by the Constitution, are only two, to wit, A CAPITATION OR POLL TAX, simply, without regard to property, profession, or any other circumstance; and a tax on LAND."

held to be a "fundamental error" by the "founders" and proponents of the Constitution:

Federalist #21:

The principle of regulating the contributions of the States to the common treasury by QUOTAS is another fundamental error in the Confederation. Its repugnancy to an adequate supply of the national exigencies has been already pointed out, and has sufficiently appeared from the trial which has been made of it. I speak of it now solely with a view to equality among the States. Those who have been accustomed to contemplate the circumstances which produce and constitute national wealth, must be satisfied that there is no common standard or barometer by which the degrees of it can be ascertained. Neither the value of lands, nor the numbers of the people, which have been successively proposed as the rule of State contributions, has any pretension to being a just representative.

JWK has stated:

The most fundamental rule of constitutional law, Ancient geezer, is to carry out the intent of the constitution as contemplated by those who framed it and the people who adopted it. In this case, the intent [indirect taxation to be the primary means to raise a federal revenue] was pretty much agreed to by the Founding Fathers
Now, what was the intent for permitting a direct tax?

Now JWK would have us believe the intent of permitting a "direct tax", (i.e tax on property and slaves) was expressed by those who ratified the document after it was authored. It is interesting that he has avoided the mention of the intents of direct taxation as a tax on property and slaves, and apportionment to assure additional representation to slave holders as a compromise measure to protect their interests, as expressed by the delegates to the convention that authored that document.

see reply #9 where we covered that thoroughly.

Furthermore in his attempt to justify these impositions on property, JWK goes further to partially quote:

Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Massachusetts:

“Fourthly, That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the Monies arising from the Impost & Excise are insufficient for the publick exigencies nor then until Congress shall have first made a requisition upon the States to assess levy & pay their respective proportions of such Requisition agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution; in such way & manner as the Legislature of the States shall think best, & in such case if any State shall neglect or refuse to pay its proportion pursuant to such requisition then Congress may assess & levy such State's proportion together with interest thereon at the rate of Six per cent per annum from the time of payment prescribed in such requisition”

Conveniently leaving out the predicate paragraph preceding this quotation, which identifies it as a recommended amendment to the new constitution, which upon inspection of the Constitution and amendments clearly was not accepted by the states, nor ratified, at any time.

Leaving the essential and original intent of the Constitution's author's and founders unchanged in this regard.

Further JWK quotes from:

Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York

" And that the Congress will not lay direct Taxes within this State, but when the Monies arising from the Impost and Excise shall be insufficient for the public Exigencies, nor then, until Congress shall first have made a Requisition upon this State to assess levy and pay the Amount of such Requisition made agreably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way and manner as the Legislature of this State shall judge best, but that in such case, if the State shall neglect or refuse to pay its proportion pursuant to such Requisition, then the Congress may assess and levy this States proportion together with Interest at the Rate of six per Centum per Annum from the time at which the same was required to be paid.

Leaving out the preceding portion of that paragraph

In full Confidence nevertheless that until a Convention shall be called and convened for proposing Amendments to the said Constitution, the Militia of this State will not be continued in Service out of this State for a longer term than six weeks without the Consent of the Legislature thereof;-that the Congress will not make or alter any Regulation in this State respecting the times places and manner of holding Elections for Senators or Representatives unless the Legislature of this State shall neglect or refuse to make Laws or regulations for the purpose, or from any circumstance be incapable of making the same, and that in those cases such power will only be exercised until the Legislature of this State shall make provision in the Premises;-that no Excise will be imposed on any Article of the Growth production or Manufacture of the United States, or any of them within this State, Ardent Spirits excepted; And that the Congress will not lay direct Taxes within this State, but when the Monies arising from the Impost and Excise shall be insufficient for the public Exigencies, nor then, until Congress shall first have made a Requisition upon this State to assess levy and pay the Amount of such Requisition made agreably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way and manner as the Legislature of this State shall judge best, but that in such case, if the State shall neglect or refuse to pay its proportion pursuant to such Requisition, then the Congress may assess and levy this States proportion together with Interest at the Rate of six per Centum per Annum from the time at which the same was required to be paid

As the state of New York was expressing its intent as regards what it's actions would be "until a Convention shall be called and convened for proposing Amendments"

It is to be noted further that there are no subsequent amendment to the Constitution implementing the so called intents expressed in the above paragraph by the state of New York in their ratification document.

