Did you know there is not a LAW stateing that you have to pay your income taxes?

Question

Seriously the sixth amendment was never ratified into law. Supreme court did not pass it in 1913.

and the federal reserve bank is a private bank issuing money out of thin air, that is why the dollar has no value anymore.

look it up you will find that it is true

first off i didnt learn this from an internet site i learned it in my government class. income as stated in the constitution is profit from a business. so it is only a corporate tax which only business have to pay according to the constitution. the money you earn is your personal property and according to the constitution not taxable.
the income tax that you pay does not go to any services that you think it goes to. it pays the national debt issued by the federal reserve bank. and then judges and other political figures that hide the fact that there is no law take the rest of it.

Determined to find the law that requires American citizens to pay income tax, producer Aaron Russo ("The Rose," "Trading Places") set out on a journey to find the evidence. This film which is neither left, nor right-wing is a startling examination of government. It exposes the systematic erosion of civil liberties in America since 1913 when the Federal Reserve system was fraudulently created. Through interviews with U.S. Congressmen, a former IRS Commissioner, former IRS and FBI agents and tax attorneys and authors, Russo connects the dots between money creation, federal income tax, and the national identity card which becomes law in May 2008. This ID card will use Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips which are essentially homing devices used to track people. This film shows in great detail and undeniable facts that America is moving headlong into a fascist police state. Wake up!
Movie: America: Freedom to Fascism

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/

the 16th amendment did not give that power to tax our income it did not change anything in the constitution about being able to tax income of the working man.

the house of representatives in 1913 met over christmas while most were out for the holidays and voted to pass it but the senate never passed it and the media newspapers at the time did not let the public know.

"The 16th amendment gave Congress "no new power", because Congress had that power from the beginning. 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..."
Congress ALWAYS had the power to lay INDIRECT taxes and income taxes are INDIRECT in a Constitutional sense.
"
but if you notice that there is a Co. behind the baltic mining Co. that stands for a company all the cases that have lost against the tax are companies and that is an indirect tax to corporate gains.
Income tax is a direct tax that is unapportioned to the people so it is unconstitutional direct tax has to be apportioned as stated in the constitution.

Answer 1

Did you know that you are wrong?

1. There is a law stating you have to pay income taxes. It is Title 26 U.S.C. Title 26 is the codification of the various acts passed by Congress concerning taxes.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html

2. The 16th amendment was ratified. The book, "The Law That Never Was" is full of errors and misconceptions. In U.S. v. Thomas, 788 F.2d 1250 (7th Cir. 1986), cert. den. 107 S.Ct. 187 (1986) the court stated, "Secretary Knox declared that enough states had ratified the sixteenth amendment. The Secretary’ decision is not transparently defective. We need not decide when, if ever, such a decision may be reviewed in order to know that Secretary Knox’ decision is now beyond review."

3. The Supreme Court does not pass or ratify bills or laws. That is a function of Congress. The Supreme Court expresses an opinion about what a law means and if someone challenges a law on Constitutional grounds, the Supreme Court will decide if the law is Constitutional.

4. You are wrong about the Federal Reserve too. However, there is not enough room here to cover a complete class on the Federal Reserve system. I bet you read or were told that the Federal Reserve has never been audited too. Here is a link to the INDEPENDENT AUDITS of the Federal Reserve.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/rptcongress/annual06/pdf/audits.pdf
BTW, those are part of the Federal Reserve's Annual Report to Congress.

5. If you learned this in Government class, your professor needs to be fired or else you misunderstood and you need to pay more attention.

6. You also need to read the Constitution. NOWHERE does it state that income only applies to corporations. Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes..."
The 16th amendment states, "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
In Betz v. United States, 40 Fed.Cl. 286, 296 (1998), the court stated, "Plaintiff appears to argue that according to the Sixteenth Amendment, federal income tax is not a direct tax on wages or salaries of individuals, but that it is an excise tax on the privilege of engaging in some privileged or regulated activity. Therefore, according to plaintiff, this ‘indirect excise tax’ can only be imposed on the income of corporations and the dividend income of stockholders. Despite plaintiff’s many case citations allegedly supporting his argument, the Sixteenth Amendment, valid as described above, clearly authorizes Congress to levy a direct income tax upon individuals who are United States citizens."

