Sixteenth Amendment - Income Tax
Congress can tax income without apportioning it among states by population. This overturned [Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895)](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/157us429), where the Supreme Court struck down the 1894 income tax. Ratified [February 3, 1913](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution).
Original Text
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
The Sixteenth Amendment removed a specific obstacle to federal income taxes—the constitutional requirement that direct taxes be apportioned among states proportional to population. It didn't grant Congress a brand-new or otherwise unlimited taxing power.
Congress already had broad taxing authority under Article I. The problem was *Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.* (1895), which ruled that a federal tax on income derived from property was a "direct tax" requiring apportionment by state population—making a national income tax impractical. The Sixteenth Amendment overturned *Pollock*: Congress can now tax incomes "from whatever source derived" without apportionment.
That is the change the amendment made—removing the apportionment obstacle for income taxes—not the creation of an otherwise unlimited new taxing authority. Income taxes still must comply with all other constitutional requirements, including uniformity rules and the limits of congressional power generally.
Check your understanding
Key Concepts0/6
Historical Context
The Constitution's requirement that direct taxes be apportioned among states by population made a national income tax impractical. A state with 1% of the U.S. population would owe exactly 1% of any direct tax levy, regardless of its residents' incomes. Congress had imposed income taxes during the Civil War under different constitutional reasoning, but their peacetime authority was unsettled. In [*Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.* (1895)](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/157us429), the Supreme Court struck down a 2% income tax on earnings above $4,000, ruling that a tax on income derived from property—rents, dividends, and interest—was a direct tax requiring apportionment. The 5-4 decision outraged progressives who saw income taxes as fairer than tariffs and excise taxes that fell disproportionately on working-class consumers. The Sixteenth Amendment, ratified [February 3, 1913](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-16/), overturned *Pollock* by permitting Congress to tax incomes "from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States." The amendment removed the apportionment obstacle—it didn't transform Article I's taxing power into something new. Every court to consider "tax protester" claims that the amendment somehow doesn't cover wages has rejected those arguments as frivolous, and the IRS imposes a $5,000 penalty on returns that raise them.
How This Shows Up Today
- Federal income tax system
- IRS enforcement authority
- Tax policy debates
Discussion Questions4
Loading questions...
Preparing comprehension questions for this section