The Constitution of the United States is the controlling document as written and expressly amended, not the expressions of intent of actions waiting for the Convention for amendments to be held, nor even the miscellaneous amendment proposals of the states in their ratifying documents.

"We the people of the United States, ..., do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Not a series of proposals merely proposed by states which were not actually ratified or included in the main body of the Constitution

JWK has also encouraged us to

"Also see the ratifications of S.C., N.H., VA, N.C., and R.I. For similar language concerning the direct tax. "

Let us do look at them. In fact let's look at all the State's ratification documents locating the proposals for amending the intents and treatement of taxation under the Constitution as written. Specifically looking to determine whether or not such language was subsequently adopted in amendment to the constitution to reflect those states desires in modifying the taxation elements of the basic Constitution.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratct.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Connecticut; January 8, 1788.

In the Name of the People of the State of Connecticut.
We the Delegates of the People of s^d State in general Convention assembled, pursuant to an Act of the Legislature in October last, Have assented to and ratified, and by these presents do assent to, ratify and adopt the Constitution, reported by the Convention of Delegates in Philadelphia, on the 17th day of September AD. 1787. for the United States of America.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratde.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Delaware; December 7, 1787.

"We the Deputies of the People of the Delaware State, in Convention met, having taken into our serious consideration the Federal Constitution proposed and agreed upon by the Deputies of the United States in a General Convention held at the City of Philadelphia on the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven, Have approved, assented to, ratified, and confirmed, and by these Presents, Do, in virtue of the Power and Authority to us given for that purpose, for and in behalf of ourselves and our Constituents, fully, freely, and entirely approve of, assent to, ratify, and confirm the said Constitution. "

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratga.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Georgia; January 2, 1788.

"In Convention; Wednesday, January the second, one thousand seven hundred and eighty eight:
To all to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting. "
***
"Now Know Ye, That We, the Delegates of the People of the State of Georgia in Convention met, pursuant to the Resolutions of the Legislature aforesaid, having taken into our serious consideration the said Constitution, Have assented to, ratified and adopted, and by these presents DO, in virtue of the powers and authority to Us given by the People of the said State for that purpose, for, and in behalf of ourselves and our Constituents, fully and entirely assent to, ratify and adopt the said Constitution."

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratme.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Maryland; April 28, 1788.

"In Convention of the Delegates of the People of the State of Maryland 28 April 1788.
We the Delegates of the people of the State of Maryland having fully considered the Constitution of the United States of America reported to Congress by the Convention of Deputies from the United States of America held in Philadelphia on the seventeenth Day of September in the Year Seventeen hundred and eighty seven of which the annexed is a Copy and submitted to us by a Resolution of the General Assembly of Maryland in November Session Seventeen hundred and eighty seven do for ourselves and in the Name and on the behalf of the People of this State assent to and ratify the said Constitution."

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratma.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Massachusetts; February 6, 1788.

"In Convention of the delegates of the People of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts February 6th 1788

The Convention have impartially discussed, & fully considered the Constitution for the United States of America, reported to Congress by the Convention of Delegates from the United States of America, & submitted to us by a resolution of the General Court of the said Commonwealth, passed the twenty fifth day of October last past, & acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Supreme Ruler of the Universe in affording the People of the United States in the course of his providence an opportunity deliberately & peaceably without fraud or surprize of entering into an explicit & solemn Compact with each other by assenting to & ratifying a New Constitution in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure Domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare & secure the blessings of Liberty to themselves & their posterity; Do in the name & in behalf of the People of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts assent to & ratify the said Constitution for the United States of America.

