U.S. TAX CODE STIFLES ECONOMY AND LIBERTY …
By Nathan Mehrens || America marked a dubious milestone in its history last year – the 100th anniversary of federal taxes levied “on incomes, from whatever source derived.” Ensconced in the Sixteenth Amendment, the federal tax code totaled 400 pages when the income tax first took effect in 1913. Today this tax code is a staggering 74,608 pages long – and is administered by a bureaucracy of 90,000 employees at a cost of more than $11 billion annually.
According to the latest data from the Tax Foundation, Americans will shell out $3 trillion in federal taxes this year – and another $1.5 trillion in state levies. That’s $4.5 trillion — a whopping 30.2 percent of income.
Lurking within the code’s monstrous size, myriad complexity and astronomical cost are any number of pernicious evils. And that’s before we take into account the political persecution perpetrated by President Barack Obama’s Internal Revenue Service (or the ensuing cover-up and ongoing failure of the Justice Department to prosecute these abuses).
The IRS targeted administration critics in an apparent effort to silence them leading up to the 2012 election – yet the president recently claimed there was “not even a smidgen of corruption” associated with this effort.
Does anyone really believe that?
Even if it were administered ethically and uniformly, the tax code’s complexity is a boon for well-connected special interests that use that complexity to benefit their constituents.
Also, the rules are constantly changing. Within the last ten years alone, tax professionals at CCH estimate there have been more than 5,000 revisions to the code – compounding the unreasonableness and unfairness of the existing system.
(To continue reading this piece, originally published by Fox News, press the “Read More …” icon below).
Nathan Mehrens is president of Americans for Limited Government.
“Does anyone really believe that?”, yes but they are progressive.
Mehrens and ALG are just angry that the IRS would investigate one piece of the system the rich have set up to buy politicians. The IRS needs to fall in line with SCOTUS and help ensure a “free market” Congress of sorts. Votes go to the highest bidders!
I didn’t realize “Votes go to the highest bidders!” just started recently.
Mega-wealthy robber barons ran the county for their personal benefit during the second half of the 19th century, and the lifestyle of the average American was miserable. It took decades of trust busting and campaign finance laws to break their strangle hold on power, beginning with the efforts of Teddy Roosevelt. The SCOTUS has wiped much of that work away in two decisions.
It is no coincidences that in the years following the great depression through the 1970s the lifestyle of the average American soared. The power of the robber barons waned and democracy and prosperity expanded, as government focused on the needs of a majority of Americans and not the needs of the rich and powerful. That reached its zenith in the late seventies and early eighties. By the middle of that decade the robber barons began to reassert their power. Those efforts have brought us were we are today. We are now in real danger of returning to a 19th century power structure. With that will come hard times for most of us as people like the Koch Brothers, Howard Rich, and Sheldon Adelson use their money to increase their wealth and power at the expense of everyone else. Unfortunately they are winning right now.
If money is speech those without money are mute and those with little money are just a whisper among the screams.
I noticed you omitted those on the left.
I am not aware of anyone on the left who is trying to push for legislation that is designed to decreases the taxes on the wealthiest Americans and pay for it by increasing taxes on the average American, and cutting the benefits of the average American. I am not aware of anyone on the left who is proposing a unfair “consumption tax.” I am not aware of anyone on the left who is trying to gut campaign finance laws. If you identify them and I agree they are trying to increase the power and wealthy at the expense of everyone else I will call them out.
OK Tom if you say there is no money from the left in politics I will believe you.
Did I say there was no money in politics from the left? Please point that out to me. When money is pouring in from people who are trying to change this nations from a democracy to a plutocracy, of course there will be a reaction from those who oppose that change. Its just highly unlikely that in a vote to the highest bidder system those opposed to plutocracy will win. Goals are important.
If we had strong campaign finance laws, strong ethics laws, and strong anti-corruption laws, those laws would reduce the influence of money no matter what side it was from. But this is power struggle; and you, me, your descendants, and my descendants are losing.
Money is not speech and corporations are not people.
Tom, I responded to your “Mega-wealthy robber barons” comment, you didn’t say anything about money from the left.
I don’t know what you want me to say. So long as money from the left is fighting to reduce the influence of money in politics the more the better. But the wealthiest 5% of Americans now control over 70% of the assets of this country. So even if the other 95% of us all band together we cannot out bid them. So if money is speech we have lost. If you point will point out someone from the left who supports legislation that increases the influence of money in politics I will be happy to call them out.
So money from the left is good and money from the right is bad.
If only money from the left was used to “reduce the influence of money in politics” but it isn’t.
I remember a presidential candidate say he would only take public funds but then that didn’t happen did it.
I did not say that. Please reread my response. I said money fighting to reduce the influence of money in government is good not matter what the source. At this point all the other issues money goes to support or oppose is a intentional distraction from the power struggle. If we reduce the influence of money in government its is good for the average American. If we increase the influence of money in government it is good for the mega-wealthy.
I think we should eliminate money in government from all outside entities except the voting populace. No 501s period, no lobbyist, no PACs left or right, I’ll even let you pick the amount each voter can donate after they get a photo ID voter registration card.
If we reduce the influence of government in the lives of average Americans, that is good for the average American. Are you in favor of money fighting to reduce the influence of government in people’s lives? No matter what the source?
No I cannot draw that conclusion. For most of the last century Government has bettered the lives of a majority of Americans.
