President Trump Speaks The Words We Long To Hear: “MASSIVE TAX CUTS!”

Sharing is Caring!

by Pamela Williams
 
In an interview with the Associated Press on Friday, President Trump said his tax reform package would be unveiled “Wednesday or shortly thereafter” and it will include a “massive tax cut.”  He went on to say it will be “bigger than, I believe, any tax cut ever.”
Surely, if this is the case Trump’s popularity would sky rocket.  It would be a great move to come before hi 100th day in office, which will be April 29.  However, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin had set a goal of passing tax reform by August, but unfortunately the deadline was delayed due to the struggles over the repeal of Obamacare.
Before any tax reform can pass, the government must stay open.  Lawmakers are to return to Washington on Tuesday to pass legislation to keep the government funded and open.  Current spending expires at midnight on April 28, and Republicans have said they plan to attempt to pass a health care overhaul next week.
We are looking at a fast paced and explosive week coming up…in more ways than one.
Trump said on Thursday he was optimistic about the “very, very good” agreement that looked to be coming together between congressional conservatives and moderates on repealing Obamacare.  He further added he did not think it would interfere in the passing a spending bill.
I pray President Trump is correct in what he is saying.  Put on your seat belt, and hang on for the ride of your life, America.  Next week will be it!  

Published on Apr 21, 2017
President Trump said he would release new details about his plan to overhaul the tax code on Wednesday, April 26. But it’s still unclear exactly what will be in the plan. Economist and former Trump adviser Stephen Moore joins CBSN to discuss what could be in the plan why President Trump and the Republican party is facing a lot of pressure to get it done.

See also  Massive Crowd Of Protesters Peacefully Marching Towards White House Demand Biden To Take Action On Cuba
See also  Teachers Union President UNABLE to Answer if Schools will Commit to In-Person Learning this Fall
1,103 views

12 thoughts on “President Trump Speaks The Words We Long To Hear: “MASSIVE TAX CUTS!”

  1. Left-handed affirmation that promotes the lie that federal tax is even “constitutional” for most Americans. Kind of like when MSM ‘exposes’ the government’s failing to stop “Mooslamic terrists!” on 9/11 – even making MOVIES about the lie for “Amerikans to enjoy”.

    • Bravo. Personal labor is not profit, so it’s not taxable. I passed the Certified Public Accountancy Exam in 1999. There are multiple court cases that have been won (and lost when the judge disallowed having the constitution read in their courtrooms…nfw! Yes, fk’ing way).
      STFU Occams!
      It’s even better. 40% of the population, don’t even pay taxes, but get REFUNDS (welfariors), around 10,000 dollars, if they file. Can’t make it up. I think that number again is WAY TOO LOW and full of shit. I think only 40% of people work and pay taxes now in the USSA.
      It gets even mo’ betta. Given Trump was already subverted in everything he has attempted to implement, INCLUDING TPP, which Ryan is going to reinstate…who gives a fk, if Trump does an EO or a dance, if the criminal government, Senate and Congress, will NEVER allow the working classes relief through actual law. Ain’t gonna happen. Here’s my quarter against anyone else’s quarter if they’re willing to bet against my position.
      To do so, giving people tax relief, so the working person would get some reprieve, from working themselves to death, just would never happen. That would give them the time, energy and money to overthrow their tyrannical government. Elites have known since time immemorial, to keep the people tired, hungry and afraid. You keep your subjects heads the fk down.
      What is government, but a parasite?

    • IF THEY irs,ice fbi CANT FIND and DEPORT the 20 MILLION MEXICANS here then THEY will NEVER FIND TAX CHEATS , just DO IT!

    • Who will benefit from the tax cuts? Certainly not those making less than $125,000.
      They will benefit most the minions of the Deep State of the Rich Wasps & Jews.
      Christians and the Middle Class will receive NO benefit.

  2. “Resistance to additional income taxes would be even more widespread
    if people were aware that . . . 100 percent of what is collected is
    absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt . . . . In other words,
    all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent
    on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.” J. Peter
    Grace, “President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost Control: A Report to
    the President,” dated and approved January 12 and 15, 1984, p. 3.
    From the article with much more: https://supremecourtcase.wordpress.com/

