Social Security Number

[Chex]

Can we get down to brass tacks what FICA is? It is an excise tax, plain and simple.

Where is that written from shikamaru ?

FICA is nothing more than the tax provisions of the Social Security Act, as they appear in the Internal Revenue Code.

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/392/~/what-is-the-meaning-of-fica

Excise taxes are taxes paid when purchases are made on a specific good, such as gasoline. Excise taxes are often included in the price of the product. There are also excise taxes on activities, such as on wagering or on highway usage by trucks. Excise Tax has several general excise tax programs. One of the major components of the excise program is motor fuel. http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-...yed/Excise-Tax

[Brian]

Can we get down to brass tacks what FICA is? It is an excise tax, plain and simple.

Where is that written from shikamaru ?

FICA is nothing more than the tax provisions of the Social Security Act, as they appear in the Internal Revenue Code.

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/392/~/what-is-the-meaning-of-fica

Excise taxes are taxes paid when purchases are made on a specific good, such as gasoline. Excise taxes are often included in the price of the product. There are also excise taxes on activities, such as on wagering or on highway usage by trucks. Excise Tax has several general excise tax programs. One of the major components of the excise program is motor fuel. http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-...yed/Excise-Tax

The Social Security "contribution" from wages received by an employee was really not a savings plan, but rather, in the Supreme Court's words, "a special income tax . . . measured by wages:" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helvering_v._Davis

The words "measured by" are a tip-off that a government privilege is being extended because those were the same words used to describe the corporate income tax in Flint v. Stone Tracy (1911), where the extent of the government-bestowed corporate privilege is "measured by" the corporation's net income: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_v._Stone_Tracy_Co.

The Social Security tax is two part. 1. A tax on employers for having employees (employer/employee relationship) 2. A "Special income tax" on employees as measured by wages. Half the tax is on the employer and the other half on the employee.

So what makes it so "special"? The court did not say...but the "measured by" part gives a clue.

Also in A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S., 295 U.S. 495 (1935) Justice Roberts statements essentially lay out the path to government intrusion. "We have held in . . . Schechter Poultry . . . that Congress has no power to regulate wages and hours of labor in a local business. If the [government] is right [in Butler], this very end may be accomplished by appropriating money to be paid to employers from the federal treasury under contracts whereby they agree to comply with certain standards fixed by federal law or by contract."

Using money substitutes other then those emitted directly by the Treasury under their exclusive money powers could certainly in my view be a taxable excised activity.

[David Merrill]

The Social Security "contribution" from wages received by an employee was really not a savings plan, but rather, in the Supreme Court's words, "a special income tax . . . measured by wages:" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helvering_v._Davis

The words "measured by" are a tip-off that a government privilege is being extended because those were the same words used to describe the corporate income tax in Flint v. Stone Tracy (1911), where the extent of the government-bestowed corporate privilege is "measured by" the corporation's net income: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_v._Stone_Tracy_Co.

The Social Security tax is two part. 1. A tax on employers for having employees (employer/employee relationship) 2. A "Special income tax" on employees as measured by wages. Half the tax is on the employer and the other half on the employee.

So what makes it so "special"? The court did not say...but the "measured by" part gives a clue.

Also in A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S., 295 U.S. 495 (1935) Justice Roberts statements essentially lay out the path to government intrusion. "We have held in . . . Schechter Poultry . . . that Congress has no power to regulate wages and hours of labor in a local business. If the [government] is right [in Butler], this very end may be accomplished by appropriating money to be paid to employers from the federal treasury under contracts whereby they agree to comply with certain standards fixed by federal law or by contract."

Using money substitutes other then those emitted directly by the Treasury under their exclusive money powers could certainly in my view be a taxable excised activity.

Great post Brian!

[shikamaru]

Where is that written from shikamaru ?

Here.

Also, how about this?

Helvering v. Davis (1937)

In Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, decided this day, ante, p. 548, we have upheld the validity of Title IX of the act, imposing an excise upon employers of eight or more. In this case, Titles VIII and II are the subject of attack. Title VIII lays another excise upon employers in addition to the one imposed by Title IX (though with different exemptions). It lays a special income tax upon employees to be deducted from their wages and paid by the employers. Title II provides for the payment of Old Age Benefits, and supplies the motive and occasion, in the view of the assailants of the statute, for [p*635] the levy of the taxes imposed by Title VIII. The plan of the two titles will now be summarized more fully.

Title VIII, as we have said, lays two different types of tax, an "income tax on employees" and "an excise tax on employers." The income tax on employees is measured by wages paid during the calendar year. ' 801. The excise tax on the employer is to be paid "with respect to having individuals in his employ," and, like the tax on employees, is measured by wages. ' 804. Neither tax is applicable to certain types of employment, such as agricultural labor, domestic service, service for the national or state governments, and service performed by persons who have attained the age of 65 years. ' 811(b). The two taxes are at the same rate. '' 801, 804. For the years 1937 to 1939, inclusive, the rate for each tax is fixed at one percent. Thereafter the rate increases 1/2 of 1 percent every three years, until, after December 31, 1948, the rate for each tax reaches 3 percent. Ibid. In the computation of wages, all remuneration is to be included except so much as is in excess of $3,000 during the calendar year affected. ' 811(a). The income tax on employees is to be collected by the employer, who is to deduct the amount from the wages "as and when paid." ' 80a(a). He is indemnified against claims and demands of any person by reason of such payment. Ibid. The proceeds of both taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way. ' 807(a). There are penalties for nonpayment. ' 807(c).

