The US Constitution does NOT apply to the American people. They did not sign it therefore are NOT a party to it. USA went bankrupt in 1913. It doesn't exist anymore. There is now the USC (United States Corporation) Corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of Practice! The IRS is a Private Corporation. How can the IRS, a non-Governmental Body, show you a Law that does not exist for a country that does not exist? EDUCATION!
The US Constitution does NOT apply to the American people. They did not sign it therefore are NOT a party to it. USA went bankrupt in 1913. It doesn't exist anymore. There is now the USC (United States Corporation) Corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of Practice! How can the IRS, a non-Governmental Body, show you a Law that does not exist for a country that does not exist? EDUCATION!
The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was passed by both houses of Congress as House Resolution 8300, and was signed by President Eisenhower on August 16, 1954, at about 9:45 a.m., becoming Public Law 83-591, 68A Stat. 3. The Internal Revenue Code (Title 26) is now known as the “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” as a result of changes made by Public Law 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085 (10/22/1986
through fear and ignorance, the government keeps us its slaves..when will people ever wake up to reason...to deny people theyr rights, is to enslave them, regardless of what the law says... its ultimately the responsibility individual man and woman to defend and preserve theyr own rights... american law was meant to protect our rights, but when government fails to do that, or in this case, violates our rights, its our responsibility to take action...that is, if we want to be free
The IRS is apparently investigating Cryer's tax liabilities for the years 2002 through 2007, and filed a petition to enforce an IRS administrative summons against Cryer. The district court ordered Cryer to comply with the summons, rejecting his claim of 5th Amendment privilege. United States v. Cryer, No. 5:09-cv-01144-TS-MLH (U.S.D.C. W.D. La. 6/16/2010).
The IRS has been the main intimidating factor in America. The Founders of this nation would have abhorred a private corporation like the IRS to run roughshod over the people. In fact, they would have taken up arms against them from the outset.
@joe80dman "The Founders of this nation would have abhorred a private corporation like the IRS to run roughshod over the people" Oh wow...and what's the latest from Thomas Jefferson on this subject? John Adams? Ben Franklin? That's right - nothing! Because they're dead and dead people don't give a shit what you think.
@darrellmellissa Repeat after me: Congress has had the power to collect income tax, Congress has always had the power to collect income tax and Congress will always have the power to collect income tax. If your Kool-Aid swilling statement was remotely true (and it isn't) then please explain Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. That's right - you can't.
@bosunbilly I suggest yopu go back and read it, Theres not a thing in there about income tax,, the wrd appropiations,for 2 years only, is there,, also congress prints the money not the fed bank.
@darrellmellissa First paragraph in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
@darrellmellissa It never fails to amaze me how anyone can be on the Internet (the largest research library in the world) and make ignorant statements like yours.
@darrellmellissa Repeat after me: Congress has had the power to collect income tax, Congress has always had the power to collect income tax and Congress will always have the power to collect income tax.
@bosunbilly Actually you made a mistake. There is nothing in there about "income" tax. And nothing in there about the the IRS being Congress- it only talks about Congress having the power----no other entity.
And this is precisely how folks like Peter Hendrickson, Irwin Schiff, Bill Benson and other so-called de-tax gurus look at you.
You're cannon fodder.
If you end up in prison or getting taken to the cleaners, it's no big deal to them - you just didn't follow their instructions to the letter and it's your fault.
They get to walk around scott free - that is, until the IRS catches on to their little scheme, just like they did Hendrickson.
no retsquid wages of the common worker in america is NOT taxable,read the laws. there is NO law saying the common worker has to pay taxes and never has been. some people do Federal workers,people who live in DC i cant remember them all but it is just a few people who have to pay taxes. what dont you get about there is now law that says you have to pay taxes.if everybody in merica has to sshow us the law from the law books period.
TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1. Tax imposed
There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of-
(a) Married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses...Heads of households...Unmarried individuals...Married individuals filing separate returns....
a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
retsquid is on every 90 percent of irs related videos on youtube bashing all of the people against the irs, he is here to make us look crazy, i wouldnt be suprised if the irs hired him!
People, what everyone needs to do is learn EXACTLY what the code says, and this is very important, HOW it says it. The code IS constitutional, yet taxing your private sector, unprivileged receipts is not. So, how can this be? You have told, and have allowed others to tell the Government your pay IS taxable so they tax you. How the hell did I do that you say? Find out the way I did. Google CRACKING THE CODE by Peter Hendrickson. Go to his website and start reading. Wake-up from the Matrix people
Don't listen to what RATsquid has to say. It is very obvious he's one of the 130,000 IRS PARASITES that are feeding on YOU every day. Google CRACKING THE CODE by Peter Hendrickson. Go to his site LOST HORIZONS and learn what the code REALLY says as apposed to what they want you to THINK it says
Pete Hendrickson Advocates filing! He also advocates claiming zero income.
