Anyway, I got up a 4 this morning with this on my mind and thought I would check it out and, within an hour, became nearly numb with, well, confusion.

For one, the information I have read could do away with the atrocities committed by the IRS immediately and forever remove any power the organization believes it has over a citizen of the United States.

How to tackle this and keep it relatively simple. First, what does the Constitution state concerning the liability of citizens to pay income taxes?

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 of the Constitution, states: "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken." This made sense since we had fought a war to be freed of unfair, lack-of-representation taxation.

But, what of the 16th Amendment, the so-called “Income Tax” amendment? 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."

Did this authorize direct taxation on personal income by the government? That is the question.

Not according to the Supreme Court, it didn’t. In a 1916 case which has never been overturned, Stanton vs. Baltic Mining, the court ruled the 16th amendment never changed the above sections of Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

From the court’s ruling, "...the regulation of apportionment or the rule of uniformity is wholly negligible because the tax is one entirely beyond the scope of the taxing power of Congress," and -

"...by the previous ruling, it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of INDIRECT taxation to which it inherently belonged.." (emphasis added)

Did you catch that? NO NEW POWER OF TAXATION!!!

Now read these quotes. And, remember - we are not a democracy and never have been. We are a Constitutional Republic. As stated in the Declaration of Independence, People have God-given Rights. In order to prevent government from doing away with those rights, the Bill of Rights was incorporated into our Constitution as Articles.

"In questions of power, then, let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson

"Study the Constitution. Let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislatures, and enforced in courts of justice." - Abraham Lincoln

"I believe there are more instances of abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations..." - James Madison

"We the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." - Abraham Lincoln

From the site, Infoamerica, "They would have us believe the government can tax everyone they were originally prevented from taxing. This would mean all citizens were now made subjects of a sovereign government with unlimited powers. (my emphasis)The power to tax is the power to destroy."

So, why is it we all believe the federal government has the power to directly tax our personal incomes? The answer to that is quite simple. Thoughts such as the above quotes are ignored or forgotten. Plus, for 8 decades, citizens have been led and taught our personal incomes can be taxed directly because of the 16th Amendment (not Direct taxation as outlined in the US Constitution) in order to support the federal government.

But, is this the case? Absolutely not. Our forefathers designed as near a perfect system for fair support of the federal government as can be designed. In designing the system, our forefathers were far more cognizant of the rampant run-away power a few would have than we are today and the treachery of taxation without representation.

They were also cognizant of the fact that money and power are corruptive. George Washington warned that the people must forever and constantly be vigilant over the members of Congress. But his warning has not been heeded.

So, how is the federal government to be financed by a fair representation of the populations of the states forming a union, a Republic we call the United States of America? And, what controls would the people of the Union have over spending by Congress? Those are the questions I am going to answer as simply as possible.

There are only three clauses we have to be concerned with. Those are: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, and Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4.

First, let's consider how the day-to-day costs of a centralized government are taken care of. This is covered under A1S8C1 and has been termed Indirect Taxation by the Supreme Court.

Items have duties, imposts, and excises put on them, taxes that must be done equally across the states regardless of representation in Congress. These taxes cover the day-to-day costs of operating the government.

Think about it. Let's say there is an impost or duty placed on potatoes. A lower populated state would naturally buy less than a heavily populated state and so the tax remains essentially proportioned.

Thus, the more heavily populated state would be providing more support to the government but, for the individual, the share would remain essentially the same regardless of which state he lived in. In other words, a person in Missouri would pay no more or less in taxes for a pound of potatoes than a person in New York. Fair and equitable.

But what if Congress overspends? If the event this happens (and it always does), Direct taxes are supposed to be applied. However, Direct taxes are not laid on the individual but on the states. Furthermore, it must be proportionate to the census or representation in Congress. Remember once again, this is not a tax placed on domestic personal income of a citizen.

Let's assume Congress overspends what is brought in by A1S8C1 by (Don't laugh at the small amount of overspending - I wanted the math to be easy) $435,000,000. Missouri, my home state, has 9 representatives. Therefore, Missouri would have the responsibility for 9/435th of the $435,000,000 or $9,000,000 to be collected through provisions in Missouri law.

