How can the income tax not be a gain from profit?
Edwards v. Keith, 231 F. 110 (2nd Cir. 1916). "The statute and the statute alone determines what
is income to be taxed. It taxes only income ‘derived’ from many different sources; one does not
‘derive income’ by rendering services and charging for them."
I have read this case from the Lexis Nexis database so it is in good standing.
Moreover:
Doyle v. Mitchell Brother, Co., 247 US 179 (1918). “We must reject in this case...the broad contention submitted in behalf of the Government that all receipts - everything that comes in - are income within the proper definition of the term 'gross income'..."
Slaughter House, 83 U.S. 36, at 127 (1873). "Property is everything which has an
exchangeable value, in the right of property includes the power to dispose of that
according to the will of the owner. Labor is property, and as such merits protection. The
right to make it available is next in importance to the rights of life and liberty. It lives to a
large extend the foundation of most other forms of property, and of all solid individual
and national prosperity."
Jack Cole Company v. Alfred T, MacFarland, Commissioner, 206 Tenn. 694, 337 S.W.2d 453 Sup. Court of Tennessee (1960). "Since the right to receive income or earnings is a right belonging to every persons, this right cannot be taxed as privilege."
Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. 240 U.S. 103; Stratton's Independence v. Howbert 231 U.S.
"Income, as defined by the Supreme Court means, 'gains and profits as a result of
corporate activity and profit gained through the sale or conversion of capital assets.'"
(Also see 399. Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co. 247 U.S. 179, Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S.
189, Evans v. Gore 253 U.S. 245, Merchants Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka 225 U.S.
509. (1921) Summers v. Earth Island Institute, No. 07-463 (U. S., March 3, 2009) (citing
Bender v. Williamsport Area School Dist., 475 U. S. 534, 541 (1986)).
How can these cases not be true?
Edwards v. Keith, 231 F. 110 (2nd Cir. 1916). "The statute and the statute alone determines what
is income to be taxed. It taxes only income ‘derived’ from many different sources; one does not
‘derive income’ by rendering services and charging for them."
I have read this case from the Lexis Nexis database so it is in good standing.
Moreover:
Doyle v. Mitchell Brother, Co., 247 US 179 (1918). “We must reject in this case...the broad contention submitted in behalf of the Government that all receipts - everything that comes in - are income within the proper definition of the term 'gross income'..."
Slaughter House, 83 U.S. 36, at 127 (1873). "Property is everything which has an
exchangeable value, in the right of property includes the power to dispose of that
according to the will of the owner. Labor is property, and as such merits protection. The
right to make it available is next in importance to the rights of life and liberty. It lives to a
large extend the foundation of most other forms of property, and of all solid individual
and national prosperity."
Jack Cole Company v. Alfred T, MacFarland, Commissioner, 206 Tenn. 694, 337 S.W.2d 453 Sup. Court of Tennessee (1960). "Since the right to receive income or earnings is a right belonging to every persons, this right cannot be taxed as privilege."
Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. 240 U.S. 103; Stratton's Independence v. Howbert 231 U.S.
"Income, as defined by the Supreme Court means, 'gains and profits as a result of
corporate activity and profit gained through the sale or conversion of capital assets.'"
(Also see 399. Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co. 247 U.S. 179, Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S.
189, Evans v. Gore 253 U.S. 245, Merchants Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka 225 U.S.
509. (1921) Summers v. Earth Island Institute, No. 07-463 (U. S., March 3, 2009) (citing
Bender v. Williamsport Area School Dist., 475 U. S. 534, 541 (1986)).
How can these cases not be true?