Followers have recovered 10.5 Million including SSI and everything. He lost a summary judgment last I heard a couple of years ago. That is what happens when you give the the federal courts sole discretionary power to interpret their own laws, you will almost always lose!. But he is still at it!
Not surprising, it isn't the way to go. Every war has cannon fodder. 10.5 million will not be recovered by the IRS and state agencies. Now that they got what they wanted very few will have to pay it back with the exception of some of the larger returns and those that don't know how to handle IRS notices. It is funny how much of YOUR tax money was paid to shut this guy down. Don't forget to file on April 15th, taxpayer.
They already recovered it - all of it, with penalties and interest.
You really aren't up on current events, are you?
Of course you don't get the Gacey reference. You're too brain dead to look anything up which is why your information on Hendrickson and his little scam is hopelessly out of date.
And that's why you're too chickenshit to not file your taxes. You'd rather someone else get it in the neck while you talk a big game.
I've seen your kind before. You secretly file while you tell everyone else they don't have to and hope someone's stupid enough to take your word and if they're successful, you take all the credit.
@bosunbilly : Well, just make sure you pack Mr. Glock, and Mr. Assault Rifle when they come knocking on your door. Wouldn't IRS agents be Trespassing on private property if they came to your door? Would they expect you to just cower, and remove yourself from your own dwelling? They'll always send their "expendables" to do their dirty work. Be brave! No one lives forever anyway.
@joe80dman "Wouldn't IRS agents be Trespassing on private property if they came to your door?" Wow...welcome to joe's alternate universe - where we only agree with the laws we like and IRS agents coming to your door on official business are trespassers.
@bosunbilly : Wrong, retard boy. NOBODY can enter onto private property unless they have the proper, legal documentation, or an invite from the property owner. This would be a Search warrant. Yes, many arrogant agents, who think scripted TV shows are instructional and real, become decapitated by righteous land owners. Yes, they die, and all because they wanted to be tough, and arrogant.
Oh, don't worry! The media will air a bagpipe parade to patronize those dumb souls!
the IRS has won many times more cases than they have lost.. it is mostly due to the knowledge of the person being put on trial.. if they think they can bulldoze u they will ..very few lawyers will defend u even if they take ur case ..they know their career in law would be over
recession is only a hidden tax agenda for those who are not paying taxes. That's why obama increased taxes on tonic and cigarettes across the nation. And the boycot's will continue.
It's not america's duty to pay for free healthcare to 12 million illegal aliens for their healthcare or homes or credit cards go fuck yourself you communist
The plain language of the IRC, however, belies this assertion, stating in section 1 that a tax is hereby IMPOSED on the taxable income of every individual (emphasis added). Although plaintiff attempts to distinguish between imposing a tax and creating a liability for a tax, there is no difference. Every individual has an affirmative duty to pay taxes.
they sure will the hard way when obongo taxes the industries and those companies pass it onto the consumer just like cigarettes and cokes. And jimmy carter style politics are back in swing. gl
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises
Amendment 16 - 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.
Alabama, Kentucky, South Carolina, Illinois, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Maryland, Georgia, Texas, Ohio, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Montana, Indiana, California, Nevada, South Dakota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, Michigan, North Carolina, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Maine, Tennessee, Arkansas, Wisconsin, New York, Arizona, Minnesota, Louisiana, West Virginia, New Mexico, Massachusetts, New Hampshire all ratified it.
This court recognizes that the Internal Revenue Code is positive law applicable to disputes concerning whether taxes are owed by someone like the plaintiff. This court refuses to embrace the plaintiff's position that the tax laws of the United States are some kind of hoax designed by the IRS to violate the constitutional rights of United States citizens. Quite simply, the court finds plaintiff's position preposterous.
There are a handful of people who have avoided criminal (but not civil) penalties by convincing a jury that they were too STUPID or delusional to understand the tax laws and their violations were not willful, but no one has ever won against the IRS in a tax collection case using one of the TPs frivolous arguments.
I have won using the law in the legal sense.... I have also obtained an injunction against the United States of America....Have you or has anyone you know or heard of ? You are a Squid all right now pay your bills.
You are ignorant of Statutory Tax Construction.....Duty is not in the Statutes at all....duty is a weasel word meaning exactly what it is and not what they walso ant you to assume what it is...Duty is a moral or legal obligation..(BLACK'S LEGAL LAW DICTIONARY) .in the voluntary system of taxation it is in the moral sense and not the legal.....Just like the weasel word owe....l may owe you a favor but you will play hell collecting it if I decide not to grant it. Favor is another weasel word..
