Illegal Income Tax?

[blue_sky]

“None of these ‘tax protesters’ with their silly ideas win. They aren’t after any grand, righteous, legal principle, they just don’t want to pay what they owe.”

You missed an important point, they also want to sell you something:

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/CyberMerchant/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=15
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/CyberMerchant/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=16
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/CyberMerchant/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=17

[blue_sky]

“None of these ‘tax protesters’ with their silly ideas win. They aren’t after any grand, righteous, legal principle, they just don’t want to pay what they owe.”

You missed an important point, they also want to sell you something:

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/CyberMerchant/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=15
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/CyberMerchant/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=16
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/CyberMerchant/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=17

[Anonymous]

We could replace income tax with an asset tax. Imagine a National Real and Intangiable Property tax of 3% on the assessed value of your home, car, boat, stocks, bonds, CDs, mutual funds, 67 inch LCD TV.

Only if it would be apportioned to the states by population, determined by census.

Would hurt low wealth states. Unclear how state residency would work for corporations—-would Delaware corporations get away with a really low tax since the money would be in Delaware, but not much population?

[Anonymous]

We could replace income tax with an asset tax. Imagine a National Real and Intangiable Property tax of 3% on the assessed value of your home, car, boat, stocks, bonds, CDs, mutual funds, 67 inch LCD TV.

Only if it would be apportioned to the states by population, determined by census.

Would hurt low wealth states. Unclear how state residency would work for corporations—-would Delaware corporations get away with a really low tax since the money would be in Delaware, but not much population?

[Duck]

I have two relatives that apparently had been following this kook’s advice for several years and not paying taxes. They are now both in a world of hurt since the IRS has finally caught up to them.

[Duck]

I have two relatives that apparently had been following this kook’s advice for several years and not paying taxes. They are now both in a world of hurt since the IRS has finally caught up to them.

[greekfire]

“There is no Constitutional basis for a tax on the wages of Americans living and working in the 50 states of the Union. Period, end of story.” – (1) Peter Gibbons, Tax Attorney

Aaron Russo: “There is no law that requires someone to file a 1040”
(2) Ron Paul, R-Texas: “No there isn’t.”

(3) Dr. Edwin Vieira, PhD, JD (both from Harvard). Apparently this chap is a noted expert on Constitutional law.

Peter Gibbons, Ron Paul, and Dr. Vieira are three well-qualified individuals on this topic. I don’t know every little nuance about them, but I wouldn’t go so far as to call them kooks, would you?

You have presented some interesting counter points so far, but can you provide the specific law that states that US citizens have to pay a tax on their personal wages/file a 1040?

[greekfire]

“There is no Constitutional basis for a tax on the wages of Americans living and working in the 50 states of the Union. Period, end of story.” – (1) Peter Gibbons, Tax Attorney

Aaron Russo: “There is no law that requires someone to file a 1040”
(2) Ron Paul, R-Texas: “No there isn’t.”

(3) Dr. Edwin Vieira, PhD, JD (both from Harvard). Apparently this chap is a noted expert on Constitutional law.

Peter Gibbons, Ron Paul, and Dr. Vieira are three well-qualified individuals on this topic. I don’t know every little nuance about them, but I wouldn’t go so far as to call them kooks, would you?

You have presented some interesting counter points so far, but can you provide the specific law that states that US citizens have to pay a tax on their personal wages/file a 1040?

[blue_sky]

“You have presented some interesting counter points so far, but can you provide the specific law that states that US citizens have to pay a tax on their personal wages/file a 1040?”

You are correct that there is no law saying you have to file a 1040. That’s because there’s a more general law that says you have to file. Laws don’t generally specify form numbers, note the language of “according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary”

Here is the Internal Revenue Code, downloadable from the house of representatives:

http://uscode.house.gov/download/title_26.shtml

Quoting section 6011(a):

“STATUTE

(a) General rule
When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information required by such forms or regulations.”

[blue_sky]

“You have presented some interesting counter points so far, but can you provide the specific law that states that US citizens have to pay a tax on their personal wages/file a 1040?”

You are correct that there is no law saying you have to file a 1040. That’s because there’s a more general law that says you have to file. Laws don’t generally specify form numbers, note the language of “according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary”

Here is the Internal Revenue Code, downloadable from the house of representatives:

http://uscode.house.gov/download/title_26.shtml

Quoting section 6011(a):

“STATUTE

(a) General rule
When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information required by such forms or regulations.”

[greekfire]

What I’ve come across so far is that there are technicalities in the definition of “income” and in whether the tax is direct or not. The tax protesters argue that the tax must be apportioned to the 50 states, and that income is defined as gains and profits, rather than wages from labor.

[greekfire]

What I’ve come across so far is that there are technicalities in the definition of “income” and in whether the tax is direct or not. The tax protesters argue that the tax must be apportioned to the 50 states, and that income is defined as gains and profits, rather than wages from labor.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of technicalities, income whatever its source, including income which is compensation for labor, has been unanimously been ruled as potentially taxable.

The 16th Amendment abolished the requirement for apportionment, which was its entire purpose.

The original reference cited (Tax protestor faq) is comprehensive in rebutting all sorts of such silly arguments.

Also, realize that a Federal agency operating under a law authorized by Congress may make regulations to properly enforce and put into action the law enacted by Congress. (Consider environmental & safety regulations, e.g. Does Congress have to approve or deny every drug with a new law? No, they tell the FDA to make the decision. Is that illegal? No.)

So there need not be a specific law in black letter which says that you must file a 1040 (surely the number of the tax forms are not generally specified by Congress), but the IRS’s power to compel information sufficient to carry out its operation as outlined by Congress is clear. The IRS has standing to obtain that information and impose penalties for failure to do so, and all courts have found this to be legal.

And case law is law that people must obey as well.

The law is not some inane computer program that James T Kirk can cleverly cause to self-destruct with some convoluted linguistic legalisms.

It is the intent of Congress that people pay taxes, and it is legal for Congress to have that power, and compel people to do so.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of technicalities, income whatever its source, including income which is compensation for labor, has been unanimously been ruled as potentially taxable.

The 16th Amendment abolished the requirement for apportionment, which was its entire purpose.

The original reference cited (Tax protestor faq) is comprehensive in rebutting all sorts of such silly arguments.

Also, realize that a Federal agency operating under a law authorized by Congress may make regulations to properly enforce and put into action the law enacted by Congress. (Consider environmental & safety regulations, e.g. Does Congress have to approve or deny every drug with a new law? No, they tell the FDA to make the decision. Is that illegal? No.)

So there need not be a specific law in black letter which says that you must file a 1040 (surely the number of the tax forms are not generally specified by Congress), but the IRS’s power to compel information sufficient to carry out its operation as outlined by Congress is clear. The IRS has standing to obtain that information and impose penalties for failure to do so, and all courts have found this to be legal.

And case law is law that people must obey as well.

The law is not some inane computer program that James T Kirk can cleverly cause to self-destruct with some convoluted linguistic legalisms.

It is the intent of Congress that people pay taxes, and it is legal for Congress to have that power, and compel people to do so.

[trex]

Who cares if it is legal or not? The bottom line is that most of us aren’t anarchists, and like the idea of having a federal government. If it isn’t legal, it should be. Aircraft carriers are expensive.

There are plenty of no-government, tax free places in the world for anyone that hates income tax. Try moving to Somalia, or the parts of Colombia that the FARC controls.

[Author]

Posts