And as it is the opinion of this Convention that certain amendments & alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears & quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of this Commonwealth & more effectually guard against an undue administration of the Federal Government, The Convention do therefore recommend that the following alterations & provisions be introduced into the said Constitution. "
***
"Fourthly, That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the Monies arising from the Impost & Excise are insufficient for the publick exigencies nor ***"

An Opinion Expressed but no amendment or modification to the Constitution ratified or adopted regards this recommendation.
[Refer: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10) ]

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratnh.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New Hampshire; June 21, 1788.

"In Convention of the Delegates of the People of the State of New-Hampshire June the Twenty first 1788.
The Convention haveing Impartially discussed and fully considered the Constitution for the United States of America, reported to Congress by the Convention of Delegates from the United States of America & submitted to us by a Resolution of the General Court of said State passed the fourteenth Day of December last past and acknowledgeing with gratefull Hearts the goodness of the Supreme ruler of the Universe in affording the People of the United States in the Course of his Providence an Opportunity, deliberately & peaceably without fraud or surprize of entering into an Explicit and solemn compact with each other by assenting to & ratifying a new Constitution, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, Insure domestick Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to themselves & their Posterity-Do In the Name & behalf of the People of the State of New-Hampshire assent to & ratify the said Constitution for the United States of America. And as it is the Opinion of this Convention that certain amendments & alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears & quiet the apprehensions of many of the good People of this State & more Effectually guard against an undue Administration of the Federal Government- The Convention do therefore recommend that the following alterations & provisions be introduced into the said Constitution.- "
***
"Fourthly That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the money arising from Impost, Excise and their other resources are insufficient for the Publick Exigencies; ***"

An Opinion Expressed but no amendment or modification to the Constitution ratified or adopted regards this recommendation.
[Refer: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10) ]

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratnj.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New Jersey; December 18, 1787.

"In Convention of the State of New Jersey
***
"Now be it known that we the Delegates of the State of New-Jersey chosen by the People thereof for the purposes aforesaid having maturely deliberated on, and considered the aforesaid proposed Constitution, do hereby for and on the behalf of the People of the said State of New-Jersey agree to, ratify and confirm the same and every part thereof. "

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratny.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York; July 26, 1788.

WE the Delegates of the People of the State of New York, duly elected and Met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia in the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, Do declare and make known.
***
Under these impressions and declaring that the rights aforesaid cannot be abridged or violated, and that the Explanations aforesaid are consistent with the said Constitution, And in confidence that the Amendments which shall have been proposed to the said Constitution will receive an early and mature Consideration: We the said Delegates, in the Name and in the behalf of the People of the State of New York Do by these presents Assent to and Ratify the said Constitution. In full Confidence nevertheless that until a Convention shall be called and convened for proposing Amendments to the said Constitution, *** ; And that the Congress will not lay direct Taxes within this State, but when the Monies arising from the Impost and Excise shall be insufficient for the public Exigencies, nor then, until Congress shall first have made a Requisition ***"

Merely statement of what they will do until convention for amendment to be proposed but no amendment or modification to the Constitution ratified or adopted regards taxation proposal.
[Refer: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10) ]

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratnc.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of North Carolina; November 21, 1789.

"In Convention, August I, 1788.
Resolved, That a Declaration of Rights, asserting and securing from encroachment the great Principles of civil and religious Liberty, and the unalienable Rights of the People, together with Amendments to the most ambiguous and exceptional Parts of the said Constitution of Government, ought to be laid before Congress, and the Convention of the States that shall or may be called for the Purpose of Amending the said Constitution, for their consideration, previous to the Ratification of the Constitution aforesaid, on the part of the State of North Carolina.
***

AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

***

III. When Congress shall lay direct taxes or excises, they shall immediately inform the executive power of each state, of the quota of such State, according to the census herein directed, which is proposed to be thereby raised: And if the legislature of any state shall pass a law, which shall be effectual for raismg such quota at the time required by Congress, the taxes and excises laid by Congress shall not be collected in such state.
***

"IN CONVENTION Whereas The General Convention which met in Philadelphia in Pursuance of a recommendation of Congress, did recommend to the Citizens of the United States a Constitution or form of Government in the following words Vizt.

Resolved, that this Convention in behalf of the freemen, citizens and inhabitants of the State of North Carolina, do adopt and ratify the said Constitution and form of Government. Done in Convention this 21 day of November 1789"

An amendment proposed but no amendment or modification to the Constitution ratified or adopted regards this proposal.
[Refer: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10) ]

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratpa.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Pennsylvania; December 12, 1787.

"In the Name of the People of Pennsylvania
Be it Known unto all Men that We the Delegates of the People of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in general Convention assembled Have assented to, and ratified, and by these presents Do in the Name and by the authority of the Same People, and for ourselves, assent to, and ratify the foregoing Constitution for the United States of America. Done in Convention at Philadelphia the twelfth day of December in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the twelfth. In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names."

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratri.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Rhode Island; May 29, 1790.

Ratification of the Constitution, by the Convention of the State of Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations
We the Delegates of the People of the State of Rhode-Island, and Providence Plantations, duly elected and met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of this State, do declare and make known
***
We the said delegates, in the name, and in the behalf of the People, of the State of Rhode-Island and Providence-Plantations, do by these Presents, assent to, and ratify the said Constitution. In full confidence nevertheless, that until the amendments hereafter proposed and undermentioned shall be agreed to and ratified,
***
And the Convention, do in the name and behalf of the People of the State of Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, enjoin it upon their Senators and Representative or Representatives, which may be elected to represent this State in Congress, to exert all their influence, and use all reasonable means to obtain a ratification of the following Amendments to the said Constitution, in the manner prescribed therein, and in all laws to be passed by the Congress in the mean time, to conform to the spirit of the said amendments, as far as the constitution will admit.
***

AMENDMENTS

***
7th That no capitation or poll-tax shall ever be laid by Congress.
8th In cases of direct taxes, Congress shall first make requisitions on the several states to assess, levy and pay their respective proportions of such requisitions, in such way and manner, as the legislatures of the several states shall judge best; and in case any state shall neglect or refuse to pay its proportion pursuant to such requisition, then Congress may assess and levy such state's proportion, together with interest at the rate of six per cent. per annum, from the time prescribed in such requisition.
9th That Congress shall lay no direct taxes, without the consent of the legislatures of three fourths of the states in the Union.

Amendments proposed but no amendment or modification to the Constitution ratified or adopted regards these proposals.
[Refer: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10)

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratsc.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of South Carolina; May 23, 1788.

In Convention of the people of the state of South Carolina by their Representatives held in the city of Charleston on Monday the twelfth day of May and continued by divers Adjournments to friday the twenty third day of May Anno Domini One thousand seven hundred and eighty eight, and in the twelfth Year of the Independence of the United States of America.
The Convention having maturely considered the constitution or form of Government reported to Congress by the Convention of Delegates from the United states of America and submitted to them by a Resolution of the Legislature of this State passed the seventeenth and eighteenth days of February last in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure Domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare and secure the blessings of Liberty to the people of the said United States and their posterity DO in the name and behalf of the people of this State hereby assent to and ratify the said Constitution.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/ratva.htm
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of Virginia; June 26, 1788.

