Why Donald Trump Should Consider Ending the IRS: An Analysis

In a recent discussion, former President Donald Trump hinted at a radical idea: eliminating the federal income tax by implementing high tariffs, an approach he refers to as an “all tariff policy.” This concept raises a compelling question: is such a move feasible, and could it be achieved without the direct involvement of Congress? Let’s delve into the intricacies of this proposition and explore the potential implications.

The Case for Ending the IRS

The U.S. tax code is notoriously complex and vague. One glaring example is the absence of a clear definition for the term “individual.” The tax code differentiates tax rates based on marital status, yet it provides no specific definition of what constitutes an “individual.” This ambiguity leaves room for interpretation and poses an opportunity for regulatory change.

Regulatory Leverage

The authority to interpret the federal income tax law falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Treasury, specifically the Secretary of Treasury. Given this, Trump could potentially appoint a Secretary of Treasury who might draft new regulations that redefine who is subject to the tax. This process involves the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which requires a notice and comment rulemaking process.

Challenges and Counterarguments

However, any new regulation must align with the existing statute, Title 26 of the U.S. Code. A regulation that conflicts with or restricts this statute could be deemed invalid by the Supreme Court. Critics might argue that despite the lack of a statutory definition, the common understanding of “individual” could suffice in the court’s judgment, thereby upholding the current interpretation.

Strategic Legal Maneuvering

Alternatively, a strategic legal approach could focus on the Secretary of Treasury’s mandate under section 7601 of the Internal Revenue Code to canvass Americans for unreported income. This mandate, perceived by many as a violation of the Fourth Amendment due to its intrusion into privacy, could be reevaluated. A new Secretary might limit or reinterpret this mandate, potentially reducing the IRS’s reach and influence.

While the feasibility of entirely dismantling the IRS without Congressional approval is debatable, the idea of leveraging regulatory authority to redefine tax obligations presents an intriguing possibility. It calls for a nuanced understanding of both the legal landscape and the political will required to pursue such a significant change. As discussions continue, it remains to be seen whether this bold vision could become a reality.

For more insights into this topic, you can view the original discussion on YouTube here.