Sorry, but I don’t agree with your analysis. First, property tax is charged on the ENTIRE VALUE of the home as claimed by the county assessor. Not on the increase in value. Furthermore, it has always been held that the increase in value of a home is capital gains. And capital gains are not taxed until the property is sold. And provisions were made for exemption from capital gains tax one time for downsizing your home.
The text is as follows:
“ARTICLE XVI. The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
CONGRESS. It doesn’t grant authority to states or local government to lay and collect taxes of any kind. That issue is IRRELEVANT.
Don’t go off on a tangent. The 16th Amendment has nothing to do with property tax. Period.
The Court has defined a capitation tax is a direct tax that is levied equally on each person, regardless of their income or wealth. It is also known as a head tax or poll tax.
The Supreme Court further explained that direct taxes are capitation taxes, real estate taxes, and personal property taxes. While income taxes are also direct taxes under "Pollock, adoption of the Sixteenth Amendment. Amendment 16 permits the federal government to tax income.
This makes it clear as far as the Supreme Court is concerned post Amendment 16. The Federal Government can tax Income, Real Estate and Personal Property. The Supreme Court defines these taxes as Direct Taxes. Because the Supreme Court determined Amendment 16 allowed Income tax. Income tax is defined as a Direct Tax. Removing Amendment 16 would make Direct Tax unconstitutional. The Supreme Court states that direct taxes are capitation taxes, real estate taxes, and personal property taxes. This being the case none of these taxes would be constitutional without permissions granted by Amendment 16. Repeal of Amendment is necessary to end these taxes.
Thank you for your input, Fred Walker
You’ve got it backwards. SCOTUS defined various taxes in 1895. The 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913. SCOTUS did not apply the 1895 ruling to the 16th Amendment. The 16th Amendment only gave CONGRESS the power to tax INCOME. Property is not income. The federal government does not tax property. The 16th Amendment granted NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER to EITHER state or local governments to levy ANY KIND OF TAX. It strictly said CONGRESS can levy taxes on INCOMES.
You are arguing like a typical pro se litigant. I have known a number of them. They always argue the law the way they WANT it to be, not the way it is. And consistently lose in court over those issues. I only lost in court once, and it had nothing to do with government, and it was a huge abuse of power by the judge and I had 30 appealable issues. In this case, you want the repeal of the 16th Amendment to end property tax. It won’t, because the Amendment has nothing to do with Property Tax. As one person put it, people often ask the wrong question of SCOTUS and get the right answer to the wrong question. You are asking the wrong question.
Interesting you can’t see Constitutional applications across both Federal and State Law. Amendment 1 is a example. The U.S. Constitution applies to Government Federal and State unless one or the other is specifically exempted in the Article. Amendment 16 is no different in application. The Court has defined Real Estate, Property, Income, Capitation Taxes as Direct Taxation. We will have to agree to disagree. I will continue to work toward Repeal of Amendment 16 and Direct Taxation. Have a Blessed Day & a Merry Christmas, Fred Walker
I can’t see WHAT IS NOT THERE. They are not the same. Amendment 16 SPECIFIES CONGRESS. It SPECIFIES INCOME TAX. The mere fact that SCOTUS PRIOR to the amendment defined different taxes as direct taxes does not change or enlarge what Amendment 16 permits. If you are working for the repeal of Amendment 16, more power to you, but it’s not relevant to property tax, and to pursue that repeal is a diversion from getting rid of property tax. I am more interested in getting rid of property tax because there is no test for ability to pay. Income tax IS based on ability to pay. And property tax hits everyone, even those without any money and nothing but a home. Income tax only hits those who make income and have the liquidity to pay. In the land patent laws, the legislative history shows that the Homestead Act (on which most land patents underlying homes are based) was contemplated as a means for people to be able to afford to pay EXCISE tax, because they would make the land productive. Without productive land, there was no path to the ability to pay excise tax, and there would be no tax on that land, just as there is no tax on productive land itself, only on what it produces. That is why Rehnquist wrote in the 8-0 opinion in Summa Corp that there is no authority to impose any feudal duties on patented land. The door wasn’t left open for property tax. Consequently, your fight is not my fight.