Saying you are for less government means nothing. You must say what you are for Government doing less of. Its a cop out to say I am for less government, when in fact you are only for government doing less of things you do not personally want them to do or you do not feel benefit you. I find most people who say they are for less government really do not know what they are talking about. They are just repeating right wing talking points put out by Rush, Beck and Fox. They cannot be specific as to what they mean by less government.
I am for government that works best for the average American.
Lake Wobegon would be on their own since all of their children are above average. :)
How about George Soros for starters ? The most evil human being on the planet.
Tell me about George Soros. What legislation has he supported that would make money more influential in government. What legislation has he supported that makes him richer. Was he in favor of the Supreme Court ruling that people should be allow to give unlimited money to politicians? What exactly makes him evil and the Koch brothers not evil?
It hasn’t been that long.
Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct. ~Thomas Jefferson
“…in his heart” ~ Euwe Max.
Exactly, ignore the man behind the curtain.
The left is trying hard to get big money to take stuff away from the poor by fraud… they’re pretty slick about how they’re doing it too… they get the rich to make the poor dependent on them, so they have to support them forever… somehow that makes the left richer.. I’ll have that part worked out soon… and I’ll write a paper on it…..
If the Cock brothers are reading this, I’ll need a per diem to finish my treatise
It’s pretty funny to see someone arguing that the theft perpetrated by the IRS(and government in general) is being done ‘unfairly’.
“No, no sir, I do not wish to be robbed with a gun, I prefer a knife! Here, let me give you mine.”
“U.S. Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) introduced legislation to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment – which he hopes to replace in part with some form of consumption-based tax.
‘Viable alternative plans for raising revenue fairly to support constitutionally enumerated functions of the federal government have been proposed,’ Rep. Bridenstine said.”
Of course Republicans want a consumption based tax, because their donors will use their political power to make sure such a tax does not apply to the things important to them. In order for a sales type tax to be fair to everyone, it has to apply to everything. Including the sale of services, stocks and bonds, real estate, residences, investments, etc. But every “fair tax” proposal or consumption based proposal it always based on consumer goods. Food, clothing, drugs, automobiles, etc. In other words the goal is to enable the wealthier people, who spend a much smaller percentage of their wealth on consumer goods than the average person, to reduce their share of taxes at the cost of everyone else. You just saw this exact scenario play out in North Carolina.
If we want a really fair consumption tax, then the next time the Koch Brothers buy a billion dollars worth of stock, tell them they owe the government $100,000,000 in sales tax.
The next time you buy a house for $250,000 pay the government $25,000 in sales tax.
The next time the Kochs pay their lobbyist $100,000,000 to by congressmen, kick in an extra 10 million for sales tax.
If we cover sales of everything, including services, stocks, bonds, investments, corporate acquisitions, real estate, etc. Then we will be approaching a true consumption tax that may be fair.
BUT WE KNOW FAIRNESS IS NOT REALLY THE PLAN!
Does the irony of trying to use a government that is controlled by rich people to “equalize” the gap between rich and poor ever occur to you, or have you remained ignorant willfully?
Well that was a dumb ass statement. Obviously you cannot read or you just don’t know what you are talking about.
Yes, abolish the IRS and let the chips fall where they may. Anarchy.
IRS, Established 1953
Everything before 1953=Anarchy
Brief History of IRS
The roots of IRS go back to the Civil War when President Lincoln and Congress, in 1862, created the position of commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacted an income tax to pay war expenses. The income tax was repealed 10 years later. Congress revived the income tax in 1894, but the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional the following year.
In 1913, Wyoming ratified the 16th Amendment, providing the three-quarter majority of states necessary to amend the Constitution. The 16th Amendment gave Congress the authority to enact an income tax. That same year, the first Form 1040 appeared after Congress levied a 1 percent tax on net personal incomes above $3,000 with a 6 percent surtax on incomes of more than $500,000.
In 1918, during World War I, the top rate of the income tax rose to 77 percent to help finance the war effort. It dropped sharply in the post-war years, down to 24 percent in 1929, and rose again during the Depression. During World War II, Congress introduced payroll withholding and quarterly tax payments.
1913 Form 1040 (PDF 126KB, 4 pages, including instructions)
A New Name
In the 50s, the agency was reorganized to replace a patronage system with career, professional employees. The Bureau of Internal Revenue name was changed to the Internal Revenue Service. Only the IRS commissioner and chief counsel are selected by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Today’s IRS Organization
Here’s a news flash:
Most everyone under 70 knows how to use google and wikipedia.
Aside from that, let’s assume for a moment you meant the ‘old’ name then(next time, just type that!):
Everything before 1913=Anarchy
You love being ignorant. Bless your heart.
Because it wasn’t the ‘IRS’ back then you dumb bitch.
Look, asshat, you made a mistake, own it and stfu.
I think I could have more meaningful dialogue with rocks than you.
Yet you are here, dumbass.
I would that you all spoke with tongues, but rather that you prophesied: for greater is he that prophesies than he that speaks with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
Oh, great. Another Libertarian stuck in what he thinks the 18th century America was like. Can’t tell the difference in a country of 2.5 million in 1790 vs. a country of 315 million today. Doesn’t it occur to you guys that things have to run differently in a country that goes from sea to shining sea as opposed to one that hugged a part of the Atlantic coast?
Or, are you guys are pining for 50 little countries + territories doing their own things with the rest of the world? And, you complain about a weak president now?
Would you consider taking Puerto Rico or Guam to do your own thing? I bet most of those populations might we willing to switch places with you? Permanently.
Gross silliness,but very entertaining,particularly for some of the nuts who visit here daily.