Virginia to wit
We the Delegates of the People of Virginia duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the General Assembly and now met in Convention having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention and being prepared as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us to decide thereon Do in the name and in behalf of the People of Virginia declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will: that therefore no right of any denomination can be cancelled abridged restrained or modified by the Congress by the Senate or House of Representatives acting in any Capacity by the President or any Department or Officer of the United States except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes: & that among other essential rights the liberty of Conscience and of the Press cannot be cancelled abridged restrained or modified by any authority of the United States. With these impressions with a solemn appeal to the Searcher of hearts for the purity of our intentions and under the conviction that whatsoever imperfections may exist in the Constitution ought rather to be examined in the mode prescribed therein than to bring the Union into danger by a delay with a hope of obtaining Amendments previous to the Ratification, We the said Delegates in the name and in behalf of the People of Virginia do by these presents assent to and ratify the Constitution recommended on the seventeenth day of September one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven by the Federal Convention for the Government of the United States hereby announcing to all those whom it may concern that the said Constitution is binding upon the said People according to an authentic Copy hereto annexed in the Words following; .

***
Subsequent Amendments agreed to in Convention as necessary to the proposed Constitution of Government for the United States, recommended to the consideration of the Congress which shall first assemble under the said Constitution to be acted upon according to the mode prescribed in the fifth article thereof:
***
and no aid, charge, tax or fee can be set, rated, or levied upon the people without their own consent,

An amendment proposed but no amendment or modification to the Constitution ratified or adopted regards this proposal.
[Refer: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1-10)

All should be careful to distinguish between mere wish lists of proposals never ratified by 3/4ths of the states legislatures, and true amendments binding the constitution and its interpretation.

At no point did ratification of the Constitution hinge upon the acceptance of the tax doctrine John W K has proposed.

JWK has stated:

Truth is, Ancient geezer, the truth cannot be changed to what it is not!

Indeed JWK, Indeed.

But then as I stated very early on, everything you are bringing up now, has already been debated and answered fully

Here:

FAIR TAX VS FOUNDERS' ORIGINAL PLAN [Free Republic]
9/4/2000 by John W K

So why do you waste our time and bandwidth in repeating rather than referencing your original vanity thread?

For all we are doing is rehashing the same debate posted in that thread, the meat of which you have chosen to ignore to continue on with your proposal to levy "direct taxes" (i.e. capitations and taxes on property.) in lieu of the current tax system we have which is apparently adequate in meeting the intent you hold up as being held by the founders.

"That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the Monies arising from the Impost & Excise are insufficient for the publick exigencies "

Since the tax on incomes specifically as it regards wages and salaries which were taxed in the income tax of Springer is of the class of an excise:

Springer v. United States(1880), 102 U.S. 586

"The central and controlling question in this case is whether the tax which was levied on the income, gains, and profits of the plaintiff in error, as set forth in the record, and by pretended virtue of the acts of Congress and parts of acts therein mentioned, is a direct tax."

"Our conclusions are, that direct taxes, within the meaning of the Constitution, are only capitation taxes, as expressed in that instrument, and taxes on real estate; and that the tax of which the plaintiff in error complains is within the category of an excise or duty."

"[W]henever the government has imposed a tax which it recognized as a direct tax, it has never been applied to any objects but real estate and slaves."

As recognized in Pollock

POLLOCK v. FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 158 U.S. 601 (1895):

"We have considered the act only in respect of the tax on income derived from real estate, and from invested personal property, and have not commented on so much of it as bears on gains or profits from business, privileges, or employments, in view of the instances in which taxation on business, privileges, or employments has assumed the guise of an excise tax and been sustained as such."

"If that[rents from land] be stricken out, and also the income from all invested personal property, bonds, stocks, investments of all kinds, it is obvious that by a r the largest part of the anticipated revenue would be eliminated, and this would leave the burden of the tax to be borne by professions, trades, employments, or vocations; and in that way what was intended as a tax on capital would remain, in substance, a tax on occupations and labor. We cannot believe that such was the intention of congress."

"We do not mean to say that an act laying by apportionment a direct tax on all real estate and personal property, or the income thereof, might not also lay excise taxes on business, privileges, employments, and vocations. "

Our conclusions may therefore be summed up as follows:
First. We adhere to the opinion already announced,-that, taxes on real estate being indisputably direct taxes, taxes on the rents or income of real estate are equally direct taxes.
Second. We are of opinion that taxes on personal property, or on the income of personal property, are likewise direct taxes.
Third. The tax imposed by sections 27 to 37, inclusive, of the act of 1894, so far as it falls on the income of real estate, and of personal property, being a direct tax, within the meaning of the constitution, and therefore unconstitutional and void, because not apportioned according to representation, all those sections, constituting one entire scheme of taxation, are necessarily invalid.
Mr. Justice WHITE, dissenting.

16. The injustice of the conclusion points to the error of adopting it. It takes invested wealth, and reads it into the constitution as a favored and protected class of property, which cannot be taxed without apportionment, while it leaves the occupation of the minister, the doctor, the professor, the lawyer, the inventor, the author, the merchant, the mechanic, and all other forms of industry upon which the prosperity of a people must depend, subject to taxation without that condition.

And the specific business tax on income as another element included within the more general term of "income: upheld in Flint as well, as JWK has provided for us.

Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.(1911), 220 U.S. 107

"This tax, it is expressly stated, is to be equivalent to 1 per centum of the entire net income over and above $5,000 received from all sources during the year, this is the measure of the tax explicitly adopted by the statute." *** In other words, the tax is imposed upon the doing of business of the character described, and the measure of the tax is to be income, with the deduction stated, received not only from property used in business, but from every source."

"The Pollock Case construed the tax there levied as direct, because it was imposed upon property simply because of its ownership."

"In the present case the tax is not payable unless there be a carrying on or doing of business in the designated capacity, and this is made the occasion for the tax, measured by the standard prescribed. The difference between the acts is not merely nominal, but rests upon substantial differences between the mere ownership of property and the actual doing of business in a certain way."

And similar taxes on income after the 16th amendment, were held to be excises taxes subject to the rule of uniformity as opposed to apportionment of property taxes:

BRUSHABER v. UNION PACIFIC R. CO., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)

"the conclusion reached in the Pollock Case did not in any degree involve holding that income taxes generically and necessarily came within the class [240 U.S. 1, 17] of direct taxes on property, but, on the contrary, recognized the fact that taxation on income was in its nature an excise entitled to be enforced as such"

Stratton's Independence, LTD. v. Howbert(1913), 231 U.S. 399:

"'[I]ncome' may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined, and here we have combined operations of capital and labor. As to the alleged inequality of operation between mining corporations and others, it is of course true that the revenues derived from the working of mines result to some extent in the exhaustion of the capital. But the same is true of the earnings of the human brain and hand when unaided by capital, yet such earnings are commonly dealt with in legislation as income."

Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.(1916), 240 U.S. 103:

"the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation subject to apportionment"

When wages and salaries obviously were expressly included in the Constitutional usage of income and upheld a taxable:

Lucas v. Earl(1930), 281 U.S. 111:

"The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,' 213(a). The provisions of the Revenue Act of 1921, c. 136, 42 Stat. 227, 233, 237, 238, in sections bearing the same numbers are similar to those of the above."

"There is no doubt that the statute could tax salaries to those who earned them "

Obviously even the criteria of levying a direct tax that JWK held out for us as supposedly the ruling intent of the founders in allowing property and capitations taxes (i.e. "direct taxes") is not met.

That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the Monies arising from the Impost & Excise are insufficient for the publick exigencies

Since obviously, the current tax system and its levies on income is "sufficient to publick exigencies", indeed far in excess of what would have been termed reasonable or of "exigency" in the time of the founders.

But then these points have be debated in JWK's earlier thread,

But then as I have pointed out, everything JWK is bringing up now, has already been debated and answered fully

Here:

FAIR TAX VS FOUNDERS' ORIGINAL PLAN [Free Republic]
9/4/2000 by John W K

To rehash old material, is especially vexing in this thread which is showing itself nothing more than a repeat of ground long covered.

I refer all to

FAIR TAX VS FOUNDERS' ORIGINAL PLAN [Free Republic]
9/4/2000 by John W K

for reference until such time a JWK comes up with something substantially new and not addressed in material of he the older thread.