If you continue to read that Supreme Court case, you'll see the term excise pop up over and over again.
This is the Supreme Court case that upheld Social Security as constitutional.

[allodial]

Its important to understand that the plenary power of Congress might have over "territories of the United States (all of them not just one of them)" is distinct from the power of the Congress in the States. Also, consider the mailing address on the stub a SS card is attached to. Territory does not necessarily mean physical land it can refer to something more abstract. You could say that regulating coin is "Congress'" territory. If the SS card and account are associated with regulating the balance/weight of currency..then there ya go.

[Chex]

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=24489 for the Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin, Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris, Israel Moses Sieff, Banks of Italy, Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam Lehman Brothers Bank of New York, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, Goldman Sachs Bank of New York using the Mandrake Mechanism the entire function of this machine is to convert debt into money. It's just that simple.

According to Black's Law Dictionary, a tax is a "pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property owners to support the government [...] a payment exacted by legislative authority."

It "is not a voluntary payment or donation, but an enforced contribution, exacted pursuant to legislative authority" and is "any contribution imposed by government [...] whether under the name of toll, tribute, tallage, gabel, impost, duty, custom, excise, subsidy, aid, supply, or other name.

When the federal reserve bank seeks to expand its influence in new areas it must find some basis in the Constitution to justify its action.

Obviously, Constitutionality of Social Security Act: http://www.ssa.gov/history/court.html

[allodial]

Money/credit tends to be private in source. In the realm of practicality, it probably morseo comes down to whether you are a source or not.

[shikamaru]

.... had absolutely no national debt, ....

Not true. In all the years of existence of the political corporation titled government of the United States, it had only one year it was out of debt (1834 - 35).

All the other years, it was in debt. In fact, that was one of its primary purposes of formation: to hold the war debts of the States.

It really began to take off after the Civil War.
You could say it, government of the United States, was a holding company.

You could say that the benefits offered by the political corporation is a way to attract constitutors .......

[allodial]

Not true. In all the years of existence of the political corporation titled government of the United States, it had only one year it was out of debt (1834 - 35).

All the other years, it was in debt. In fact, that was one of its primary purposes of formation: to hold the war debts of the States.

It really began to take off after the Civil War.
You could say it, government of the United States, was a holding company.

You could say that the benefits offered by the political corporation is a way to attract constitutors .......

Its called "prosecution of war" (ala U.S. Department of Justice).

[David Merrill]

Its called "prosecution of war" (ala U.S. Department of Justice).

The departure from justice?


The Constitution is suspended in the actual theater of war.



The ACIM Gifts of the Holy Spirit:


To Have; give all to all.
To Have Peace; teach peace to learn it.
Be Vigilant only for God and His Kingdom.

[allodial]

The departure from justice? The Constitution is suspended in the actual theater of war.

Theaters of war as in: CA, NV, IA, LA, OR, WA, AK, KS, MO, IL, CA, GA, CO, NY, TX, CT, NH, etc? (military-revenue districts?)

In 1775, the Continental Congress enacted the Articles of Conduct, governing the ships and men of the Continental Navy. However, soon thereafter, all of these ships were sold and the United States Navy and Marine Corps were disbanded. In July 1797, Congress, after authorizing construction of six ships, enacted the Rules for Regulation of the Navy as a temporary measure. Then, in 1800, Congress enacted a more sophisticated code adopted directly from the British Naval Code of 1749. There was little or no need for lawyers to interpret these simple codes, nor was there a need for lawyers in the uncomplicated administration of the Navy prior to the American Civil War.
During the Civil War, however, Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles named a young assistant U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia named Nathaniel Wilson to present the government's case in complicated courts-martial. Without any statutory authority, Secretary Welles gave Wilson the title of "Solicitor of the Navy Department," making him the first House counsel to the United States Navy.
By the Act of March 2, 1865, Congress authorized "the President to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for service during the rebellion and one year thereafter, an officer of the Navy Department to be called the 'Solicitor and Naval Judge Advocate General.'" The United States Congress maintained the billet on a year-to-year basis by amendments to the Naval Appropriations Acts. In 1870, Congress transferred the billet to a newly established Justice Department with the title of Naval Solicitor.
In 1967, Congress decided to establish the Judge Advocate General's Corps within the Department of the Navy. The legislation was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on December 8, 1967, and redesignated Navy lawyers as staff officers within the Navy, similar to physicians and chaplains. Prior to this change, all Navy lawyers were Line Naval Officers.
Prior to 2005, JAG Corps personnel primarily worked in one of three offices: Navy Legal Service Offices providing defense and legal assistance to eligible personnel; Trial Service Offices providing courts-martial prosecution, court reporting and administrative trial support; and Staff Judge Advocates providing legal advice to U.S. naval base commanders. In 2005, the Judge Advocate General of the Navy approved a pilot program which resulted in the merger of the Navy's Trial Service Offices and Staff Judge Advocates into new commands known as Region Legal Service Offices. Additionally, the JAG Corps has attorneys and paralegals on aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships and flag ships as well as in support of Seabee battalions and special operations commands.

[Goldi]

[Chex]

[gdude]

Chex, Could you tell us exactly is that info located? I opened the link and there is at least 40 different chapters. Thanks.

[Chex]

I wish I had the answers you were looking for gdude.

I did not get the contract Richard M. Salsman.

Maybe he might have some insight. I hope you find what your looking for and let us know.

We learn something new everyday.