The Law: For federal income tax purposes, “gross income” means all income from whatever source derived and includes compensation for services. I.R.C. § 61. Any income, from whatever source, is presumed to be income under section 61, unless the taxpayer can establish that it is specifically exempted or excluded. The 16th Amendment, the income tax, has been the subject of many Supreme Court decisions. Generating income is a commercial activity. The Supreme Court ruled exactly that in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), where the Court stated the following: “The 16th Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted.”. The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of federal law and the Constitution. Their rulings are intended to carry the force of law, and set binding precedents for inferior courts. On May 21, 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a direct tax on personal income was unconstitutional as a result of the case of Pollock v. Farmers‘ Loan and Trust Company. The lawsuit had been precipitated by the 1894 Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision stated that a “direct tax” on the “income of real and of personal property” was “unconstitutional and void.” In Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955), the Supreme Court laid out what has become the modern understanding of what constitutes 'gross income' to which the Sixteenth Amendment applies, declaring that income taxes could be levied on "accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion." Under this definition, any increase in wealth — whether through wages, benefits, bonuses, sale of stock or other property at a profit, bets won, lucky finds, awards of punitive damages in a lawsuit, qui tam actions — are all within the definition of income, unless the Congress makes a specific exemption, as it has for items such as life insurance proceeds received by reason of the death of the insured party, gifts, bequests, devises and inheritances, and certain scholarships.
If you don't like the way Bushie is spending your money, there is supposedly a program in effect in the US whereby you can go through the programs, and pick and choose not ony WHERE your money goes, but how MUCH of the tax bite you have to pay goes to each program!
Incidentally, Freedom of the Press was NOT intended by "the Founding Fathers," nor was racial equality, nor was equality of the sexes.
MOST of what you would consider to be a given in the life of the average US citizen was NOT intended by the men who Founded the United States.
The entire point of the existence of the 16th amendment is that a federal income tax would have been unconstitutional, so in order to get one, the Constitution had to be amended. Because of this amendment, i.e., the federal income tax has been written into the Constitution, it is definitely not unconstitutional.
Amendment 16 to the U.S. Constitution 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." Income taxes are not unconstitutional since the Constitution specifically gives Congress the authority to collect income taxes as a means of revenue.
In 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. This was in response to taxes levied during the Civil War. To be a citizen of a country, one must contribute back to its welfare, so to ask citizens to pay taxes to their government is not an unreasonable request.