The 16th Amendment was never ratified
| The 16th Amendment was never ratified | |
|---|---|
| FALSE | |
| "The 16th Amendment, which allows a federal income tax, was never properly ratified, so the income tax is unconstitutional and paying it is voluntary." | |
| Domain | Government, Law & Courts |
| Tactic | Statistical & Evidentiary Distortion Fraud or Scam |
| Era | Historical |
| First seen | 1985 |
| Origin | The Law That Never Was by William J. Benson and M.J. "Red" Beckman, published in 1985 |
| Last reviewed | 2026-10-29 |
| Further reading: books on Government, Law & Courts | |
The claim that the 16th Amendment was never ratified is a core argument of the tax-protester movement. It was popularized in 1985 by William J. Benson, who said he had found errors in state ratification documents that invalidated the amendment. Courts have rejected the argument in every case, and Benson was barred from selling the materials as a fraudulent tax shelter.
The claim
Benson argued that differences in punctuation, capitalization and wording in the documents states sent to Washington meant they had not ratified the same text. He sold a "Reliance Defense Package" claiming buyers could legally stop paying income tax.
What the evidence shows
- Ratified in 1913. Secretary of State Philander Knox certified the amendment on February 25, 1913, after the required three-quarters of states had approved it.
- Courts rejected the argument. In United States v. Thomas (1986), the Seventh Circuit held that minor errors in state documents did not undo ratification and that Knox's certification was conclusive.
- Benson enjoined. In 2009 the Seventh Circuit upheld an injunction barring Benson from selling his package, finding it promoted a fraudulent scheme.
- Penalties. The IRS lists the argument as frivolous; filing a return based on it can bring a $5,000 penalty.
Why it persists
The argument looks like legal scholarship, comes with document copies and offers a way to stop paying taxes. People who rely on it often face back taxes, penalties and prosecution.
Lessons for readers
- Arguments the IRS lists as frivolous carry real penalties.
- A court ruling, not a pamphlet, decides whether a law is valid.
See also
Sources
- United States v. Thomas, 788 F.2d 1250 (7th Cir. 1986).
- United States v. Benson, 561 F.3d 718 (7th Cir. 2009).
- Internal Revenue Service, The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments.
- Wikipedia, "Tax protester Sixteenth Amendment arguments."