If you FOUND OUT about the FEDERAL RESERVE and the INCOME TAX were illegal, would you stand up against it?

Question

And if your local mayor said he checked into it and said there's no requirement in the tax code--it's a voluntary tax.

And your whole town wasn't going to file.

Would you join in a group effort?

It's too scary of course to do it on your own, but there's strength in numbers. How would we get a group of people together that could get attention and make an impact?

Will any CONGRESSMEN reply and SHOW US THE LAW in the IRS Tax Code that says we are REQUIRED TO PAY?

Will and JUDGE? IRS AGENT?

WILL any SENATOR?

Did you know last year a former IRS agent who believed that the agency was bullying little people with no ability to fight, and decided to stand up for what was right and not pay, and because the judge refused to show the jury the IRS CODE that says IT IS A REQUIRED TAX, not a Voluntary Tax, they ACQUITTED HIM.

http://www.unknownnews.org/030812VerniceKuglin.html is a story from 2003 of Vernice Kuglin, a 58-year-old FedEx pilot who stopped paying the IRS & won.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1913 that the 16th Amendment does not impact individuals, just corporation.

The point is we all live in fear. Fear of reprisal.

AND REMEMBER THE INCOME TAX DOES NOT HELP TO PAY FOR POLICE AND ROADS. IT ONLY PAYS--I REPEAT ONLY PAYS--FOR INTEREST ON THE DEBT TO THE FED, which is not even a necessary expense, since the US Congress has the right to print their own money. Without interest debt. DID YOU KNOW THAT?


And if your local mayor said he checked into it and said there's no requirement in the tax code--it's a voluntary tax.

And your whole town wasn't going to file.

Would you join in a group effort?

It's too scary of course to do it on your own, but there's strength in numbers. How would we get a group of people together that could get attention and make an impact?

Will any CONGRESSMEN reply and SHOW US THE LAW in the IRS Tax Code that says we are REQUIRED TO PAY?

Will and JUDGE? IRS AGENT?

WILL any SENATOR?

The Supreme Court ruled in 1913 that the 16th Amendment does not impact individuals, just corporation.

The point is we all live in fear. Fear of reprisal.

AND REMEMBER THE INCOME TAX DOES NOT HELP TO PAY FOR POLICE AND ROADS. IT ONLY PAYS--I REPEAT ONLY PAYS--FOR INTEREST ON THE DEBT TO THE FED, which is not even a necessary expense, since the US Congress has the right to print their own money. Without interest debt. DID YOU KNOW THAT?

The Congress wants us to be confused about the law and to just keep paying. It's not just about the ratification of the amendment.

ALL IS ASK IS IF WE COULD GET AN IRS OFFICIAL TO SHOW US THE LAW IN THE TAX CODE THAT IMPACTS INDIVIDUALS.

It doesn't exist. And they don't want to talk about it.

Answer 1

It sounds like you are getting all your information from fringe web sites -- which isn't bad if the information was true.

Let's take a look at your points and offer you some authorizative references counterpoints

- Will someone show you the law?

Sure, here it is.

Here's the law that imposes the tax:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000001----000-.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000003----000-.html

and the laws for imposting penalties:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=failure&url=/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006651----000-.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=penalty&url=/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006721----000-.html



Some tax protestors will contend that the U.S. Code is not law. Yet that is the very definition of the U.S. Code. From Wikipedia:
"The United States Code (U.S.C.) is a compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal law of the United States." (ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Code ) When congress passes a law, they are making a modification to the U.S. Code. For instance, when the Davis-Beacon Act was passed by congress it modified U.S. Code 40, sec. 276a-7 .(Ref: http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/statutes/whd/dbra.htm ) . The tax code is the result of 100s of various Public Laws passed. The U.S. Code has references to the applicable laws and amendments.


- Is the tax voluntary ?

The IRS says No
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:0CzvuzzvvTkJ:www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf+Vernice+Kuglin&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=105#4

Wikipeida says No and cites several court challenges:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments#The_.22income_taxes_are_voluntary.22_argument

Then there is the law itself:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006012----000-.html


- Did Vernice Kuglin win a case against the IRS so she did not pay taxes?

No, that is a misreading of the case outcome. She was acquitted of criminal tax evasion but was still liable for the taxes. (see this fox interview http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94630,00.html ). According to one source, she ended up settling for a lesser amount http://www.quatloos.com/Tax-Forums/viewtopic.php?p=146080&sid=0ec9516466e67b6aceedcb9d49bbe8bb


- Regarding the 16th amendment...

Read up at Wikipedia about all the tax protester arguments regarding the constitution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_constitutional_arguments

Or from the IRS (but you could say they were biased):
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:0CzvuzzvvTkJ:www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdfn&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=105#33


Final comment:

A skeptical citizenry is healthful for a democracy. But so is truth. There are lots of sources for misinformation on the web. Dig deeper if it doesn't sound right.

Answer 2

I visited the links provided in some of the other (apparently) definitive answers. Frankly, I am underwhelmed by their definitiveness and conclusiveness.

The supposed US Code from cornell DOES NOT MAKE ANYONE LIABLE TO PAY ANY TAX. It only says who shall file a return. I CAN READ.

A law is an act of Congress, something like the Davis-Bacon Act, the Williams-Steiger Act. the Federal Wage Contracts Act, and similar. Where is the law?

