Taxes are illegal
Posted on: June 15, 2007 - 9:22am
Offline
Taxes are illegal
Every so often you see some wing nut saying that income taxes are illegal (they usually go to prison for tax evasion.) This is because there's a passage in the constitution saying so, but there is also an ammendment that counters it. The Constitution also has rules about how slavery should be, and that the vote is restricted to white men older than 21, but there are ammendments banning slavery and extending the vote to black men, then women, then native americans, and finally to 18-20 year olds. Why is this so hard to understand?
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
- Login to post comments
Its the "I only see what I want to and the other stuff doesnt exists" syndrome. You know,the same one used to justify the seriously deluded extremeists.
"Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions."--Frater Ravus
Uhh Ill put this one under wishful thinking!
But I can see why people are upset with so much tax money being pissed away...
That being said taxes are 100% legal and they should be.
"When the missionaries arrived, the Africans had the Land and the Missionaries had the Bible, They taught us how to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the Land and we had the Bible." - Jomo Kenyatta
http://www.reason.com/news/show/29134.html
Here are some of the core arguments against the legality of the income tax one finds in the tax honesty movement. Devotees probably would regard them as oversimplifications. This is certainly not an all-inclusive list.
1) The IRS declares in various documents that the income tax is "voluntary." And in Flora v. U.S. (1960), the Supreme Court announced, "Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment."
2) In Brushaber v. Union Pacific (1916), the Supreme Court declared that "the conclusion that the 16th Amendment provides for a hitherto unknown power of taxation" is "erroneous," and thus the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any taxing powers it did not already have. Hence, an unapportioned direct tax such as the income tax still cannot be legal. (Most mainstream readings of this extremely hard-to-follow decision say the Court meant Congress always had the power to levy an income tax, and that it was merely the question whether it should have to be apportioned that was at issue.)
3) Income, for the purposes of the tax code, should not be understood in any "common sense" way but only as defined by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in Merchant's Loan and Trust Company v. Smietanka (1921), defined it as having the same meaning as in the Corporation Excise Tax of 1909-and as Irwin Schiff has written, "nothing that was received by private persons was taxable as 'income' under that Act." Income is defined as "gain derived...from labor" in a previous Supreme Court decision, Stratton's Independence v. Howbert (1913).
4) Title 26 of the U.S. Code, in which tax-related statutes are found, is inherently "void for vagueness" because it lacks precise definitions of such terms as state, United States, employee, and person. Again, "common sense" definitions aren't good enough. (Many tax honesty types interpret the use of the word includes in the tax code as properly meaning, "is limited to." )
5) According to the tax-honesty reading of U.S. Code 26, Section 861, only income from foreigners or from overseas activity appears to actually be subject to the income tax.
At one point there was a $50,000 reward for the person who could show the law that states the average individual is liable to pay taxes. - Nobody claimed the money. I guess it's hard to produce what's not there, like psychic power.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."--Stephen F. Roberts
Even if the 16th amendment gives the right to levy a direct tax that is not apportioned it wouldn’t be irrational to not want to pay it because having a tax like that is unethical. Why should I have to pay a debt that the government has incurred in interest by borrowing reserve notes from a private bank when the treasury can print the notes for free? How is that different from the bank owner coming to my house and putting a gun to my head and saying “pay me”? The only reason anyone pays a tax like that is because if you don’t you’ll be savagely brutalized. I suppose one could say it’s rational to attempt to avoid that, but it’s not irrational to not want to pay.
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
No one wants to pay taxes, everyone wants to drive on highways and use other public works. I've always just attributed this to whining; all the arguments seem weak.
And even if it was illegal, as soon as you manage to successfully challange it, new legislation would be passed. Haven't heard about that recently.
WWTFSMDFAKB?
What does driving on highways and using public works have to do with the government taking on voluntary debt to a private bank?
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
Public works have to be paid for, no such thing as a free lunch in other words. If this isn't paid through taxation, how else would it be paid?
WWTFSMDFAKB?
The money that the fed charges in interest does not pay for public works; it is profit for the federal reserve bank.
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
If you don't want the Fed making interest, pay your taxes on time and to the penny.
Plenty of people do just that by claiming as many deductions on their income as they can and write a big fat check every April 15th.
People like me, who see the need for the Internal Revenue Service (and even work for it) claim zero deductions, let the Fed make money on my money, and then give me a refund every April 15th for what I've overpaid.
