The problem with this thesis is that the term "theft" confers ownership. (Almost) All taxes arise from labour. Society does not own anyone's labour. If the collective owned the labour of the individual, then the collective could dictate to the individual what that individual will work on. Clearly, that is not the case. Society recognizes that the labour of the individual is his or her own. Society taxes the income from that labour for a number of reasons, but society rightfully recognizes the inherent right of the individual to expend his or her labour anyway the individual pleases.
First off I just quoted the OP's article.
Second your argument defies itself. The article never claimed that society owns anybody's labor, yours or anybody else's, it claimed that those who benefited most from the social contract owed it to society to give the most back.
Which you yourself acknowledged when you said "Society taxes the income from that labour for a number of reasons".
But everything else you said was a straw man, unless your own recognition that society has a right to tax income represents a claim to the individual's labor.
Are you saying nothing at all, or are you saying that society has no right to assess taxes on income?
There are some here on USMB, however, who don't phrase it in those exact terms, but they do see the government/society as owning everything including labor and it is then appropriate for government to tax whatever it wants and then make proper allocations with the 'most needy' of course receiving everything regardless of why they are 'needy'.
And it is in this context that we see 'theft' in the process of confiscating property (taxing) and reallocating that property.
All that property is the product of somebody's labor.