Federal Politics: Did You Know That Income Tax Was Supposed To Be A Temporary Measure in 1917

By on April 2, 2016
canadatax

Submitted by Helen Witt: Did you know that in 1917, Canada brought in Income Tax as a “temporary measure” to help pay for Canada’s involvement in World War 1.

From, before its birth, as a so-called nation, in 1867, the people who invented Canada decided that the provincial legislatures and not the federal parliament of Canada would have “exclusive jurisdiction” to make laws with respect to “direct taxation’ within the province.

“Income tax” was then considered, and continues to be considered, by economists and legal scholars, to be a “direct tax”.

This division of legislative powers was enshrined in Canada’s first constitutional document, the British North America Act, which divided legislative powers between the provincial legislatures and the federal parliament.

In the First World War, WW1, Canada’s Federal Government, charged with responsibility for national defence found itself without adequate funds to fight the war and brought in Canada’s first tax on incomes. All the legal scholars of the day, the judges, the lawyers and the politicians, knew that “income tax” was a “direct tax” and, therefore, outside the taxation powers of the federal parliament during peacetime.

So, the Government of Canada, under the leadership of Robert Borden, introduced the Income War Tax Act using its powers under the British North America Act to make laws for the purpose of national defence and, considering that Canada was fighting a war on behalf of England, the Governor General, as the representative of King George V of England, , was only too happy to provide Royal Assent to the legislation, on behalf of King George V, who was also the King of Canada at a time when Canada was still an official colony of England.

Click here to view Government of Canada web site confirming the Income War Tax Act received Royal Assent on September 20, 1917. cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/tcc-cci_Eng/About/Full_history

This issue of Royal Assent is important because a law, passed by Canada’s Parliament, is not legal unless it receives Royal Assent and, if you keep reading the above web site and other web sites like it, you will not find any refrence to the date when Royal Assent was provided for the Income Tax Act, 1948, the law that replaced the Income War Tax Act, 1917. The absence to any reference to the date Royal Assent was given for the Income Tax Act 1948 is evidence supporting the view that no Royal Assent was ever provided – otherwise, the Government would be sure to publish it.

After the First World War, when the war debt was paid, there were repeated calls, in parliament and elsewhere, for the federal government to repeal the Income War Tax Act because it was illegal, the war effort was over and the war debt was paid.

However, the Government class had grown, in size and in power, and the citizens’ calls for a return to constitutional values were ignored.

Also, the Second World War, WW2, came along, England and Germany resumed their family quarrel, Canada, again, sent its young men off to die for God and country, and the Income War Tax Act, passed in 1917, continued in force to fund
the second war effort.

About David Murray

10 Comments

  1. Bob Patrick

    October 30, 2013 at 2:49 pm

    Imagine no federal income tax. That is true freedom! Affordable housing would increase!

  2. TD

    August 9, 2014 at 8:00 am

    I believe you’re looking for “Income Tax Act of 11-12 George VI, assented to 30 June 1948” as mentioned in Heckendorn v. Canada, 2005 FC 802

  3. Robert

    March 11, 2015 at 3:24 pm

    Unfortunately TD that would be illegal due to the Letters Patent of 1947, where the powers of representing the Crown were transferred to the Governor General of Canada. It would have had to be the Governor General at that time who made any form of declaration to that effect and would have had to appear in the/a Gazette in Canada.

    • Nathan baltus

      March 14, 2016 at 2:56 am

      As I understand it, Letters Patent of 1947 (replacing previous Letters Patent) was not an absolute transfer of power from the Monarchy. It is to in effect empower the Governor General to act on behalf of, being in continual contact and communication with the Monarchy at ALL times, act on its behalf. It does not limit or restrict the Monarchy from control.

  4. Mike

    March 20, 2015 at 12:49 am

    The pigs at the trough should be given a Icelandic wake up call , Fire all of them , what a bunch of crooks

  5. Wayne Clark

    March 28, 2015 at 9:36 pm

    How things change under the war measures act the only people that paid income tax were the rich I believe $10, 000 was the starting point for paying the tax it has now become more of a poor tax, and as far as I know is still an illegal tax.

  6. I am not a number

    June 18, 2015 at 9:58 pm

    I am just finding out about this illegal “Act” that we are all subject to and am dumbfounded. How is this not being preached from the hilltops. I for one will be sharing this info with my friends and contacting my councilman, MPs/MPPs and a good lawyer.
    Here I’ve been losing sleep over the constant harassment from CRA over a $105,000 debt they say I owe and I am currently working odd jobs.

    • freedom from tyranny

      July 19, 2016 at 4:25 pm

      “I am not a number” I am going through this roght now with the CRA. They simply ignore the question and continue to enforce their fraud. I have filed an access to information request to see what comes of it…I beleive they too need follow the law and should be accountable for their actions…for further reading check out Eva Sydel’s battle with the CRA…or Dempsey…
      We need to get this out to the mainstream…this stealing of our money and time has to stop…WE THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE..

  7. Pingback: Tax time in Canada with it’s 3,000 page tax act

  8. Charles Lee

    September 11, 2016 at 9:11 pm

    RE: The GOVERNOR GENERAL, and the MONARCHY.

    GOVERNOR GENERAL – INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

    THE GOVERNOR GENERAL AND COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF CANADA HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE AND A RESPONSIBILITY TO BRING CANADIANS TOGETHER, HONOUR CANADIANS, AND PROMOTE CANADA.

    GOVERNOR GENERAL – CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE

    AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CROWN IN CANADA, THE GOVERNOR GENERAL HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE AS “DE-FACTO” HEAD OF STATE THAT IS CENTRAL TO THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICE.
    http://archive.gg.ca/osgg-bsgg/parl/osgg-bsgg-01_e.asp

    COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF

    “The Command-in-Chief of the Land and Vaval Militia, and of all Naval and Military Forces, of and in Canada, is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.” Section 15, Constitution Act, 1867.

    “…when examining the legal foundations of how the military is governed in Canada, there has been a TENDENCY TO OVERLOOK SECTION 15 and to concentrate on section 91 (7). While the former is often understood to be colonial vestage or a merely symbolic provision, the latter is taken to be the effective source of the authorities granted to ministers, civilian defence offices, and members of the Canadian Forces (CF).
    https://ualawccsprod.srv.ualberta.ca/images/03_Lagass.pdf

    De Facto Definition

    As a matter of fact; something which, while NOT NECESSARILY LAWFUL, exists in fact.

    A DE FACTO GOVERNMENT IS ONE WHICH HAS SEIZED POWER BY FORCE or in any other unconstitutional method and governs in spite of the existence of a de jure government.
    http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/D/DeFacto.aspx

    CANADA: CRIMINAL CODE

    Obedience to de facto law Obéissance aux lois de facto
    15 No person shall be convicted of an offence in respect of an act or omission in obedience to the laws for the time being made and enforced by persons in de facto possession of the sovereign power in and over the place where the act or omission occurs.
    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-46.pdf#enID0ECKAG

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *