“I would then mandate that the 16th amendment to the federal constitution be repealed. This amendment has done more harm than any other law on the books in my opinion. Before I go any further I wish to clarify that I have nothing against the taxation of income. If we recognize the need of a government then taxes are inevitable. In fact I’ll be on record as saying that taxes should be the only source of revenue for governments.
All taxes regardless of how they are described are taxes on income. And all income is a derivative of profits. Since governments cannot produce a profit then the only means for governments to get revenue must come from private enterprise. So, what is my problem?
My problem lies in the tax code itself. The federal government as well as the State governments have created a code that is so complicated that no one can say that they understand it. This be the one thing that everyone can agree on regardless of political ideology. And once you create laws that cannot be understood in their entirety you create a fertile ground for abuse of the system.
Another problem is enforceability of the law. If laws cannot be enforced as intended then injustice results. Even in the enforcement of these laws the whole idea of the meaning of justice in this nation is turned upside down. For these laws when enforced presumes guilt until innocence is proven. That is the whole purpose behind the idea of keeping financial records for a certain number of years, as proof of innocence. A person should not need to prove their innocence of any charge of illegal activity. It is the obligation of the State to prove a person guilty.
Most important reason of all is affordability. As the tax code is written now affordability is assumed without any real basis in fact other than a general assumption. Affordability can only be defined in terms relative to each person’s situation. It cannot be defined in terms of the collective average.
Persons with the same amount of income can have different levels of affordability. And the reason for this is that the cost of living is determined by the individual needs not by the needs of the collective. Another determinant of affordability is the locale in which a person resides. It is a known fact that in any country as large as the United States the cost of living is different for many locales.
Financial obligations are another factor in affordability. Persons of the same income level may have different obligations thus effecting their ability to afford the paying of any tax imposition. This creates a need to prioritize obligations. And I think everyone can agree that a person’s personal obligation to himself as well as to his family should be given priority over his obligation to the State.
This is not the case as the law now imposes a tax obligation upon the taxpayer. Payroll deduction of taxes declare that a taxpayer’s first obligation is to the State. I’ll grant the reason for payroll deduction of taxes but it does not change the end result of it as it giving priority to the State. And if we recognize that then we will recognize the need to change the system so that it gives priority to the taxpayer’s needs.
Last but not least of my reasons for the repeal of this amendment can be found in the first part of this series. It would force the federal government to collect taxes only as the federal constitution permits it to thus require that people view the constitution from a historical context of power divided and not from an ideological context of power authorized.
Now, these are but a few reasons that I have for this action. I could stand here all day and give reason after reason and I have no doubt that you could give a few yourself but this is the primary gist behind it.”