Irwin Schiff B.S.

Friday, January 09, 2004

"Meaning of Income" Irwin Schiff is Wrong!

Many believe because of Irwin Schiff that in the Merchants Loan and Trust v. Smientanka 255 US 509 (1921)decision, the Supreme Court said "income" as used in the 16th Amendment means a "corporate profit". Why? Because Irwin Schiff says so that's why and "he's the Self-Proclaimed Nations leading authority on the income tax" Self-Proclaimed I mind you. He takes completely out of context what was actually said so it would say what he wanted it to say instead of what it actually really says.

The United States Supreme Court didn't say any such thing. What they said in Merchants Loan and Trust v. Smientanka is "the word income must be given the same meaning in all the Income Tax Acts of Congress that was given to it in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909". From that statement Irwin Schiff jumps to the illogical, ludicrous and ridiculous conclusion that since the Supreme Court said and included the word "corporation" in their statement/decision along with the word "income" that the word "income" can only be associated with "corporations" and "income" can only be profit received by "corporations".

The real actual name of the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909 referenced by the Supreme Court is the "Tariff of 1909" [36 Stat 11]. The Tariff was enacted August 5th 1909, which was "An Act to provide revenue, equalize duties and encourage the industries of the United States, and for other Purposes". The word Tariff means "Customs, duties, toll or tribute payable upon merchandise to the general government is called tariff; the rate of customs, &. also bears this name and the list of articles liable to duties is also called the tariff". [Bouvier's Law Dictionary].

Now read Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States of "America" to understand what Congress can regulate is. "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes".

Now read Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17 of the Constitution of the United States of "America" to understand what Congresses only Jurisdictional authority is. "To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And".

The meaning of "income" in its Constitutional Sense means "money" received from and through commerce. That is what the whole "Tariff Act of 1909" revolved around was duties and imposts on importing goods from and exporting goods to other countries and making money from without the U.S. from foreign countries and foreigners "resident and Nonresident aliens" and foreign corporations making money from within the United States. Go to a Law library and read the "Tariff Act" from the Statutes at large. [36 Stat 11]

The provisions for the taxing clauses in the Constitution such as apportionment and uniformity only apply when the Federal Government is trying to tax the States of the Union, which they are not doing in regards to the income tax. The apportionment and uniformity clauses do not apply to their territorial jurisdiction such as the District of Columbia (DC, United States - seat of Government), Guam, Puerto Rico, or any of its other territories.

For further proof of the Federal Government's jurisdiction authority go to the United States Department Of Justice's, United States Attorneys Manual, Title 9 Criminal Resource Manual and read the sections pertaining to Federal Jurisdiction:

Section 664: Territorial Jurisdiction
Section 665: Determining Federal Jurisdiction
Section 666: Proof of Territorial Jurisdiction

This is not complicated. If you argue that "Income" in its Constitutional Sense means only "corporate profit" you will be Wrong and you will lose every time as Irwin Schiff has done repeatedly. So it is evidently clear that Irwin Schiff has missed the point and he has many believing and doing the same.

Irwin Schiff Self-Proclaims himself to be the Nations leading authority on the "income tax". Does that make him so? NO! Schiff claims to have written and self-published more books on the "income tax" then any other author. This may be so. Does this make him an expert? NO! Does this mean his theories are sound and based on logic and solid evidence? NO! I am not a doctor nor have I ever gone to medical school. So if I proclaim to be the Nations leading authority on heart surgery does that make me so? NO! I can write 10 books on heart surgery. Does that make me an expert? NO! Would you want me operating on you? I bet the answer is NO!!!!!

You must never take some Self-Proclaimed Guru's word for anything. You must always look at the "Evidence" yourself for what it is, not for what you want it to be or some Guru says it is. You must always read Court decisions i.e. "case law" yourself for what they say and refer to, not for what you want them to say and mean or some Guru says they mean.