I can hear the Libertarians getting ready to rattle their sabres - "but I could make more in interest than I could just letting the government hold onto my cash". Yes, maybe as individuals you could. The collective members of society do FAR better when the government holds their hand and parcels things out.
Yes, I am stating that the average American is too stupid to handle their own pocketbook. Until laws can be passed to my liking that everyone who can't handle themselves suffers and dies (cough, morons, cough, Christians), this is the best solution we have.
"Like Fingerpainting 101, gimme no credit for having class; one thumb on the pulse of the nation, one thumb in your girlfriend's ass; written on, written off, some calling me a joke, I don't think that I'm a sellout but I do enjoy Coke."
-BHG
Yeah... it's almost like having a forced savings account. More than one CPA-type has tried to convince me to change my deductions so that I won't be overpaying by so much every year, but the chance that a slight miscalculation will mean I'll have to write a check to the IRS come April isn't one I want to take. I'd much rather experience the joy that comes when I've got that big, fat refund check to fund some home improvement project or family fun event... than the blinding hot fury that I'd feel having to pay the IRS even one dollar at the end of a year of physical and mental toil and stress laboring for someone else to "put food on my family."
Sadly, I must agree (except your punishment proposal is a bit harsh IMO. Suffer yes, but die???
). But I'll be kind and add that it's not just ignorance of finance, but their gullibility that makes most Americans unable to keep their finances in order. They're all too ready to spend all their money on any number of things that they've been convinced they need. Or that their kids need (parents are suckers when it comes to their kids).
Living in Los Angeles, we pay a shitload of taxes and service fees to process taxes, and inflated prices for damned near everything (which is also taxed). Sure, we pay a premium for living in "paradise" (ha!), and I wouldn't even mind so much if I saw more potholes filled, school music and arts programs or neighborhood rehabilitation; instead I'm seeing celebrities being shuttled back and forth to court, jail, their homes and whatnot, and medical marijuana dispensaries being raided by the feds when they're operating legally in this state, all on my fucking dime.
Yaaaaarrrrggghhhh! Must wake & bake....
[edit for typos]
Invisible friends are for children and psychopaths.
Well, there are pages like this
The there is just no law myth
Tax protester myths
"What right have you to condemn a murderer if you assume him necessary to "God's plan"? What logic can command the return of stolen property, or the branding of a thief, if the Almighty decreed it?"
-- The Economic Tendency of Freethought
Paying my taxes on time doesn’t change the fact that everyone has to pay to cover the interest on the national debt accumulated from the money the fed printed and loaned to the government. Even if everyone pays their taxes on time the national debt won’t be paid because there isn’t that much currency in circulation. And even if there was that wouldn’t make it ok to have direct taxes that are not apportioned. That’s tantamount to robbery in my opinion.
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
Public works is a small % of taxes taken in...We pay what 50%+ of what we earn in taxes (counting income, sales and taxes on goods before we buy them, capital gains, tolls)
Im willing to bet it could possibly be done for 1-2% of what we earn without waste and nonsense spending. And could realistically be done for 10%.
I dont mind paying taxes, but we no longer have a say in what it is being spent on. Man I would love to have a school voucher program if they are going to charge me for schooling at least let me choose the school and type of education.
"When the missionaries arrived, the Africans had the Land and the Missionaries had the Bible, They taught us how to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the Land and we had the Bible." - Jomo Kenyatta
"Taxes are illegal based on the statutes, codes, and regulations currently enforced" is obviously false.
Taxes are illegal under common law. Taxes are illegal because they assume authority that the government doesn't have (although it says it does, and it has the guns to back that statement up, that says nothing about the common law status of taxation).
It works like this. If the IRS agent has the right to take your money without your consent, they had to get that right from someone who had it. The IRS would tell you it was the Secretary of the Treasury that gave them the right. The Secretary of the Treasury would have to have that right to give to the IRS agent. The Secretary of the Treasury doesn't have that right originally either, everything he's got in that sense is coming from Congress. This is where things get tricky.
Congress would say that they originally got it from the voters. The problem here is that you can't go and ask the voters where they got it from, because you can't even know who voted due to the secret ballot. But fortunately, you don't have to. The burden of proof is on the representative who says that someone in his district had the right to steal your money, and that they delegated that right to the representative. They can't do that, firstly since you're the only one who could originally has that right, nobody else, and secondly because voting doesn't confer all the rights of those individuals to the elected representatives, especially not the ones that those individuals didn't vote for. The voters obviously never had that right, that's why if they steal from you, you can sue them and the government will even help you get stuff back from them, and throw them in a cage for a little while. No single voter had that right (except you), and the voting public as a whole doesn't have that right if no one of them has that right, because a thing is just the sum of it's parts.