  3. The elephant in the room from: https://supremecourtcase.wordpress.com/
    “A tax is a demand of sovereignty . . . State Freight Tax Case, 15 Wall (U. S.) 278, 21 L. Ed. 146.” John
    Bouvier, Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Third Revision (Being the Eighth
    Edition), revised by Francis Rawle (West Publishing Co.: St. Paul,
    Minn., 1914) (hereinafter “Bouvier’s”), p. 3220.
    The sovereign authority throughout the Union is the American People[16]; the sovereign authority in the District of Columbia, Congress.[17]
    The sovereign authority in the District of Columbia, Congress, is
    providing legislation for the laying and collection of tax (income tax)
    without the territory over which they are sovereign, in geographic area
    occupied by another sovereign, the American People.
    That Congress appear to be demanding income tax of the American People, joint tenants in the sovereignty, Chisholm v. Georgia,
    2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419, 472 (1793), residing throughout the Union means
    either that Congress is usurping exercise of territorial and personal
    legislation outside their territory or what we know as “income tax” is
    not actually a tax or both.
    “A tax is not a debt . . . New Jersey v. Anderson, 203 U. S.
    483, 27 Sup. Ct. 137, 51 L. Ed. 284 ; and has none of the incidents of a
    debt ; 21 Harv L. Rev. 283 ; technically it is not a debt . . .” Id.
    All alleged Federal income-tax liability is classified as debt, 28 U.S.C. 3002(3), and all Federal income-tax cases, civil and criminal, are prosecuted under the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. Chapter 176 Federal Debt Collection Procedure.
    What is called “income tax” ultimately is not a tax per se but a
    commercial penalty for the use of private property of the Federal
    Reserve Bank known as Federal Reserve Notes[18] (“FRNs”).
    The alleged income-tax liability generated from multiple transactions involving the same FRN (called velocity of money) will exceed the face value of the FRN after a few transactions.
    “No tax is valid which is not laid for a public purpose ;
    Citizens’ S. & L. Ass’n v. Topeka, 20 Wall. (U. S.) 655, 22 L. Ed.
    455, where it was said that there are limitations on the power of the
    three branches of government which grow out of the essential nature of
    all free governments—implied reservations of individual rights without
    which the social compact could not exist, and among these is that
    taxation must be for a public purpose ; such are (according to Cooley,
    Tax. 18) to preserve the public order ; to make compensation to public
    officers, etc. ; to erect, etc. public buildings ; to pay the expenses
    of legislation and of administering the laws, etc. ; also, to provide
    secular instruction ; Colley, Tax. 2d ed. 119–124 ; Kelly v. Pittsburgh,
    104 U. S. 81, 26 L. Ed. 658 . . .” Id. at 3221.
    No collection of what is called income tax goes toward a public purpose; all collections of income tax are used for a private purpose,
    i.e., to pay interest on the so-called national debt incurred by
    Congress and owed to a private bank, the Federal Reserve; to wit:
    “Resistance to additional income taxes would be even more
    widespread if people were aware that . . . 100 percent of what is
    collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt . . . . In
    other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one
    nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their
    Government.” J. Peter Grace, “President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost
    Control: A Report to the President,” dated and approved January 12 and
    15, 1984, p. 3.
    Banks do not pay income tax; to wit:
    “Sec. 7. . . . Tax exemption. Federal reserve banks,
    including the capital stock and surplus therein, and the income derived
    therefrom shall be exempt from Federal, State, and local taxation,
    except taxes upon real estate.” Federal Reserve Act, H. R. 7837, Ch.
    6, 38 Stat. 251, December 23, 1913.
    All collections of income tax paid to the private Federal Reserve are
    retired from circulation the same way they are created by banks in the
    so-called loan process—by computer-keypad keystroke, in exchange for the
    borrower’s promise-to-pay; to wit:
    “What they [banks] do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits to the borrowers’ transaction [checking or credit-card]
    accounts.” Modern Money Mechanics: A Workbook on Bank Reserves and
    Deposit Expansion, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, 1994, pp. 3–6.
    “If it [a bank] makes loans, it will simply credit the
    checking accounts of the borrowers. . . . [N]ew money, in the form of
    additional checkable deposits, will be “created.” The Federal Reserve Today: Fed Funds Rate, Discount Rate, 11th ed., Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, 1994, p. 21.
    “[M]oney exists simply as a bookkeeping entry at a bank . . .” The Story of Money, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2009, p. 17.
    “[W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower’s
    deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. This money is not
    taken from anyone else’s deposit; it was not previously paid in to the
    bank by anyone. It’s new money, created by the bank for the use of the
    borrower.” Robert B. Anderson, quoted in U.S. News & World Report,
    “How Much Will Your Dollar Buy – Interview with Secretary of the