7. Income taxes go into the general fund and Congress decides what to do with it after that. No, income taxes do not just go to paying interest on the debt. A little research clearly shows that. In 2006, the Government paid a little over $405 billion in interest on the U.S. Government debt. In 2006, the Government collected $1.04 trillion in individual income tax revenue alone.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?DocID=203&Topic2id=20&Topic3id=21

8. Also, very little interest gets paid to the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve only holds about $800 billion of the U.S. Government debt. In 2006, the U.S. Government paid $36.5 billion as interest on that debt. However, the Federal Reserve is REQUIRED BY LAW to return excess earnings to the U.S. Treasury. Once the Federal Reserve has paid all expenses, the excess is paid to the U.S. Treasury. In 2006, the Federal Reserve paid $29.1 billion to the U.S. Treasury. This can clearly be seen on the financial statements I linked to earlier.

9. The film "Freedom to Fascism" is full of inaccuracies and falsehoods. Just about every quote in the film is taken out of context. For example, the quote from President Clinton was from a speech he gave on GUN CONTROL. It wasn't about taxes or the Federal Reserve. Also, the Woodrow Wilson quote was never made. Woodrow Wilson did say various parts of that quote, but he didn't say them in 1919. He said them during various campaign speeches in 1911 and 1912. Also, he was discussing corporate monopolies and not the Federal Reserve. You can read that fact for yourself in Woodrow Wilson's book, "The New Freedom" at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/14811

10. You are sort of right about the 16th amendment did not give Congress the power to tax incomes, but not for the reason you think. The 16th amendment gave Congress "no new power", because Congress had that power from the beginning. 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..."
Congress ALWAYS had the power to lay INDIRECT taxes and income taxes are INDIRECT in a Constitutional sense.

11. The 16th amendment wasn't passed by Congress in 1913. It was passed by Congress in 1909. When you talk about Christmas 1913, you are probably referring to the Federal Reserve act of 1913, which was passed by the House on Dec. 23, 1913. It was also passed by the Senate on Dec. 23, 1913. However, did you bother to look up what the Congressional Record has for attendance on those days?
On Dec. 22, 1913, the House passed the Federal Reserve Act with a vote of 298 to 60. That is 358 members of the House out of a total of 435. That is 82%! How does that equate to most were out for the holidays? The Senate passed it by a vote of 45 to 23. That is 68 out of 96. That's more than half too.

12. Ok, I have looked it up and there isn't a single thing true in your entire question.

EDIT: Your addendum concerning the Stanton case that I quoted shows that you know nothing about law. However, I cited that case to show that tax protestors routinely misquote the case. In Tornichio v. United States, 81 AFTR2D PAR. 98-582, KTC 1998-71 (N.D.Ohio 1998) the court stated, Plaintiff argues ‘income’ should be interpreted as limited to corporate activities, and not include wages. He relies on a series of Supreme Court cases rendered shortly after ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, and which define the scope of corporate income. NONE of those cases, however, stands for the proposition that only corporate income is taxable. To the contrary, like Richards, supra, many of these cases state: “income may be defined as gain derived from capital, FROM LABOR, OR FROM BOTH COMBINED”. See, e.g., Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U.S. 170, 174 (1926); Merchant’s Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509, 518 (1921); Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189, 207 (1919); Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U.S. 179, 185 (1918); Stratton’s Independence. Ltd. v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 (1913) (emphasis added). In particular, in Southern Pacific Co. v,. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330, 333-34 (1918), the Supreme Court quoted the income statute at the time as imposing a tax on “every person residing in the United States . . . upon the entire net income arising and accruing from all sources”. Thus, the plain language of the authorities upon which Plaintiff relies belies his position."
ruling aff’d 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 5248, 99-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) Par. 50,394, 83 AFTR2d Par. 99-579, KTC 1999-147 (6th Cir. 1999). In affirming, the 6th Circuit stated that, “Tornichio’s legal assertions are patently spurious, as it cannot be seriously argued that an individual’s taxable income is based solely on income derived from corporate activities,” and imposed additional sanctions for filing a frivolous appeal.

Also, Myrick v. United States of America, 217 F Supp 2d 979, 2002-2 US TaxCas 650,487, KTC 2002-457, aff’d Docket: 02-16428, KTC 2003-327 (9th Cir. 2003) the court stated, "One of the bases for Plaintiff’s position is that he had no taxable income since “income” can only be a derivative of corporate activity. This position, however, is simply untenable and is directly contrary to the law."

In Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1880), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of an income tax against an individual, William H. Springer, finding that the income tax was a constitutional “duty or excise” and not a “direct tax.”

In United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255 (8th Cir. 1993), cert. den. 510 U.S. 1193 (1994), the court stated, "We have rejected, on numerous occasions, the tax-protester argument that the federal income tax is an unconstitutional direct tax that must be apportioned. See, e.g., Lively v. Commissioner, 705 F.2d 1017, 1018 (8th Cir.1983) (per curiam)"

Finally, if you don't want to pay taxes, go ahead and try and declare yourself exempt. Declaring yourself exempt if you are not exempt is ILLEGAL. Also, be prepared for a life of grief because if the IRS decides to collect what you owe them, they will come get it by garnishing your wages, putting levies on your home and any retirement accouts you may have. Basically, you will be broke after they get done with you. So, if you are smart, you will pay your taxes. Also, you will take another government class with a different professor.

Answer 2

16th amendment (income tax)... the following states ratified the amendment
1. Alabama (August 10, 1909)
2. The Commonwealth of Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
3. South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
4. Illinois (March 1, 1910)
5. Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
6. Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
7. Maryland (April 8, 1910)
8. Georgia (August 3, 1910)
9. Texas (August 16, 1910)
10. Ohio (January 19, 1911)
11. Idaho (January 20, 1911)
12. Oregon (January 23, 1911)
13. Washington (January 26, 1911)
14. Montana (January 27, 1911)
15. Indiana (January 30, 1911)
16. California (January 31, 1911)
17. Nevada (January 31, 1911)
18. South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
19. Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
20. North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
21. Colorado (February 15, 1911)
22. North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
23. Michigan (February 23, 1911)
24. Iowa (February 24, 1911)
25. Kansas (March 2, 1911)
26. Missouri (March 16, 1911)
27. Maine (March 31, 1911)
28. Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
29. Arkansas (April 22, 1911)
30. Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
31. New York (July 12, 1911)
32. Arizona (April 3, 1912)
33. Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
34. Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
35. West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
36. New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
37. Delaware (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913)

Answer 3

Technically you are correct, and income taxes are unConstitutional.

*However* the Supreme Court has decided that the 16th Amendment will be interpreted as the right to collect income tax-and have also used it as precendent in many cases, granting it a sense of legitimacy despite it's unConstitutionality. The Supreme Court also set the definition of income as it relates to the 16th Amendment. In Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., the Supreme Court defined "income" saying that income tax could be taken on "accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion." This definition has been supported by the Supreme Court to include any increase in wealth including wages, benefits, bonuses, sale of stock or property, gambling winnings, punitive damages in a lawsuit, and even *FINDING MONEY IN THE STREET*...all are considered taxable income by the federal government, and failure to pay will put you away. (Look at Al Capone-he did 20 years for tax evasion.)

The truth of the matter is that no matter how unConstitutional it is, we are forced to comply with it until we get leaders in office that will support the people's right to their Constitutional government. That's why it's so important who you vote for.

Answer 4

That may be so, but how are you going to go about not paying them? Most employers pay employees legitimately, meaning that taxes are taken out before you even see the check. So unless you are working under the table then there is no way to "not pay income taxes".

Answer 5

If you really did learn this from your government class, I feel sorry for your classmates. None of what you just said makes sense.

There are arguments as to why the Income Tax should be repealed, but try not paying them now and see what happens.

Answer 6

NO, this is not true. It is just Internet tripe. There are MANY MANY laws around Income Tax.

And the government has every right to prosecute you under those laws if you choose to break them.

This is just another "Internet Fact" that is totally bull. Just people who like to make stuff up for this reason, to get gullible people to believe them.

If you decide to belief this garbage, have fun at your trial!

Answer 7

But the funny thing is if you DON'T pay your income taxes, those "non laws" will get your butt thrown in the slammer. I don't think it is too much to pay them - I mean, the money does go to do some good things in this nation. . .

Answer 8

I do not know where you get your information but it dioes state in the constitution and among differt amendments about taxation and it is law. Try not payoing your taxes and see who wins in court. It will not be you and they will state where and what the statutes or constitutional law is.

Answer 9

You haven't a clue. You need to stop reading wacko web sites and try reading something credible instead...or perhaps take a couple of law classes...not to mention economics.