Another thing Congress might do if you could even ask them what gives them the right to take your money is refer to the Constitution. And you can't ask the Constitution where it got that right, because pieces of paper don't have rights, and can't create them, and can't give them, and can't take them. All a written instrument can do is shuffle them around, and then only as a contract, and only if it's signed by people who originally have the rights to be shuffled around.
Another thing that anyone along the line could try is admitting that they pulled it out of their ass. But if they establish the principle that rights can be pulled out of one's ass at any moment, they're also establishing your right to pull rights out of your ass, which would logically mean you have the right to tell them to fuck off, which they'll never accept but it's not like politicians and bureaucrats care what makes sense and what doesn't, since they have all the guns and they don't need these petty obstructions like logic and rights. They'd never admit that either because that's throwing their whole pretense of legitemacy out the window.
The trick to not paying taxes is to trap them between two of their own lies, the first is that they are legitemate, the second is that they have the right to take your money. They can't have both of these without your consent, and if you never gave it, you're 100% guaranteed they don't have the right. Phrase it the right way, and most IRS agents will just give up and go after targets that aren't going to put up a fight. They've got quotas to meet and you're giving them a hard time. Don't be confrontational because then they'll give up the pretense of legitemacy right away and take you to court. Just ask extremely difficult questions which you are perfectly within your rights to ask.
In practice it involves a lot more legalese but this is the layman's version.
Are you saying you've actually gotten away with this? For how long?
Tax debts are a bitch. I would not recommend anybody try this. Fight the government directly and you will be squashed like a bug.
-----
I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting. But it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously.
- Douglas Adams, Salmon of Doubt
Personally, not long enough that the IRS would be coming to get me unless I'd done something massively stupid like filed a zero return or sent them a letter identifying myself as a tax protester. The IRS generally won't bother you for a while if you're not sending them anything, so my personal experience not paying income taxes isn't something one should go by. I have seen correspondance between the IRS and someone using this technique which supports what I have said here, it would take me a while to find it again but I could do so.
"Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and to God that which is God's."
As someone once said.
Kind of settled the tax question, and the church/state issue.
The problem is, that the atheists I have dealt with, particulary at places like the Freedom From Religion Foundation don't really want separation of church and state...they want elimination of the church from the state.
And yes, I really believe that is what they would do if they had the power.
After all, they always have when they got the chance.
By the way, God only asked for 10 per cent.
The state wants it ALL.
There is no God, and we don't want that bullshit in government.
Even if we assume there is a god, it does not follow that god has any right to tell me to pay even 10%. It applies exactly the same as the last argument I gave against government (since god and government are basically the same anyways).
If any clergyman thinks I should give him any money the question arises of where he gets the authority to make such a demand. Presumably, from God, right? Where is his proof that god gave that specific clergyman the authority to collect in God's name? How do I know that this isn't an imposter?
How do I know God had that right in the first place? I am not God's slave, I'm a free and sovereign individual with free will. God does not own me, nor the works of my hands, but I do. How did God aquire a right which is intrinsically mine and nobody else's if I did not give it to him?
Nobody owes any obedience to god, nobody has any contract with god. Unless might makes right and no natural principles of justice or goodness exist (in which case God has no business claiming to be just or good), God's word is binding upon nobody.
The burden of proof is on you to show that anyone claiming to represent and collect in God's name actually does so.
The burden of proof is on you to show that I am God's slave or serf from whom he can demand any payment he sees fit to decide on.
I would like to see your evidence.
You got this wrong Zhwazi; we throw our money up into the air and god can take how ever much he wants.
Also, what makes common law right (as it seems you are saying) while government decree wrong?
"What right have you to condemn a murderer if you assume him necessary to "God's plan"? What logic can command the return of stolen property, or the branding of a thief, if the Almighty decreed it?"
-- The Economic Tendency of Freethought
I didn't say the common law was right. It's a lot less wrong than government decree, but it's still wrong. The question was legality. It's not my burden to prove that the common law is right, everyone else is taking it at face value though.
taxes are, not only illegal, but more importantly, are immoral. i could go into specifics, but frankly im too lazy right now.... ill probably make an essay on this in the near future...
however if you want a good read on the subject pick up the virtue of selfishness by ayn rand
I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction. ayn rand