    Treasury Robert B. Anderson,” August 31, 1959, pp. 68–69.
    The purpose of income tax is to remove from circulation a substantial
    portion of the digits of credit “loaned” into circulation by banks by
    bookkeeping entry in the so-called loan process.
    “The Federal Reserve is a fount of credit, not of capital. . . .”
    New York Times, “Stabilizing Money Rates,” Section 3, Editorial
    Section, January 18, 1920, p. 33.
    Unless a significant amount of the digits “loaned” into circulation
    by the banks are collected by the IRS in the form of FRNs from (1)
    payments of income tax, (2) seizure and sale of real and personal
    property, and (3) seizure of bank accounts and paychecks and thereafter
    gifted or bequeathed (31 U.S.C. 321(d)(1) and (2)) to a non-U.S. Government employee and proxy / agent of the private Federal Reserve, i.e., the Secretary of the Treasury,[19]
    for transmittal to the private Federal Reserve as payments of interest
    on the national debt and thereupon retired from circulation, inflation
    skyrockets, prices go through the roof, and the fraudulent nature of the
    fractional-reserve banking system of the private Federal Reserve can be
    concealed no longer.[20]
    Hence, the need to screen and select and vet and test and groom and
    own and control every single United States District Judge, Magistrate
    Judge, and Appeals Judge and Supreme Court Justice and United States
    Attorney and Assistant United States Attorney.
    Only two kinds of taxes: direct and indirect
    Article 1 § 8(1) of the Constitution provides, in pertinent part:
    “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties,
    Imposts and Excises . . . but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be
    uniform throughout the United States;”
    This division of taxation into two classes, i.e., (1) direct taxes, called taxes, and (2) indirect taxes, called duties, imposts and excises, is recognized throughout the Constitution, Thomas v. United States, 192 U.S. 363, 24 S.Ct. 305, 48 L.Ed. 481.
    “Taxes are classified as direct, which includes ‘those which are assessed upon the property, person, business, income, etc. of those who pay them ; and indirect,
    or those which are levied on commodities before they reach the
    consumer, and are paid by those upon whom they ultimately fall, not as
    taxes, but as part of the market price of the commodity.’ Cooley, Tax.
    61. The latter includes duties, imposts and excises ; Pollock v. Trust
    Co., 157 U. S. 557, 15 Sup. Ct. 673, 39 L. Ed. 759 . . .” [Emphasis in
    original.] Bouvier’s, p. 3220, s.v. “Tax.”
    There is nothing wrong with direct taxes per se, so long as they are
    apportioned, i.e., divided and assigned in proportion, as provided in
    pertinent part of Article 1 § 2(3) of the Constitution; to wit:
    “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the
    several States which may be included within this Union, according to
    their respective Numbers . . .”
    Income tax, which is not apportioned, to any reasonable man clearly
    is a direct tax on the supreme political authority in America, the
    American People (fn. 15), and therefore unconstitutional; yet today
    income tax is regarded by government as an excise, or indirect tax,
    without the need to be apportioned, and therefore constitutional.
    The only way such absurdities can come to pass is by ownership and control of those making, declaring, and executing the law.
    All the chaos arrived with the Federal Reserve Act.
    Congress transmute Americans into corporately colored franchisees
    The only Americans who allegedly are liable to income tax are called individuals (26 C.F.R. 1.1-1 Income tax on individuals), a.k.a. taxpayers.
    The statutory term “individual” is defined at 5 U.S.C. 552a Records maintained on individuals as follows:
    “(a) Definitions.—For purposes of this section—
    “. . . (2) the term ‘individual’ means a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence;”
    The phrase “citizen of the United States” means resident of the District of Columbia (see Memorandum of Law, August 10, 2015, p. 15, paragraphs 44–45).
    The phrase “alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence” means American
    non-resident of the District of Columbia who appears to have made an
    election (choice) to be treated as a resident of the District of
    Columbia (id. at 15–17, paragraphs 46–51).
    The statutory so-called individual is an artificial person, a
    creature of the law in the nature of a corporation and, like a
    corporation, designated by a name written in ALL-CAPITAL LETTERS (style
    of writing a proper noun for which the rules of English grammar make no
    provision).[21]
    A corporation is a franchise; to wit:
    “FRAN?CHISE, n. . . . A particular privilege or right granted by a
    prince or sovereign to an individual, or to a number of persons; as the
    right to be a body corporate with perpetual succession . . .” Noah
    Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (S. Converse:
    New York, 1828), Vol. I, s.v. “Franchise.”
    “FRANCHISE. . . . A franchise is privilege or immunity of a
    public nature, which cannot be exercised without legislative grant. To
    be a corporation is a franchise. The various powers conferred upon
    corporations are franchises.
    “The word ‘franchise’ has various significations, both in a legal and
    popular sense. A corporation is itself a franchise belonging to the
    members of a corporation, and the corporation, itself a franchise, may
