Editing Taxation in the United States (section)

==Legal basis==
The [[United States Constitution]] provides that [[United States Congress|Congress]] "shall have the power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises ... but all Duties, Imposts, and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."<ref>Constitution Article I Section 8.</ref> Prior to amendment, it provided that "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be Laid unless in proportion to the Census ..." The [[Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|16th Amendment]] provided that "Congress shall have the 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 [[Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|10th Amendment]] provided that "powers not delegated to the United States by this Constitution, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Congress has enacted numerous laws dealing with taxes since adoption of the Constitution. Those laws are now codified as Title 19, Customs Duties, Title 26, Internal Revenue Code, and various other provisions. These laws specifically authorize the United States Secretary of the Treasury to delegate various powers related to levy, assessment and collection of taxes.

State constitutions uniformly grant the state government the right to levy and collect taxes. Limitations under state constitutions vary widely.

Various fringe [[Tax protester (United States)|individuals and groups]] have questioned the legitimacy of United States federal income tax. These [[Tax protester arguments|arguments]] are varied, but have been uniformly rejected by the Internal Revenue Service and by the courts and ruled to be frivolous.<ref>[https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf Frivolous Tax], Internal Revenue Service</ref><ref>''United States v. Thomas'', 788 F.2d 1250, (7th Cir. 1986), ''cert. denied'', 107 S.Ct. 187 (1986); ''United States v. Benson'', 941 F.2d 598, 91-2 U.S. Tax Cas. ([[CCH (company)|CCH]]) ¶ 50,437 (7th Cir. 1991); ''Knoblauch v. Commissioner'', 749 F.2d 200, 85-1 U.S. Tax. Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9109 (5th Cir. 1984), ''cert. denied'', 474 U.S. 830 (1985); ''Ficalora v. Commissioner'', 751 F.2d 85, 85-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9103 (2d Cir. 1984); ''Sisk v. Commissioner''; 791 F.2d 58, 86-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9433 (6th Cir. 1986); ''United States v. Sitka'', 845 F.2d 43, 88-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9308 (2d Cir.), ''cert. denied'', 488 U.S. 827 (1988); ''United States v. Stahl'', 792 F.2d 1438, 86-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9518 (9th Cir. 1986), ''cert. denied'', 107 S. Ct. 888 (1987); ''United States v. House'', 617 F. Supp. 237, 87-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9562 (W.D. Mich. 1985); ''Ivey v. United States'', 76-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9682 (E.D. Wisc. 1976).</ref><ref>''Brown v. Commissioner''; 53 T.C.M. (CCH) 94, T.C. Memo 1987-78, CCH Dec. 43,696(M) (1987); ''Lysiak v. Commissioner''; 816 F.2d 311, 87-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9296 (7th Cir. 1987); and ''Miller v. United States'', 868 F.2d 236, 89-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶ 9184 (7th Cir. 1989). For background on how arguments that the tax laws are unconstitutional may help the prosecution prove willfulness in [[Tax avoidance and tax evasion|tax evasion]] cases, see the United States Supreme Court decision in {{ussc|name=Cheek v. United States|link=|volume=498|page=192|pin=|year=1991}} (defendant arguing about constitutionality may be evidence that the defendant was aware of the tax law, and is not a defense to a charge of willfulness).</ref>