You are intruding your irrelevant fight into someone else’s proposal. Why are you in this discussion?
I’m trying to understand. Question, if this definition is correct, “The Supreme Court further explained that direct taxes are capitation taxes, real estate taxes, and personal property taxes.”. And according to record it is, it would seem if Amendment 16 allowing direct taxation is Repealed all classes of taxation defined as " Direct Taxation" would become illegal as they were before 1913 and Amendment 16?
I’m having trouble understanding how you would end Property Taxation Nation wide with out an Amendment to Our Constitution. We need to end this tyranny. Merry Christmas Fred Walker
I’m trying to understand your lack of understanding! I’ll try an analogy. Suppose your mother says, red fruit, yellow fruit, and blue fruit are all fruit, but you may eat none of them, on Monday. On Tuesday, she says, you may eat blue fruit. Does she give you permission to eat red and yellow fruit? No. Now suppose you eat red fruit anyway. You didn’t do that with her permission. On Wednesday, she says, you may no longer eat blue fruit. Did she tell you that yesterday it was OK to eat red fruit, but now it is not OK? Of course not! She never gave you permission to eat red fruit even though she said you can eat blue fruit.
The 16th Amendment did not give any government the legal right to impose property tax. The repeal of it won’t end property tax.
Yes, we need to end the tyranny of property tax. But we won’t do it with the repeal of the 16th Amendment. We will do it by asserting the federal laws known as land patents. One case brought before SCOTUS by someone competent who asks the right question could end property tax nationwide. We already have analogous SCOTUS decisions against certain kinds of feudal duty. This is another feudal duty. The SCOTUS decisions I cited said if the authority to impose the feudal duty was NOT ASSERTED IN THE PATENT PROCEEDINGS, IT DOES NOT EXIST. The right to tax property was never asserted in the patent proceedings for any land patent. It is a feudal duty. Even if it had been asserted in the patent proceedings of one land patent, that would not make it legal to assert it in any patent where it was not asserted during proceedings. It would only apply to that one patent, since EACH PATENT is a SEPARATE LAW passed by Congress and signed by the President. So the proper way to end property tax is through asserting FEDERAL LAW, namely the land patents.
Have I finally explained it so it makes sense to you?
Sorry to intervening here but have you watched the video I posted before ? the gentleman in the video explains a certain way to do this “property tax” course correction.
Thanks, you are not intervening you are doing what this sight is designed to do.
I will watch but I’m pretty much committed to using Article V and the Amendment Process. That is the only solution that can’t be undone by a following Administration, Congress, States, Counties or Cities. They would have to send a call for an Amendment change and send it to We the People. Hopefully We will not again make the mistake of giving Government a blank Check as far as taxation is concerned. The Constitution is the Law.
I hope this helps explain why I prefer the Amendment Process. I have been working on an updated Amendment Proposal that I believe leaves no stone uncovered as far as taxation changes are concerned. Keep watching. Thanks and Have a Very Merry Christmas, Fred Walker
Thanks, I hope we are successful in correcting the issue.
My take on taxation and I’ll be talking worldwide because it happens in all countries, is that govs can survive very well with just import tariffs and that works perfectly when there is manufacturing in every country in the world. When so, products are exported and imported so the tariffs apply, yes makes things a bit more expensive to buy but the truth is that when zero tax we all have more $ that we keep so I think that at the end is actually cheaper to buy anything.
The problem I see as to why this system has gone so far for tens of years is because everyone is conditioned into giving away funds when there is an income or a sale so yes we’re kinda of trapped in the vicious cycle, especially that i.e. in the US is little manufacturing and even in Europe because all is sent to mostly China. And that is a big issue. Merry Christmas