Sixteenth Amendment

The term "Sixteenth Amendment" carries two examination-relevant meanings, and serious candidates must distinguish them by jurisdiction. In the United States, the Sixteenth Amendment, ratified on 3 February 1913, empowers Congress "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." It was a direct legislative response to Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895), in which the Supreme Court had struck down the federal income tax of the Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act as an unapportioned direct tax violating Article I, Section 9. The amendment removed the apportionment requirement for income taxation, providing the constitutional foundation for the modern American fiscal state and the Internal Revenue Code.

In Bangladesh, the Sixteenth Amendment Act, 2014 amended Article 96 of the 1972 Constitution to restore Parliament's power to remove judges of the Supreme Court for proved misbehaviour or incapacity through a parliamentary resolution supported by a two-thirds majority. This reverted to the original 1972 scheme, displacing the Supreme Judicial Council mechanism that had been inserted by President Ziaur Rahman's Fifth Amendment-era proclamations. The Appellate Division, in Bangladesh v. Asaduzzaman Siddiqui (3 July 2017), declared the amendment unconstitutional, holding that it violated the doctrines of separation of powers and judicial independence forming part of the Constitution's basic structure. The judgment, authored under Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha, precipitated a major political confrontation and the Chief Justice's eventual resignation.

The two amendments illustrate contrasting constitutional dynamics. The US Sixteenth Amendment expanded central fiscal authority and survives unchallenged, underpinning roughly half of federal revenue through individual income taxes administered by the IRS. The Bangladeshi Sixteenth Amendment, by contrast, became a flashpoint over the limits of parliamentary sovereignty versus judicial independence; as of 2026 the government's review petition against the Appellate Division verdict remains a live constitutional and political issue, leaving the Supreme Judicial Council operative in practice. Candidates should note that Bangladesh, like India, applies a basic-structure doctrine derived from the reasoning in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and applied domestically in the Eighth Amendment Case (Anwar Hossain Chowdhury v. Bangladesh, 1989).

For examinations, the US Sixteenth Amendment is tested in the FSOT US History/Government sections—typically asking which amendment overturned Pollock or established the federal income tax, and distinguishing it from the apportionment rule of Article I. In BCS Bangladesh Affairs, the 2014 amendment appears in questions on judicial accountability, Article 96, the Supreme Judicial Council, and basic-structure jurisprudence; expect questions on the Asaduzzaman Siddiqui verdict and the institutional crisis it triggered. The classic trap is conflating the two instruments, so always anchor your answer to the named constitution, year of ratification, and the controlling case.