top of page

Bernie Sanders proposes 95% tax on big corporations. The unconstitutional nature of Federal taxes.

Updated: May 8, 2022

On Friday, March 25th, 2022, Bernie Sanders introduced the “Ending Corporate Greed Act.” Proposing a 95% tax on big companies. The tax would apply to their annual revenue in the form of “windfall profits.” These windfall profits will be based on an average 5-year profit level prior to the “pandemic”

95% tax rate from the federal government. Who in their right mind proposes a bill that only allows any company to keep only 5% of their profits? Bernie Sanders does.

His tax proposal would be in place from 2022-2023. Where he claims that it will bring in close to $400 billion in just one year.

Another windfall tax proposal from Rep. Khanna (California) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (Rhode Island) would specifically target oil and gas companies. Which would seem like a logical thing to do right now considering inflation and the cost of oil. Insert sarcasm. With gas prices already soaring, our great leaders see it fit to tax oil and gas companies at 95% of their profits. Let’s just keep raising those gas prices until the market crashes and American citizens are left to either fend for themselves or rely on the Federal Government to bail them out. You catch the hint there?

So, what are windfall profits?

Windfall profits are large, unexpected gains resulting from lucky circumstances. One of the easiest ways to explain windfall profits in simple terms. Is to identify with the individual. A good example of what would be considered windfall profits on an individual basis. Would be something like winning the lottery, inheriting money or selling a collectable around your home for profit. Unexpected gains from lucky circumstance. On a corporate level, it could just mean something as simple as obtaining more profit than the year prior. Unexpected gains. Or selling a sister company. Again, unexpected gains.

Imagine that you are the family member of someone serving in our military. I’m a veteran. And I had what was called Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI). If anything were to happen to me while I was serving, my listed beneficiary would receive $400,000 in SGLI according to how I allocated it. That is considered a windfall profit. Could you imagine taxing SGLI at 95% because it is considered a windfall profit. And holding you accountable for that money for 2 years. Which you will pay taxes accordingly? $330 thousand of that would go to the federal government so that you could pay your “fair share”

Imagine just selling a collectable around your house for $200,000 and the government hits you with a windfall tax of 95%. You would pay $190 thousand to the federal government.

Do you shop on Amazon? Help support Americas Tribune and The Patriot Edda by doing all of your Amazon shopping through the following link. A portion of your purchases will go towards keeping the website running and help fund future content.

So, what is in the proposed “Ending Corporate Greed Act”?

The proposed act is literally only a page long. And takes 2 seconds to read. It starts out by stating:

“President Biden was right to impose a ban on Russian oil in response to Putin’s murderous invasion of Ukraine. But let’s be clear. We cannot allow big oil companies and other large, profitable corporations to use Putin’s war, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the specter of inflation to price gouge Americans at the gas pump, the grocery store, or any other sector of our economy”

Political theatrics? First of all, no, Biden was not correct in imposing sanctions on Russian oil when Russia is one of the countries that we count on for our oil. We imported 209,000 barrels of oil a day from Russia in 2021. That is 76.285 million barrels of oil a year. Small number compared to what we consume on a yearly basis. But that is still 76 barrels of oil the United States does not have. And we only produce roughly 11 thousand barrels a day. And those numbers are questionable.

I won’t even get into the fact that NATO and the EU are responsible for the events that are taking place in Ukraine. Maybe he should focus more on what our bio-labs in Ukraine are doing. Which I covered in a 4-part series you can check out on YouTube.

The Article then goes on to state:

“Instead of asking struggling working families to keep paying higher and higher prices for gasoline, food, and other basic necessities, the time has come to demand that large, profitable corporations make less money and pay their fair share of taxes.”

“Fair Share”

This is always the talking point of the left. That major corporations need to pay their fair share. But as I will go on to cover here shortly. They more than pay their fair share. Let’s talk about Amazon for example.

Amazon has 1.5 million employees. In 2020 Amazon paid $162 million in federal taxes. Based on 2018 data. According to the business insider, the average American will pay roughly $15,322 in federal taxes every year.

Using that national average, which may fluctuate, keep in mind that Amazon has 1.5 million employees.

That would mean that Amazon generates $22.983 billion dollars annually in federal taxes simply by creating jobs for the American economy. Fair share? Without those jobs generating tax revenue who would the federal government tax to fund their exploits? The problem isn’t greed from American corporations. The problem is the greed in Washington D.C to the tune of 30 trillion in national debt.

To further cover the article.

“This bill would impose a 95 percent tax on the windfall profits of corporations with more than $500 million in annual revenue. Windfall profits would be determined by each company’s average profits during the five years preceding the pandemic.”

