PMMJ (cheetahmaster) wrote,

The FAQ Question of the Day

The word "includes" is also defined by the Internal Revenue Code. According to section 7701(c), "The terms 'includes' and 'including' when used in a definition contained in this title shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined." The states of the United States are within the normal meaning of the word "State," and so a definition that says that "State" shall be construed to include the District of Columbia does not exclude the states of the United States from the meaning of "State."

A definition of "State" that equates "State" with "District of Columbia" turns the definition of "United States" into gibberish, because the definition then becomes a statement that "United States" "includes only the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia."

The definition of "State" includes the District of Columbia "where such construction is necessary to carry out the provisions of this title." What happens if the construction is not necessary? If "State" does not include the District of Columbia, then references to "states" in the Internal Revenue Code would apply to nothing at all. Which is absurd.

-from The Tax Protester FAQ
(Courtesy Sailor Tork.)

  • relevant to my interests

    "The Secret Douglas Adams RPG people have been playing for 15 years."

  • tactical

    "This actually fits with everything Obama has been doing lately: neither his legislative proposals nor his executive actions have been world shaking.…

  • huh

    "The problem for a terrorist group like Al Qaeda is that its recruitment pool is Muslims, but most Muslims are not interested in terrorism. Most…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.