Otto Skinner

[Pottapaug1938]

Maybe we're looking down the same pipe, just from different ends, and can't agree with what we see.
1] Are we agreed that rents and royalties from property must be apportioned according to census? (direct)
2] Are we agreed that the residue that sticks to our fingers from the flow of property through our hands as we pursue our businesses can be taxes uniformly, according to each privilege or occupation? (indirect)
3] Are we agreed that you are saying the 16th Amnd. allowed for a 3rd form of tax, neither direct nor indirect?
Just a simple yes or no for each would be appreciated for the moment.
Thanks, David

#1: no. That's income, and it needs no apportionment or consideration of source.

#2: I don't know what you're talking about, and perhaps neither do you; but if the "residue" fits the definition of income, then see #1 above.

#3: no. You are obsessed with the direct/indirect issue; but worrying about whether it's a direct or indirect tax is a waste of time. The 16th Amendment removed the apportionment and source requirements from the laws concerning taxation of income.

[Pottapaug1938]

AndyK, 1] please re-read Pollock, 158, that many, many, many later cases viewed favorably.
2]profit from a business, trade, profession, privilege, occupation, after expenses, after you have done that business, trade...
and 3] Wow, thanks, I thought we were looking at each other cross-eyed for a while.

Brushaber partially overruled Pollock, in that it removed the apportionment and source requirements from the laws regarding income taxation. The principle, in Pollock, that the government has always had the power to tax income, still survives.

You still have major problems with reading comprehension, David. You mine comforting quotes from court decisions; yet you seem unable to understand how to distinguish the HOLDING in a case from the DICTA, or explanations, which surround it.

[AndyK]

AndyK, 1] please re-read Pollock, 158, that many, many, many later cases viewed favorably.
2]profit from a business, trade, profession, privilege, occupation, after expenses, after you have done that business, trade...
and 3] Wow, thanks, I thought we were looking at each other cross-eyed for a while.

#2 INCOME "from a business, trade, profession, privilege, occupation" is income and taxable as such without regard to licenses or privilege. The concept of PROFIT is relatively artificial and only exists (within taxation) due to the grace of Congress which allows for the deduction (from gross income) of many of the costs of generating income.

[webhick]

Just an off topic question..
Who is messing with those things under my name displayed to the right?
And, what are their significance, what do they mean?
I hope to hear soon. Thanks.
David

They're the standard user ranks and are dependent on your post count. Your rank should change again at 50 posts (and 75, 100, 125, 150, 175, 200 and 250).

It doesn't mean anything, just a bit of whimsy.

[grixit]

Some of us carry special titles, which are also whimsical. You, for instance, could be the Rebel Without a Privilege.

[notorial dissent]

I'm rather partial to the clueless without a cause!!