We already know that windfall profits are “lucky” unexpected profits. How do you tax someone on lucky money exactly? That is like taxing someone who got an inheritance the same amount every year based on a onetime payment. 5 years preceding the pandemic? A lot of things have happened over the course of the last 5 years from an economic standpoint alone.

The bill then goes on to state “However, companies that have chosen to raise prices in the pursuit of obscene profits would face a steep penalty.”

So now we penalize companies for raising prices based on supply and demand? We plan on taxing these corporations into bankruptcy but also want to penalize them for raising their prices as the market dictates. Inflation 101. The market dictates those prices. Not the federal government.

But they go on to quote that the following companies could have generated more tax revenue as a result.

Chevron. Which currently has 47 thousand employees. In 2021 they paid roughly $5.95 billion in taxes to the federal government as a company. Based on the national average American citizens pay in federal taxes. They also generate $720 million in tax revenue through their payroll.

We already covered Amazon above.

JP Morgan Chase. Which currently has 250,355 employees. They pay an estimated $9.64 billion in taxes every year to the federal government as a company. Based on the national average American citizens pay in federal taxes. They also generate nearly $4 billion in federal taxes through their payroll.

Berkshire Hathaway. Which currently has 360,000 employees. They pay an estimated $21.09 billion in taxes every year to the federal government as a company. Based on the national average American citizens pay in federal taxes. They also generate $5.5 billion in federal taxes through their payroll.

So, I have a logical question. How much in federal taxes does the government itself generate? Because from what I can see these companies are creating tax revenue through job creation. But I have yet to see a list of revenue generating agencies that the federal government can claim. In fact. All I see is $30 trillion in debt and a federal government that spends beyond its Constitutional authority.

Federal taxation in itself is a direct violation to the United States Constitution.

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises”

Article 1 Section 8 United States Constitution.

“As to the first point, there are two cases in which there can be no room for double sets of officers: one, where the right of imposing the tax is exclusively vested in the Union, which applies to the duties on imports;”

The intent of federal taxation as outlined in Federalist 30-36, was to give the federal government the delegated authority to place taxes on imports and exports. International trading.

“But there is a simple point of view in which this matter may be placed that must be altogether satisfactory. The national legislature can make use of the SYSTEM OF EACH STATE WITHIN THAT STATE. The method of laying and collecting this species of taxes in each State can, in all its parts, be adopted and employed by the federal government.”

Federalist 30-36 1

On top of that. The States were the ones delegated the authority to levy taxes on their citizens. In return, Congress was to tax the states based on revenue generated by that State. Through the Commerce Claus of the United States Constitution.

These taxation laws were not supposed to contradict one another. What the federalist papers alludes to as “double jeopardy”

“The laws cannot, therefore, in a legal sense, interfere with each other; and it is far from impossible to avoid an interference even in the policy of their different systems.”

Stating specifically that the Federal Government cannot adopt the State form of taxation. While the states also tax the American people. It had to be one or the other.

“As to the suggestion of double taxation, the answer is plain. The wants of the Union are to be supplied in one way or another; if to be done by the authority of the federal government, it will not be to be done by that of the State government.”

Double taxation. If the Federal Government is the one who imposes taxation on the American citizen. Then it could not also be done by that of the State Government. It goes against the United States Constitution to have a Federal and State income tax.

I know a lot of people are going to reference the 16th Amendment.

But the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified on February 3, 1913. As outlined in Article 5 of the United States Constitution.

“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”

Article 5 United States Constitution

When Amendments are proposed to the Constitution. They must pass 2/3 of both the House and Senate. Then be sent to the States to be ratified. Once it passes the House and Senate. It must then be sent to the States and be ratified by three fourths of the States. Which requires that each State legislature pass the ratification with 2/3 of both the State House and Senate.

The 14th Amendment was never sent to the States for ratification. Much like most of our Amendments over the years. Congress simply did what they wanted and passed whatever they wanted.

Do you shop on Amazon? Help support Americas Tribune and The Patriot Edda by doing all of your Amazon shopping through the following link. A portion of your purchases will go towards keeping the website running and help fund future content.

95% taxation on corporations? Why does this even have to be a topic of discussion. Corporations are the backbone of this country. They create more jobs than the Federal Government ever will. They also generate more tax revenue than the corrupt politicians that we have sitting in Washington D.C. Ask yourself, if you were a small business owner, would you be ok with being taxed at 95%? While having to pay for payroll, leases, medical coverage for your employees and still maintain your product.

Make sure to check out The Patriot Edda on all social media accounts!

-The Patriot Edda-

Follow on Facebook

Follow on Twitter

Follow on YouTube

Follow on Rumble

24 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page