Is there a law that requires you to pay the income tax?

I was watching a video that says there isn't. If so where?
Also how did the income tax come to be? did it get enough state support to actuallly be law?
Additional Details
dont worry people..just a youtube video ;) wasn't going to stop paying taxes..

however, nobody has shown me the vote that should have happened that would add the tax. that's mostly what i'm interested. and by nature we should be skeptic about our governement..after all we are their employers.

The income tax laws are codified as Title 26 of the U.S. Code. You can read it at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/ or at http://uscode.house.gov/download/title_26.shtml

For the actual laws passed by Congress, you have to go to the U.S. Statutes at Large. For the most part, these are not available online. However, you can read them at most Federal Depository Libraries or most law libraries. You can find a FDL in your state at http://catalog.gpo.gov/fdlpdir/public.jsp

The current tax laws get their basic structure from the Internal Revenue Act of 1954 and the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The tax laws have been amended several times since 1986. You can read the 1954 act in Volume 68A beginning on page 3 of the U.S. Statutes at Large. You can read the 1986 act in Volume 100 beginning on page 2085. The 1986 act passed the House on 9/25/1986 by Yea-Nay Vote: 292 - 136 (Record Vote No: 413). It passed the Senate on 9/27/1986 by Yea-Nay Vote. 74-23. Record Vote No: 296.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d099:1:./temp/~bd9MjI:@@@L&summ2=m&

Re: 16th amendment
Tax protesters and some Internet conspiracy theory videos claim that the 16th amendment was not properly ratified. They are wrong. Most of them refer to a book by Bill Benson. Bill Benson claims he researched his book for a year. It took me all of five minutes to find that he misinterpreted the Tennessee State Constitution. Additionally, courts who have ever considered the issue officially have always said the 16th amendment was properly ratified. Here is a court case that dispels the argument.

“Thomas is a tax protester, and one of his arguments is that he did not need to file tax returns because the sixteenth amendment is not part of the constitution. It was not properly ratified, Thomas insists, repeating the argument of W. Benson & M. Beckman, The Law That Never Was (1985). Benson and Beckman review the documents concerning the states’ ratification of the sixteenth amendment and conclude that only four states ratified the sixteenth amendment; they insist that the official promulgation of that amendment by Secretary of State Knox in 1913 is therefore void.

“Benson and Beckman did not discover anything; they rediscovered something that Secretary Knox considered in 1913. Thirty-eight states ratified the sixteenth amendment, and thirty-seven sent formal instruments of ratification to the Secretary of State. (Minnesota notified the Secretary orally, and additional states ratified later; we consider only those Secretary Knox considered.) Only four instruments repeat the language of the sixteenth amendment exactly as Congress approved it. The others contain errors of diction, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. The text Congress transmitted to the states was: “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.” Many of the instruments neglected to capitalize “States,” and some capitalized other words instead. The instrument from Illinois had “remuneration” in place of “enumeration”; the instrument from Missouri substituted “levy” for “lay”; the instrument from Washington had “income” not “incomes”; others made similar blunders.

“Thomas insists that because the states did not approve exactly the same text, the amendment did not go into effect. Secretary Knox considered this argument. The Solicitor of the Department of State drew up a list of the errors in the instruments and--taking into account both the triviality of the deviations and the treatment of earlier amendments that had experienced more substantial problems--advised the Secretary that he was authorized to declare the amendment adopted. The Secretary did so.

“Although Thomas urges us to take the view of several state courts that only agreement on the literal text may make a legal document effective, the Supreme Court follows the “enrolled bill rule.” If a legislative document is authenticated in regular form by the appropriate officials, the court treats that document as properly adopted. Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, 36 L.Ed. 294, 12 S.Ct. 495 (1892). The principle is equally applicable to constitutional amendments. See Leser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130, 66 L.Ed. 505, 42 S.Ct. 217 (1922), which treats as conclusive the declaration of the Secretary of State that the nineteenth amendment had been adopted. In United States v. Foster, 789 F.2d. 457, 462-463, n.6 (7th Cir. 1986), we relied on Leser, as well as the inconsequential nature of the objections in the face of the 73-year acceptance of the effectiveness of the sixteenth amendment, to reject a claim similar to Thomas’. See also Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433, 83 L. Ed. 1385, 59 S. Ct. 972 (1939) (questions about ratification of amendments may be nonjusticiable). Secretary Knox declared that enough states had ratified the sixteenth amendment. The Secretary’ decision is not transparently defective. We need not decide when, if ever, such a decision may be reviewed in order to know that Secretary Knox’ decision is now beyond review.”
U.S. v. Thomas, 788 F.2d 1250 (7th Cir. 1986), cert. den. 107 S.Ct. 187 (1986).
You can read it at http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/788/788.F2d.1250.85-2120.html

Information on what states ratified the amendment and on which dates, go to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/conamt.html

I'd highly suggest that you ignore those insane videos, you will just end up in jail if you don't pay your taxes...If you have any doubt, google wesley snipes...he didn't pay his taxes based on those insane notions as expressed in these videos...now...he has lost all assets, and is in/on his way to jail.

Yes, there is a law.

I hope you didn't pay money for that video! There are always people who believe the income tax is somehow "unConstitutional", but they are morons...

Think about it, does the US Constitution explicitly forbid citizens from stealing someone else's iPod? Does that mean it's legal to steal iPods?

Glad to oblige.

The Income Tax laws are codified in the U.S. Code. Check out:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Income_tax
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A.html

The U.S. Code is derived from acts of congress. For the major acts passed by congress regarding the Federal Income Tax...

Revenue act of 1862:
//www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Revenue_...

1894 Income Tax and the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act:
//law.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/i...

Revenue act of 1913:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913
http://law.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/federal-income-tax

Internal Revenue Code of 1954:
http://law.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/internal-revenue-act
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_of_1954
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_of_1954

Tax reform act of 1986:
http://www.answers.com/topic/tax-reform-act-of-1986
http://law.enotes.com/major-acts-congress/tax-reform-act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Reform_Act_of_1986

yes the law went into effect during wwi and is still in effect. the video that you watched is clearly labeled on the package as amusement only, but people often misunderstand the tape.

Yes, you are required to pay income tax. The income tax is established in law by an amendment to the constitution, and you don't get any more legal than that.

Title 26 - Internal Revenue Code

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/

The people that made the video kind of forget to mention one minor little detail. They forget to mention that no one has ever used their theory and gotten out of paying their taxes. Trust me, you won't be the first.

ite not that they take it its what they do with they need it to step on other people around the world dont you know.

No, there is no law. We all just pay the money out of the goodness of our hearts.

Now seriously, is the statement above logical in ANY way?

I hear you can make good money selling books and videos about the supposed 'unconstitutional' nature of income tax to suckers all over the country. Oh, wait a second, I guess you figured that out already......

THINGS I DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL I SAW THEM ON THE INTERNET:

Nobody ever really landed on the moon - it was a giant hoax. What you saw on TV was filmed in Utah.

Elvis is still alive, and performing marriage ceremonies in Las Vegas.

It is unconstitutional for the government to tax your wages (income tax), the 16th amendment was never ratified, and most of what we think of as income isn't really income anyway.

Excuse me now....I just won 2 million pounds in the online UK lottery when my email was randomly selected, and I have to go answer the email.....

;-}

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment:

Archive: Forum -Forum -Finance - Links - 1 - 2 - RSS - All RSS Feeds
The Causes and the Results. 0.054
Copyright (c) 2011 Financial Crisis Tuesday, May 29, 2012 - Terms of use - Privacy Policy