- 15 -
(1994). The Internal Revenue Code taxes the income of all
individuals; only nonresident aliens are excluded.2 See sec. 1.
However wrongful the 1893 overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii may
have been, we can provide no relief to petitioner from the lawful
application of the general law of the United States, including
the Internal Revenue Code. Similarly based arguments with
respect to native American Indians have been rejected by the
Supreme Court. Johnson v. M'Intosh, 21 U.S. 543, 588 (1823). We
see no reason for elevating petitioner's claim above that of
native American Indians. The Supreme Court has more recently
stated: “Indians are citizens and that in ordinary affairs of
life, not governed by treaties or remedial legislation, they are
subject to the payment of T income taxes as are other citizens.”
Squire v. Capoeman, 351 U.S. 1, 6 (1956). The Joint Resolution
relied on by petitioner specifically provides: “Nothing in this
Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any
claims against the United States.” Pub. L. 103-150, sec. 3, 107
Stat. 1514 (1993). The Joint Resolution is neither a treaty nor
remedial legislation. Congress has not seen fit to exempt
citizens or residents of the United States from the imposition of
income tax on the basis of unlawful acquisition of the native
land of their ancestors by the United States. If such relief is
2Sec. 2(d) provides in the case of a nonresident alien
individual the taxes imposed by secs. 1 and 55 shall apply only
as provided by sec. 871 or 877.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011