FAQ: Since the Sixteenth Amendment begins with “The Congress”, does that mean that all taxes levied in Title 26 originate from the Sixteenth Amendment?

QUESTION:

The language in 16A seems pretty broad. And there also seems to be multiple taxing methods in Title 26. Do you suppose that since the first two words of 16A is “The Congress,” that any and all taxes levied in Title 26 could be ARGUED to fall under 16A?

If not, why not? For example, a federal fuel excise tax…..

ANSWER:

There were taxes before the Sixteenth Amendment, and they are all excise taxes under Articles 1:8:1 and 1:8:3 of the Constitution, and those too are codified in 26 U.S.C. and inherited from the Statutes at Large originally, the Revised Statutes after that, etc. That’s an unreasonable presumption.

Title 26 wasn’t even codified until 1925. If the Sixteenth Amendment didn’t even come along until 1913 and conferred no new taxing powers in Stanton v. Baltic Mining, then NOTHING effectively originates in Sixteenth Amendment and everything goes back to 1:8:1 and 1:8:3, at least insofar as states are concerned. The only thing that changed with 16A was to ADD personal property to the definition of property for the purposes of direct taxes.

Internal taxes are ALWAYS direct taxes on states and not people in them. Taxation of territories are not limited by the Constitution per the Insular Cases. Anything goes in territories and possessions or among those who consent or make any elections whatsoever. But if its foreign commerce, Constitution 1:8:1 and 1:8:3 limit.

In the case of the Sixteenth Amendment even, EVERYTHING subject to excise taxation is ALWAYS USPI (public property) originating from the national government in the form of a privilege, benefit, or civil status. If there is no consideration provided by the national government in this form, there can be:

1. No “quasi-contract”.
2. No equitable obligation on your part.
3. No power to tax.
4. No enforcement authority.

The above are IN FACT, the reason it’s called a “return”: They have to GIVE you something before they can ask you to “return” a portion of it as a kickback. Here’s the proof:

“As was said in Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co., 311 U.S. 435, 444 (1940), “[t]he simple but controlling question is whether the state has given anything for which it can ask return.”

[Colonial Pipeline Co v Traigle, 421 U.S. 100, 109 (1975);
SOURCE:https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16559630216409245512]