FreeMarketUnderBlog

Most people don’t know that the constitution allows no direct taxes “unless in Proportion to the Census”, that means by head count, or, in other words, the same amount for everyone. Check the wording of the 16^th Amendment. It specifically says “without regard to any census or enumeration”, this language being required to completely reverse the original language of the US Constitution. 

Clearly the founding fathers were not inclined to create an income tax, and it is doubtful any of them would feel differently today. This may sound shocking today, but would not have sounded so to anyone who lived prior to the creation of the 16^th Amendment in 1913. (This is also not to say that everyone suddenly became enlightened in 1913, realizing that an income tax was the equivalent of religious rapture. On the contrary, the income tax was almost certainly more bitterly disputed in 1913 than it is today.) 

The 16^th Amendment should be repealed, or drastically modified. Concerns that import and excise taxes would be insufficient to properly run the government are unfounded. If the government were engaged only in the behavior specifically authorized by the Constitution, those few taxes specifically granted to the federal government would be more than sufficient to operate it. 

Two other issues should be addressed here. First, there are some very good scholarly debates over the validity of the 16^th Amendment, first, regarding whether it was properly ratified, and, second, whether is actually says anything at all. Those issues are beyond the scope of this brief commentary, but much good information is available on this subject, including in Michael Badnarik’s very good book, It’s Good to Be King. 

Second, I often hear people wonder how we will fund various federal government programs without an income tax. Without opening that gigantic can of worms, the only current federal program that I can possibly think of that might justify federal involvement is that of primary and secondary education (i.e. grammar school and high school). Therefore, I would suggest that I could live with, say, a 3% income tax to fund a nationwide voucher system. The federal government’s role should be simply collecting the money and distributing vouchers, without dictating any terms or conditions of a proper or adequate education and without attaching any other strings, such as those bogus arguments by the US Supreme Court that vouchers can’t be used to pay for religious schools. 

Naturally, 99% of the verbiage in modifying this amendment should have to do with restraining the powers of the federal government. For instance, it should take another Amendment to deviate from the 3% tax. Also, the powers of the IRS should be limited, the tax codes simplified so a fifth grader could prepare a tax return in less than 90 seconds, income should be defined, loopholes eliminated, and so on. Perhaps most importantly, any income tax should not be progressive or graduated based on income, and there should be no exemptions whatsoever. In other words, someone making minimum wage will pay the same percentage of their income as will Bill Gates. This will end the ridiculous funding by the “haves” of the whims of the “have-nots” and make everyone realize that nothing is free.