Yes, court wins are in the minority. But judicial misconduct is widespread, rampant, and shameful. Judges will not allow the defendants to present the Supreme Court or even the IRS code into evidence. The prosecution and the judge will meet in secret without notifying the defense. The prosecution and the judges conspire to allow less than a day to respond to a government motion. Judges in these cases overwhelmingly deny basic Consitutional rights, even ruling that Constitutional cases are irrelevant. All of these are extremely well-documented. If the law that makes one liable to pay an income tax is so clear and definitive, why is the government fighting tooth and nail NOT TO ANSWER? That should be the real question in any a thinking person's mind. For a list of questions that the government REFUSES to answer, see the sources below. The "nuts" include former IRS agents, authors, former federal employees, veterans, physicians, and ordinary people who one day woke up and saw government the way George Washington described it: "Government is nor reason; is not eloquence; it is force"

To read an account of what happened in the Courtroom where Irwin Schiff was convicted is to read an treatise in authoritarianism, dictatorship and fascism. In so called debunking websites such as http://www.quatloos.com/United_States_v_Irwin_Schiff2.htm, any thinking person will very quickly see that neither the circuit nor the district court cites the LAW. They quote each others rulings ad nauseum because there appears to be no underlying LAW.

Where is the outrage?

Answer 3

Well the losers far out number the winners.

Just say you wanted to follow and have your day in court if you lose then for every year you owe them they charge you instrest and a penalty every 1/4 year and that can really add up .

No i would pay i could not afford it if i lost .

Well like you said it was a voluntary tax so unless congress did make a law they could not show it to you . But belive me if alot of people started to stop paying them they would adopt a law very fast .

As for the IRS bullying just the little guy no i think they will target anyone just look at Willy Nelson he lost everything and after making many gold records you figure he had some deep pocket to fight back . But he lost and i'm sure the IRS is not done with that 58 year old pilot don't forget they can appeal the ruling to a higher court so his battle is far from over .

Answer 4

yeah, sure,

you see the problem lies with the people that contend that the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified, and therefor is not legally an amendment.

You would need a judge to decide and agree that the procedure was flawed and that just isn't going to happen. If it did a high judge would certainly reverse the ruling. You see the government just is not going to go without money. and all those people are paid by the government.

besides you use the services of the government, the infrastructure, police , fire, ect. to numerous to mention.

if you want to change the law, then lobby for it change it in the system, maybe propose a VAT Tax or a national sales tax instead of an income tax. but not paying will cost you more in the long run.

Answer 5

First - in the case of Vernice Kuglin she was found innocent of willful tax evasion. The trial had NOTHING to do with taxes being legal or not, just if she should go to jail for avoiding them. She is still on the hook for the taxes. There have been 2 cases before the supreme court challenging the 16th amendment. Both have failed. Pay your taxes as you CAREFULLY consider fighting the IRS.

Answer 6

inspite of the indisputable fact that, the Consititution does supply the authorities the right to levy taxes. This change into performed in change XVI. the unique structure did not call for it, yet do not ignore that the structure enables Amendments. change XVI handed interior the regulation. right here's the contents of that change ... The Congress shall have skill to position and carry mutually taxes on earning, from inspite of source derived, without apportionment between different States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. idea and Ratification The 16th change to the structure of america change into proposed to the legislatures of different States by the Sixty-first Congress on the 12th of July, 1909, and change into declared, in a proclamation of the Secretary of State, dated the twenty fifth of February, 1913, to were ratified by 36 of the 40 8 States. The dates of ratification were: Alabama, August 10, 1909; Kentucky, February 8, 1910; South Carolina, February 19, 1910; Illinois, March a million, 1910; Mississippi, March 7, 1910; Oklahoma, March 10, 1910; Maryland, April 8, 1910; Georgia, August 3, 1910; Texas, August 16, 1910; Ohio, January 19, 1911; Idaho, January 20, 1911; Oregon, January 23, 1911; Washington, January 26, 1911; Montana, January 30, 1911; Indiana, January 30, 1911; California, January 31, 1911; Nevada, January 31, 1911; South Dakota, February 3, 1911; Nebraska, February 9, 1911; North Carolina, February 11, 1911; Colorado, February 15, 1911; North Dakota, February 17, 1911; Kansas, February 18, 1911; Michigan, February 23, 1911; Iowa, February 24, 1911; Missouri, March 16, 1911; Maine, March 31, 1911; Tennessee, April 7, 1911; Arkansas, April 22, 1911 (after having rejected it in the previous); Wisconsin, might want to 26, 1911; lengthy island, July 12, 1911; Arizona, April 6, 1912; Minnesota, June 11, 1912; Louisiana, June 28, 1912; West Virginia, January 31, 1913; New Mexico, February 3, 1913. Ratification change into finished on February 3, 1913. The change change into for this reason ratified by Massachusetts, March 4, 1913; New Hampshire, March 7, 1913 (after having rejected it on March 2, 1911). The change change into rejected (and in no way for this reason ratified) by Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Utah.

Answer 7

There is this little thing called the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Read it, and you'll find that Congress can collect taxes. Not the tax code, the Constitution. The Supreme Court has consistently upheld cases in favor of taxation based on it.

Answer 8

Ms. Kuglin was acquitted of Tax Evasion but still had to pay all of the back taxes plus penalties and interest.

The verdict kept her out of jail but the government still got all of their money. There is a audio interview where she states that, due to IRS levies, she was only taking home about $400 per paycheck. Some victory.

Go ahead and stop filing and see what happens.

Answer 9

This was such a popular argument in the 80's. I worked with so many (very intelligent, highly educated) people who would just stop paying taxes. I do not know of one who did not regret their actions. Right or wrong, it is a tough fight to win. Smarter people with more resources than me have failed. Therefor, I surrender to the idea that death and taxes are unavoidable. Good luck to you, I hope you succeed.

Answer 10

I have hard the same thing, over and over. However, I am sure there is a think folder somewhere in the DOJ that contains all of the names of people who have been convicted after challenging the income tax.
Good luck, if you decide to try it. I'll be watching the newspapers to find out how much time you got.