Is there a standing reward of $100,000.00$ to anyone that can provide a law requiring you to file a tax return

Question

a tax code rule that says if you are required to file a Federal Tax return then you must file dose exist.
But you are not required to file.

Answer 1

Some tax protestors have made a big deal about offering an award to anyone who can show their theories are wrong. The problem is, they have rigged the offers so that no one can ever collect.

In many states, such a unilateral offer is not legally binding, and can be withdrawn at any time, of if the tax protestor refuses to pay, there is no legal recourse.

Some offers include multiple assertions and the challenge is to prove them all incorrect. If the offeror inserts one statement into the list that is even arguably true, then it is impossible to collect the reward.

Also, many of these tax protestors have multiple liens against them so in effect, they are broke anyway and don't have any assets in which to pay the award.

Title 26 of the U.S. Code is the law covering income taxes. The law requiring a person to file a Federal Tax return is TITLE 26, Subtitle F, CHAPTER 61, Subchapter A, PART II, Subpart B, § 6012
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006012----000-.html

You can easily read it for yourself at the above link. However, I'll give you a brief synopsis. In short, the law says that everyone must file a return if they had income for the year that exceeded the exemption amount plus any allowed deductions. In reality, everyone who earned income and had taxes withheld should file a return, even if they made less than exemptions plus deductions. Since they most likely they had taxes withheld from their pay, they would be due a refund. The IRS will not give a refund until the taxpayer files a return.

BTW, don't drink the kool-aid being offered by tax protestors. They are all wrong. A few have won some criminal cases, but all of them end up paying more taxes in the long-run than if they had simply paid their taxes in the first place.
Go to the excellent tax protestor faq at http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html

Good luck,

BTW, to see how stupid tax protestors are, go to this other question where I answered with links to the specific parts of the U.S. Code and the person still said no one could cite the law.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aq3XGbGQ2VjRZgWz8B74LJjty6IX?qid=20070802180120AAtEvrX&show=7#profile-info-cpCUgkyuaa

To Ted: You need to get some facts. Tax protestor arguments are wrong. The income tax, in a constitutional sense, is an INDIRECT tax and therefore does not need to be apportioned. In Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916), the court stated, “by the previous ruling [in Brushaber] it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of INDIRECT taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation....” Even if you disregard that ruling, the wording of the 16th amendment specifically says an income tax can be levied without apportionment, making your argument frivolous at best.

The Federal Reserve is structured like a corporation, but it is not private. The shares of any district bank of the Federal Reserve cannot be sold on the market. BY LAW, only a small portion of the shares can even be held by private individuals or corporations. What is truth is that national banks, like Bank of America, N.A., have to subscribe to shares in their district banks. This is to ensure the Federal Reserve system has some control over the amount of reserve each member bank is to maintain. YOU need to get some facts and actually learn the TRUTH instead of getting your 'truth' from a conspiracy theory video produced and made by a guy who never finished high school.

Answer 2

The law comes from the U.S. Constitution which says that "the states may levy taxes." The misconception is that the "states" are separate from the federal government. However, when the Constitution was written, the "states" were considered a collective unified group. The Supreme Court also interprets it the same way. So, when you read the Constitution and you see the word "states," add on the implied word in front "United." United States = Federal Government. Do you remember the guy who wrote the book saying that the IRS has no right to collect taxes? Several people read the book and were non-filers and did not pay their taxes for several years. That same guy who wrote the book is in prison and all of those people who didn't pay their taxes are being levied by the IRS. So, like all the rest of us "United States" citizens, you have to pay taxes. You may keep the $100,000 reward because you will probably need it to pay the IRS if you are one of the people who was mis-led by that guy's book.

As far as a law that requires you to file, the Constitutional law only says that you have to pay the taxes. The Constitution is the backbone of the U.S. Code which creates another form of law called administrative code. Administrative code comes about through the workings of government bodies and agencies such as the IRS who make rules. The revised code gives this administrative code the "full effect" of law and for all practical purposes the courts treat the administrative code as law. So, the IRS rules are not only rules, they are law. So, if the IRS says you have to "file," then the law says you have to file. Like I said before, keep that $100,000 in case you need it. Try to have fun in life and not worry too much about the taxes since there is nothing you can do about it anyway!!!

Answer 3

Some publicity hungry 'tax protesters' have made such offers. However considering that they have rejected the rulings of the IRS and the federal courts that say that hey are wrong is there any chance that they are going to accept YOUR explaination?

In reality they are playing with a bit of semantics. If you do not owe any tax you don't have to file, since the whole point of filing is to pay the tax that you owe. However since most people equate filing with paying they get the impression that 'not having to file' means 'not having to pay taxes'

Answer 4

There's some moron of a Tax Kook who has made that offer -- might even be $1 million --- however he refuses to accept the fact that Title 26 is law. Either that or he's just a liar. I'm guessing the latter.

At any rate, in his tax and financial situation he could never pay it anyway. They don't pay those kinds of wages in prison where he currently sits.

Answer 5

Sure there's somebody that's offered a reward to anyone that can provide a law requiring you to file a tax return, but that same person is also the person who makes the decision whether you've proved that a law exists. You don't think he's seriously going to just say "Ok, you're right, I'm wrong, here's you money", do you?

Answer 6

For all that say there is a law, I'd definately suggest you google video, AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM. You'll understand that the income tax is an unapportioned direct tax. Which already is unconstitutional since any direct tax has to be apportioned. That and the Federal Reserve is as federal as Federal Express. It's a private bank for crying out loud. Get some facts.

Answer 7

Al Capone used the same reasoning. The feds couldn't get him for racketeering, but they put him in the slammer for income tax evasion. Go for it. They have computer rooms in most prisons. Let us know how it works out for you.

Answer 8

i don't know about any reward but you are right you don't have to file taxes. our federal prison is full of people that exercised there rights not to file.

Answer 9

Yes! Tell him it's in Title 26, and you'll get the money! Good luck!!

Answer 10

never heard of that one before