More

Patricia Draznin

Patricia Draznin

Posted April 13, 2009 | 11:19 AM (EST)

The 1040 Rebellion


We approach that notable time of year when the snow is melting, the sun is shining, and a young man's fancy turns to thoughts of itemizing to offset the annual looting fest by our federal and state governments. Today we band together in the spirit of survival to remember that even in 2009, there is life after taxes, as long as we don't have to buy anything for the rest of the year.

While the Obama administration struggles to ease our tax burden, we reflect on the roots of American taxes when in 1773, the colonists staged The Boston Tea Party to rebel against taxation without representation -- since the commute to Parliament was prohibitive and also non-deductible. In addition to spiking the flavor of Boston Harbor, the Tea Party succeeded in eliminating the unfair tea tax, which we later replaced with the property tax, employment tax, social security tax, capital gains tax, and the income tax.

Taxation was not always a contact sport. In the early 1800s, Americans paid a simple luxury tax on items like tobacco and alcohol, a reason to be grateful for other people's vices. But the history of tax is the history of war. The sales tax was born to finance the War of 1812, while the income tax was conceived by President Lincoln to bankroll the Civil War -- along with the excise tax, the car wash and the yard sale.

Repealed in 1872, revived in 1894, ruled unconstitutional in 1895, and reinstated in 1913, the lowly misunderstood income tax is here to stay. Which is why today we pay our taxes every year whether we are engaged in combat or just sitting at home decoding our 1040s. And by now we are getting used to the feeling of always having someone else's hand in our wallets, and realizing that paying taxes to Uncle Sam doesn't mean we're losing money. We're gaining shares of an F-16 Viper.

The Internal Revenue Service has been collecting our taxes since 1862. And apparently it's still not enough. And if they ever have a question, they will be happy to audit your tax returns all the way back to your first newspaper route, a procedure as painless as having your spleen removed through your mouth in a dentist's office. And a reminder to all wage earners to save your receipts so you can justify every business latté you ever deducted. Not that I knew about receipts when I was 23 and got audited -- probably for earning so little income, which I had no idea was illegal. I arrived carrying a big cardboard box filled with mystery papers organized like the contents of a wastebasket and probably included some receipts. In response to each of the questions posed by the tax collector, who breathed fire that swirled high above his horns, I rummaged through the box holding up one receipt after another asking, "Is this it?" [No response.] "How about this one?" Honestly, I was not under the influence of any mind-altering substances, although that could only have helped. But after a while the tax collector told me to take my box and never darken his doorway again. Maybe he decided to try meeting his quota with a better prospect, like Chevron.

Before you try the "big box of mystery papers" method, remember that results may vary. Consult your tax adviser. And be prepared, be very prepared. After all, paying taxes is just the price of our freedom to work and pay taxes. Remember this when you're drinking your next cup of tea.

 
 
  • Comments
  • 14
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:36 PM on 04/13/2009
I suggest we reserve a part of a rural state that resembles the US around 1800 (Utah?) for those who do not want to pay their taxes and allow them to move their at will, at which time all of their obligations to the federal US tax system are removed. Of course, every time they re-enter civilization, they are required to pay the proportional share of the facilities they use.

I think this plan would be very fair to everyone, the people who do not wish to pay taxes, as well as those who do and who understand that they are only paying for the services they voted for.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
04:13 PM on 04/13/2009
Kill,

It amazes and scares me how often I agree with you.

BBack
04:23 PM on 04/13/2009
Second the idea.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
02:47 PM on 04/13/2009
So you are opposed to everything that the government has given you? It's not just the war fighting capabilities, but the roads, and the schools, and the police, and the fire departments, and the economy, and the internet, and the phone system, and the power system, and the flood control system, and the......

The fact of the matter is that we pay taxes not so that the government can rob us, but so that they can generate the society that we all want!
04:29 PM on 04/13/2009
--Continuation--

As income increases the social assistance diminishes and the rate of taxation increases. The more you make, the less you take, and the more you pay. Finally, you reach that reviled, ungrateful, unscrupulous 5% group. They account for more than 60% of the income tax revenues. http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

Understand me. I am not complaining about paying taxes. It is a requirement for the establishment and maintenance of society. I object to the construct that it is the government that gives. As I said before, the government redistributes what individuals give through taxation
04:29 PM on 04/13/2009
"So you are opposed to everything that the government has given you?"

Given me?

I (and/or my family) have paid for everything I have received from the Government. My Elem. and H.S. education was paid for by my parents Property Taxes. I worked my way through college and my parents helped (took 10 years). User fees and gas taxes pay for my use of the roads. My Property Taxes pay for the education of my two sons. My wife and I will pay for their college. Part of my federal taxes pay for defense and a since of security. My local taxes pay for my local Police and Fire departments,; furthering the sense of security The Government does not and cannot give anything to anybody.

It is people who give, and the government that inefficiently distributes those receipts. In fact, I give more to the government than I receive from it. The fact that as a liberal or a conservative, you pay income taxes in a progressive tax system means that you are repaying society in inverse proportion to the benefit received.
A low income entity pays a low (or no) tax rate and qualifies for significant social assistance such as housing, utilities, and transportation subsidies and food assistance programs (WIC, Food Stamps, free school lunches, Meals on Wheels, etc.). That assistance is given not by the government but by other taxpayers.

--Continued--
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
10:18 PM on 04/13/2009
You're entirely correct, you HAVE paid for everything that the government has provided, and that's my POINT!! To quote Heinlein's best line:

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch, or TANSTAAFL.

My point is that most people LIKE those things that the government provides, so they need to continue paying taxes, just like they need to pay for the food that they buy at the store!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
10:26 AM on 04/14/2009
Oh, and by the way, you bring up the lie that the poor are the primary beneficiaries of the government's largess. Were it not for the fact that a poor person receives around $10,000 per year (MAXIMUM) from the government compared to a rich person getting back MILLIONS, that might even be true!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:01 PM on 04/13/2009
My complaint about taxes isn't about buying another fighter plane, something that benefits everyone equally (national defense) my complaint is about bailouts of businesses and people. While their circumstances are hard and unfortunate, they are not my fault and I should not be forced to pay for them.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
02:31 PM on 04/13/2009
Not to put words in your mouth but are you saying you are all for another multi-million dollar weapons system but not for education or healthcare for average or below average income citizens?

Some people have not had a reasonable chance and while I believe there is much room for improvement in our public assistance programs, they are needed and even helpful. I think there should be some kind of incentive to get off of public assistance. For instance, if you are physically capable you must show up and volunteer a portion of your time to non-profit community organizations while getting public funds. Or when you do get a job, instead of cutting off all assistance make it a gradual cutback. I have heard of people on PA that get $1600 a month and take a job making $200 a week and they are kicked out of the program so they must quit the job. Not much incentive to pick yourself up.

And ROTC is a good program that trades Schooling for a commitment to the armed services, at a reasonable pay grade. How about similar programs for Teachers and other needed professions?

I would also like to see some of the waste removed from our government. Let us talk about $100 hammers, $400 toilet seats, charging for laundry services or a $30 six-pack of soda for our troops in Iraq.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:34 PM on 04/13/2009
yes I am in support of Federal spending for national defense but not for Federal spending for education or healthcare. The Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to raise money for national defense but does not give that power to pay for schooling or healthcare (or a host of other programs). Some will argue that the general welfare clause gives Congress this power but if that is true what is prohibited to the Congress? Anything can be justified for general welfare.

if the states want to spend the money of their constituents on objects of benevelence that is a issue for the voters of that state but is absolutely outside the purview of the federal govt.