Forum

The secret is out! Grandma and Grandpa have owned their tiny home for years. They are retired, living off their Social Security and a small pension. However, the IRS now demands an equity tax on the inflated value of their retirement home. Due to inflation, their home's value has increased, and this taxation is imposed without them selling it. They will be taxed on its inflated value, crushing the retired couple who have worked so hard to pay off their mortgage and freeing them from years of house payments. Now, the government demands taxes on their equity!

Grandma and Grandpa will be crushed and starved, what should they do?

If they sell their lifetime home they will be taxed, if they stay in their home they will be taxed. If they sell their home, pay their taxes they will be doomed to paying rent until their life savings and what little they had remaining from the sale of their home runs out!

In a shocking blow to property rights, the recent case of Moore v. United States has once again highlighted the dangers of an overreaching government. This landmark decision has set a dangerous precedent by allowing the government to tax the invisible, undermining the very foundation of our property rights.

At the heart of this case is the issue of whether the government has the authority to tax property is not physically present, in other word equity. The Supreme Court's ruling in favor of the government sends a chilling message to hardworking Americans who have diligently built their wealth and assets.

This pivotal case centers on a little-known provision within the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, namely the "mandatory repatriation tax" (MRT). The MRT, a staunch advocate for limited government intervention, has sounded the alarm bells over the government's questionable ability to impose taxes on income and equity  hardworking individuals may not even receive until years or even decades down the line.

Case On Point: Charles and Kathleen Moore, brave defenders of liberty, have become embroiled in a fierce legal battle, fearlessly taking on the unconstitutional MRT. This couple owns a 13 percent stake in a company which provides affordable equipment to hardworking small farmers.

Nevertheless, it is worth noting  despite their claims, they conveniently fail to mention  they have never actually received any income from this stock. This same model also applies to home equity, unrealized but having value.

The company reinvests all its profits back into the business, and does not distributes its earning to the shareholders.  This means shareholders do not receive dividends but own a percentage of a growing company, much like owning a home and not cashing in the equity.

In a shocking turn of events, the IRS has mercilessly targeted the hardworking Moore’s, burdening them with an outrageous $14,729 tax bill for stating they have received an increase in equity without receiving dividends or any financial rewards of their company's success.

This blatant act of government overreach is a clear example of the oppressive taxation policies  continue to stifle the entrepreneurial spirit and hinder economic growth in our great nation

The heart of the issue lies in the government's audacious attempt to impose taxes on unrealized gains, a radical departure from the longstanding tradition of taxing dividends, stock sales and liquidated equity.  

The far-reaching implications of this case cannot be overstated, as it has the potential to impact not only the Moore’s but also hardworking homeowners and business owners across the nation. If the Supreme Court affirms the lower court's ruling, hardworking individuals could potentially be burdened with exorbitant taxes on speculative profits  may never even come to fruition.

In a stunning display of judicial activism, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, notorious for its outrageous rulings, has shamelessly validated the IRS's audacious claim to tax unrealized gains. Ignoring the fundamental principle  income must be realized before it can be taxed, this activist court has once again trampled on the rights of hardworking Americans.

This decision sets a dangerous precedent, allowing the government to seize even the fruits of our labor that have yet to be fully realized.

This flawed reasoning has the potential to unleash a torrent of taxation on unrealized capital gains across a wide range of assets, such as funds, stock portfolios, homes, and land.

This case carries significant ramifications for the sanctity of property rights and the very essence of income, as enshrined in the Sixteenth Amendment. The sacred document is the Constitution, in its original form, staunchly rejected the notion of income tax. It was only through the audacious Sixteenth Amendment, shamelessly ratified in 1913,  Congress was bestowed with the power to mercilessly extract hard-earned income from the pockets of the American people.

However, it wasn't until the landmark 1920 case of Eisner v. Macomber  the Supreme Court finally shed light on the contentious definition of "income." In this case, the Court made it abundantly clear  a mere increase in the value of a capital investment, without any actual monetary dividends, cannot be considered as income. This ruling was a crucial step in establishing a more precise understanding of what truly constitutes income.

If the government emerges victorious in the crucial Moore v. United States case, it could spell the end of vital limitations on Congress's taxing power.

This alarming outcome would grant the IRS the ability to levy taxes on the appreciation of residential properties, treating it as capital gains, irrespective of whether the property is actually sold.

Such a move would undoubtedly have far-reaching consequences for hardworking homeowners across the nation. This egregious policy proposal poses a grave threat to hardworking homeowners and diligent business owners, as it paves the way for exorbitant tax burdens that are unjustly calculated on the basis of speculative future gains.

A potential ruling in favor of the government has the potential to grant them the authority to impose taxes on unrealized income, thereby jeopardizing the very foundations of countless individuals' homes and businesses.

As the Supreme Court prepares to deliberate, the fate of Moore v. United States teeters on a knife's edge, holding within its grasp the potential to profoundly impact the fundamental principles of property ownership and the cherished American dream.

Final Word: Wonder why the Democrats and some Republicans want inflation to run wild. So your property will be worth more and there will be more equity to tax. But those equity dollars buy less, therefore all equity due to inflation is without material value except to meter increase taxes on invisible assets!

Welcome slaves to the land of the debtor and the home of the broke!