Talk:Revenue Act of 1861

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Abraham Lincoln#Signed as President|Abraham Lincoln]] The anchor (#Signed as President) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled

I am quite sure this is incorrect:

income above $800 (equivalent to $115,000 in 2002 dollars)

The accurate number is more like $15,000. I'm deleting that part of the article for now...

69.19.2.225 22:55, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Minor quotation correction

I checked the text of the United States Statutes at Large and found that there were some minor discrepancies between the quotation in the article and the actual verbatim text of the statute. I made the changes to conform quotation in the article to the actual text of section 49 of the Act, and I added a footnote. Famspear (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed the ungrammatical, unsourced commentary about notability and constitutionality and the Sixteenth Amendment. Aside from being unsourced (and although I partially agree with the commentary), the commentary could actually create confusion, especially for normal readers not versed in federal income tax law. If there had been any doubt about the constitutionality of the 1861 Act, that doubt probably would have been removed by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Springer v. United States -- although the Springer case really dealt with the Revenue Act of 1864, not the 1861 Act. By contrast, the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified in 1913 to negate the holding in the Pollock case of 1895, which dealt with an 1894 statute. Essentially, the purpose of the Amendment was to prevent income taxes on dividends, interest and rents from being treated as "direct taxes" for purpose of the apportionment requirement that generally applies to direct taxes. Famspear (talk) 19:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]