December 12, 2025
Trump’s Zero Income Tax Plan
By: Art da Rosa, PE, MPA, CFM | Rigby, ID
By now, you must have heard of President Trump’s Zero Income Tax Plan. Even among conservative media, doubt was verbalized. Can that be done? Is it constitutional? Isn’t it too bold, too aggressive, too “kingly,” too “tyrannical”? Or does he have the moral authority to do such a thing?
Constitutional Background
I want to concentrate on the Constitutional angle. While we pay federal income tax today, income tax was unconstitutional when our nation was founded. The US Constitution Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 reads:
“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”
Income tax is referred to as a direct tax. On this issue, numerous papers between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists were written to argue its appropriateness and impact on our nation. The bottom line is that our nation prohibited direct taxation (income tax) in the founding era.
It was not until 1913 that Wilford Woodruff passed the 16th Amendment that changed that.
Income Tax and, by extension, the IRS, were unconstitutional. President Trump’s proposal is not unconstitutional.
The justification for that could be summarized by President Obama’s statement: “Generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you. But it doesn’t say what the state or federal government must do on your behalf.”–meaning that governments should do more for us. The Constitution prohibits it. And for our own good, they need more resources to do so; therefore, more taxes, in addition to tariffs and excise taxes.
Tariffs are taxes on foreign products coming into our country. Excise Tax is a specialized consumption tax applied to a narrow set of items or activities, rather than all retail transactions, with the idea of promoting or discouraging certain behaviors. Tobacco or alcohol taxes are examples of excise taxes.
Also, with the 16th Amendment, the scope of the Excise tax expanded to today’s Corporate Tax. It increased in the rate and level (from specific items to…everything).
Federalist and Anti-Federalist
The Founders spent a great deal of time discussing the level of taxation. It was agreed that the Federal Government must rely on tariffs and excise taxes to fund its operation, with the assumption that the federal government stay within its proper role, as listed in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
One more point of clarification: the federal government was prohibited from directly taxing us, the citizens, because it was viewed as intrusive, inefficient, an unfair level of collection, hurt the economy, and severed the link between the State and Federal governments.
All of these became a reality. In addition to that, the federal government grew immensely.
Trump’s Plan
First of all, under the current government spending (I didn’t say budget because we haven’t had one), no amount of tariff will be able to fund it. The tariffs comprise approximately 5 to 8% in 2024, while income tax was about 50% of the total federal revenue. Even quadrupling the tariff revenue will not equate to the income tax revenue.
President Trump knows it, too. Unless…the role of the government is reverted to the original intent of the Constitution.
From my personal, narrow point of view, income tax hurts our economy. It was amply debated and explained in the Federalist Papers. Eliminating it will bring a level of prosperity unseen in the past century.
And I support a Zero Income Tax Plan.
