No, it wasn't required to have the tax.
The ONLY thing the 16th did was remove the apportionment rule.
The Congress, in 1790, could have passed an income tax and sent it out to the States for Apportionment.
Now you want to tell me they couldn't have passed that tax at all?
My friend, please. Stop while you are behind. There never have been limitations on the ability of Congress to tax. The only question is how they collect the funds - either through apportionment or not.
The power to tax has never NEVER been questioned. Not even by the Supreme Court who has said, on a few occasions, "This needs to go out for Apportionment; as a direct tax it is unconstitutional."
The Supremes have NEVER said the Congress cannot tax. They have only said which method is used to collect the funds.
The Supremes have NEVER said the Congress cannot tax. They have only said which method is used to collect the funds
That is not a limitation?
That is why i asked you:
If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a horse have?
I don't give a damn what the lefty blogs are saying. They don't trust roberts for the same reason you are so adamant that he didn't betray you.