To review the provisions in the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 states: "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

Our forefathers meant through this clause that no direct income tax could be laid on a citizen of the nation. Taxes on individual citizens can only be demanded through indirect means such as property, impost, duties or excise taxes. We also know of other indirect taxes such as sales taxes, city taxes, road taxes, and so on. None of these require being proportioned to the number of representatives in the House.

Indirect Taxation is quite fair. The more income a person has, the more goods he can buy (his fair share in sales taxes and other imposed taxes), the more property he can obtain, which also is fairly obtained through city taxes (increases in property owned, road taxes (the more vehicles registered, the more road taxes are paid), and so on.

To reiterate, the Constitution prohibits a citizen of this nation from having his personal income taxed directly; he may be subjected only to Indirect Taxation (through taxes called imposts, duties and excises). Remember, states can be directly taxed, not individual citizens.

All right - what did the 16th Amendment do? Well, really nothing except support the Constitution as written in a sense. The following quote comes from Mr. Ed Akehurst of Inform America, an individual who earned my respect and appreciation by aiding me in understanding our tax system.

"It is the same with the Sixteenth Amendment. The tax on incomes must be without apportionment and without regard to any census or enumeration. Since the original taxing clauses still stand, and Direct taxes must still be apportioned according to the census, then it follows that the Income Tax must be an Indirect tax. That means it must be an impost, duty, or excise tax, and it must be uniform throughout the States.

That is exactly what the supreme Court held in the Stanton case. Congress has never been prohibited from taxing income, only from taxing income directly. The Sixteenth Amendment did nothing to change this. It simply "clarified it" (Yeah, right)."

In other words, if you only have two choices, any decision made must be one of the two choices. The 16th stated "without apportionment"; therefore, logic dictates it must be an Indirect tax on citizens since the other choice, Direct (remember on states only, not individuals) must be done with apportionment.

Thus, the 16th Amendment merely supported Article I's provisions and nothing more. From the Supreme Court's decision in the Stanton Vs. Baltic Mining Case, "...no new [government] power of taxation".

What this all boils down to is no American citizen has to pay taxes on his personal income. You do not have to fill out a W-4 as it is for aliens earning an income in the United States or territories.

No employer has the right to withhold taxes. Specifically, IRS Publication 515 prohibits any employer from withholding taxes on any citizen's income.

If a person voluntarily fills out a W-4, then taxes will be withheld even though against the Constituion's provisions since one has, in a sense, volunteered to do so by giving the firm his social security number and allowed the IRS to believe the citizen is an alien earning an income in this country.

At least this appears to be its defense in case it is brought to task by knowledgeable people.

Only one form allows the IRS to demand taxes on personal income of citizens, Form 2555. And it is to cover income derived from business interests held in foreign countries.

All other IRS forms are applicable only to aliens earning an income in the US and designated territories since the IRS knows it may not demand or lay personal income taxes on citizens of this nation.

And, to answer the second question before I close this out - what control do we have? It is much easier to see who is responsible, for example, a bill for an additional property tax to cover Direct taxation in the event of federal overspending.

We in Missouri would just have to direct our anger at 9 people and either get satisfactory answers or oust them the next election.

Furthermore, in the case of Indirect Taxation, we can simply choose to not buy products that have high duties, imposts, or excises placed on them.

Check this out for yourself. Don't take my word for any of it. It will be well-worth the time and effort.

And, Ladies and Gentlemen, you will find as I did that our forefathers had a perfectly fair, very simple means of providing money to our centralized government.

Special Addendum: It seems as one read the intro to this that I understood this in a few hours. Not so. It took hours upon hours of concentrated effort spread over several weeks, along with the help of a couple of experts, including the afore mentioned Mr. Akehurst, for me to understand taxation and the constitutionality of it.

What was most difficult was to get over nearly five decades of beliefs I had been mistakenly taught by people who did not know what they were talking about because they had been taught by people who did not know what they were talking about and so on.

If you remember nothing else, remember this.

The IRS has no power whatsoever to force personal income taxes on you. You have the US Constitution and the United States Supreme Court protecting you while the IRS legally has nothing but, instead, relies on fear.