Misplaced Pages

Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:41, 24 October 2004 view sourceBeland (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators236,626 edits NPOV edit← Previous edit Revision as of 19:28, 27 October 2004 view source 170.29.1.10 (talk) External linksNext edit →
Line 21: Line 21:
* Supreme Court opinion on the apportionment clause of the Constitution. * Supreme Court opinion on the apportionment clause of the Constitution.
* no new power of taxation * no new power of taxation
* from whatever source derived
{{US Constitution}} {{US Constitution}}



] ]

Revision as of 19:28, 27 October 2004

Amendment XVI (the Sixteenth Amendment) of the United States Constitution, authorizing income taxes in their present form, was ratified on February 3, 1913. It states:

The Congress shall have 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.

Interpretation and history

The Income Tax Act of 1894 attempted to impose a federal tax of 2% on incomes over $4,000. Derided by its opponents as "communistic", it was challenged in federal court. In the case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895), the Supreme Court declared it to be an unconstitutional "direct tax", forbidden by Article I of the Constitution unless apportioned by population. Such apportionment was impractical for income taxes, since the rates would have to be set differently in different states depending on their population and total incomes. In response, this amendment was passed in order to make federal income taxes constitutional.

In Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., (1916), the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment created a narrow exception, into which only taxes on income from all sources could fit. All other taxes must still pass the "direct taxes must be apportioned" test of Article I. It also ruled that the Amendment was not retroactive.

Some Americans who object to income taxes claim that the Sixteenth Amendment was never properly ratified. The best-known proponent of this claim is Bill Benson, author of the book The Law That Never Was. In spite of the questionable ratification of the 16th amendment, the amendment was certified in 1913 making it part of the Constitution. Federal courts have rejected appeals based on these claims, and some now consider them "frivolous" claims that are subject to sanction.

A strong libertarian viewpoint proposes the existance of a "natural" right to enjoy all the fruits of one's own labor (previously protected, they claim, by the Ninth Amendment). Taxation is an infringement on that right, and this Amendment was a major expansion of the taxing power of the federal government.

External links

Constitution of the United States
Articles
Amendments
Bill of Rights
1795–1804
Reconstruction
20th century
Unratified
Proposed
Formation
Clauses
Interpretation
Signatories
Convention President
New Hampshire
Massachusetts
Connecticut
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Delaware
Maryland
Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Convention Secretary
Related
Display
and legacy
Categories: