The Congressional Research Service in December
1996 released another report titled "Frequently Asked Questions Concerning the
Federal Income Tax," written by John R. Luckey, another legislative attorney. It
discusses twenty questions; we'll discuss here the items most relevant to the two main
propositions examined at the symposium, i.e., the question of the ratification of the 16th
amendment and the question of whether there's a law that requires most citizens to pay
income tax. The report is accessible only through your Congressman.
The 16th amendment issue is addressed in item #4 of the report. Luckey was at the CRS
in 1985 when Ripy's report was published, and, not surprisingly, he used the same argument
in 1996 that Ripy used in 1985, i.e., "conclusive presumption." He refers to the
changes to the amendment made by the various states as "clerical errors" in
punctuation, capitalization and/or spelling; he omits mention of the many word changes.
One could consider this to be deceptive and dishonest, as many changes were obviously
deliberate and intentional. Benson's research shows clearly how intentional and purposeful
those changes were. Luckey's discussion about whether the income tax is a direct or
indirect tax (item #2) gives added relevance to the debate over the 16th amendment
ratification.
The report doesn't directly address -- it avoids -- the "statutory" question
about whether there's a law that requires most citizens to file and pay income taxes. In
item #7 it deals with the question of wages as taxable income, and gives a long and
difficult discussion. The report does not address the arguments made by Banister and
others, which reveal that the issue is deeper, and has a conclusion different from
Luckey's.