    hold other franchises. So, also, the different powers of a corporation,
    such as the right to hold and dispose of property, are its franchises.
    In a popular sense, the political rights of subjects and citizens are
    franchises, such as the right of suffrage, etc.” Henry Campbell Black, A
    Law Dictionary (West Publishing Co.: St. Paul, Minn., 1891), p. 515.
    The right to receive Social Security retirement or survivor benefits
    and the right to vote for the president of the United States (District
    of Columbia Municipal Corporation) are political rights and franchises
    conferred by the sovereign authority in the District of Columbia:
    Congress, a.k.a. “Congress of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. 3002(2),
    i.e., the Congress of a Federal corporation, id. at 3002(15), the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation.
    Nature of so-called individual income tax
    “The federal corporation tax act (August 5, 1909) provided
    that every corporation for profit . . . engaged in business in any
    state should be subject to pay annually a special excise tax with
    respect to carrying-on or doing business by such corporation . . . upon
    the entire net income . . . received by it from all sources. This act
    was held valid in Flint v. Tracy Co., 220 U. S. 107, 31 Sup. Ct. 342, 55
    L. Ed. 389, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312 (followed in McCoach v R. Co., 228 U.
    S. 295, 33 Sup. Ct. 419, 57 L. Ed. 842), as being an impost or excise
    on the doing of business and not a direct tax.
    “It was also there held that it complies with the provision
    for uniformity throughout the United States . . . and that the tax is
    properly measured by the entire income of the companies subject to it . .
    .
    “. . . It [the corporation income tax] is an excise tax
    measured by the corporate income ; Stratton’s Independence v. Howbert,
    231 U. S. 399, 34 Sup. Ct. 136, 58 L.Ed. —; imposed upon the doing of
    business and not upon the franchises or property of the corporation ;
    McCoach v R. Co., 228 U. S. 295, 33 Sup. Ct. 419, 57 L. Ed. 842. . . .”
    [Emphasis in original.] Bouvier’s, p. 3229.
    The only kind of income tax that is not a direct tax but an indirect
    tax and excise on the income, from whatever source derived, of a
    franchisee, is what modernly is known as “income tax.”
    That the post-19th century Supreme Court has ruled that
    the personal income tax on American men and women is an excise is proof
    that Government treats of every American as an ALL-CAPITAL LETTER
    franchise, i.e., an individual: artificial person and creature
    of the law in the nature of a corporation who, like all franchises,
    exists by privilege conferred by the state (District of Columbia
    Municipal Corporation).
    All so-called State (District of Columbia) tax codes draw
    substantially (almost exclusively) from the Internal Revenue Code for
    their respective provisions and deal strictly with franchisees, i.e. individuals (citizens of the United States, 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(2), i.e., residents of the District of Columbia, Memorandum of Law, August 10, 2015, p. 15, paragraphs 44–45) and corporations.
    For example, the California Revenue and Taxation Code provides, in
    pertinent part, that California is neither a statutory state nor part of
    the statutory geographical United States but a foreign country
    thereto—and the State of California Franchise Tax Board taxes only
    individuals who are residents of, or corporations who are organized or
    commercially domiciled in, “this state” (District of Columbia); to wit:
    “17017. ‘United States,’ when used in a geographical sense,
    includes the states, the District of Columbia, and the possessions of
    the United States.
    “17018. ‘State’ includes the District of Columbia, and the possessions of the United States.
    “17019. ‘Foreign country’ means any jurisdiction other than one embraced within the United States.”
    ?“[Individuals] 17041. (a)(1) There shall be imposed for
    each taxable year upon the entire taxable income of every resident of
    this state . . .”
    ?“[Corporations] 23101. (a) “Doing business” means
    actively engaging in any transaction for ??the purpose of financial or
    pecuniary gain or profit.
    “(b) . . . a taxpayer is doing business in this state for a taxable year
    if . . . . [t]he taxpayer is organized or commercially domiciled in
    this state.”
    For the meaning of the word “includes” in the above code citations, see Rule 6, expressio unius est exclusio alterius, of the rules of statutory construction, Memorandum of Law, August 10, 2015, p. 3, paragraph 6.
    The 16th Amendment provides for an excise tax on franchisees
    The Sixteenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of February 3, 1913, provides:
    “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.”
    The 16th Amendment provides that Congress shall have power
    to lay and collect an indirect tax, an excise, on incomes, from
    whatever source derived, of franchisees residing or doing business in
    one of the several statutory States of February 3, 1913: the District of
    Columbia, Porto Rico (changed to Puerto Rico in 1932), Alaska, American
    Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Midway Atoll, and the Panama Canal Zone and no
    other thing, id. at 8, paragraph 23.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.