As if you care what is missing. You just respond with automatic pre-programed diatribe. Looks to me that you are a card carrying member of the third oldest profession.
OKAY STUPID....SQUID... READ READ YOU IDIOT...TAX IS ON ".....INCOME...." NOT ON WAGES , DOLLARS, DIVIDENDS, ETC.... You and everyone else are trying to make a direct tax out of a indirect excise tax...... read you moron.... then go out an get a real job.
Let us now put [the question] to rest: WAGES ARE INCOME. Any reading of tax cases by would-be tax protesters now should preclude a claim of good-faith belief that wages or salaries are not taxable
United States v. Koliboski
Whether the tax is to be classified as an excise is in truth not of critical importance. If not that, it is an impost [citations omitted] or a duty [citations omitted].
Chas. C. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582 (1937)
koliboski represents that the income from wages is taxable...big difference..... the other Machine co is a social security contribution....READ READ YOU FOOL
There is no Law.......so now what.?....No one so far has been smart enough to use that knowledge.....Just plain ignorant!!!!!!
What happened to all the legal minds who blow judical tyranny and oppression for no other reason they are just plain ignorant and want to blame thier lack of knowledge on irs oppression and judicial bias...They lose because they are legally incompetent...Bobby Fisher they are NOT !!
What kind of freedom is that which requires free people to legally pay for anothers dreams, schemes, wants, desires, pleasures, wealth building, failures bailouts & other legal mischief when I cannot force my neighbor to pay for my dreams, schemes...?
HOW CAN THERE BE LAW OR COURTS OF LAW THAT PERMITS LEGAL STEALING & LEGAL SLAVERY?
FORGET LEGAL THIEF ARGUMENTS ITS TIME TO BAND TOGETHER. We need unity not legal arguing.
I-FEEL-MAN-TOOLS[1,2,3,4,...]/stoplegalthiefspam[1,2...]/SpamOLabeler[1,2...] (and many others) says, and therefore I define the words to my benefit and protection."
Maybe you need to use words as everyone else uses them and not make up your own definitions.
after seen Ron Paul on reality report man am proud u have men like him in america n i joined Restore the Republic even am not american live or ever visited the usa but because i believe you have been robbed systematically by the thugs running your financial institutions including the fed res n to me ANY wrong committed by ANYONE against another human is wrong can't do much other than send to all my friends all the information i get from R t R but its many like me all over the world on u r side
sorry to say the IRS wins the majority of cases when people go to trial.. if u r lucky and get a good jury & judge u might win but most judges will support the government 100%.. most juries can be "packed" by a good lawyer to give the best results for his case.
On January 21st, 2004 Schiff filed a brief in the District Court of Nevada Civil Case CV-S-01-0895-PMP (LRL) claiming "Insanity" in his defense for failing to pay his Federal Income Taxes! He contends he suffers from a mental disease or defect and exhibits symptoms of chronic severe delusional personality disorder!
i had to read it 3 times before it hit me but i had studied it for yesrs and this is the ket to it all. I would from ecperiance add to the letter on page 152 first email or write to the payroll person if the co. is a federal intity or contractor. after you get a reply saying no . then write up the short letter on page 152 and find a W4-T (termination). thats it they have to do it , no more withholding . as for what was wrongfully withheld previously you file a 1040 with a 4852 not the w2 .
did you file already . if so then you have to do an amendment file and thats a pain . i would just work on stopping the withholding the right way . that way next year you only have a small amount to file for and then the next year nothing.
and by the way , i also had my employer cancel my w-4 and end withholding.
one more comment: as above
The IRS will challenge the claims of individuals who
attempt to avoid or evade their federal tax liability by using Form
4852 in a manner other than as prescribed.
they challenge it first to see what you know , and the reason the irs has the form is to correct an incorrect or missing w2. they cant prove it is in error if used to dispute the w2 claim because the filer has the final word.
Taxpayers' argument that compensation for labor is not constitutionally subject to the federal income tax is without merit. There is no constitutional impediment to levying an income tax on compensation for a taxpayer's laborsthe term income includes the compensation a taxpayer receives in return for services rendered. Taxpayers' argument that wages received for services are not taxable as income is clearly frivolous. Funk v. Commissioner
TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1. Tax imposed
There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of:
every married individual, every surviving spouse, Heads of households, Unmarried individuals, Married individuals filing separate returns, Estates and trusts.
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
In fact, ever since the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment nearly a hundred years ago, no cases, from the Supreme Court or from any other federal court, have ruled favorably on any tax protestors theories, while hundreds of cases have specifically considered and rejected them. Judicial decisions are 100% against tax protestor theories—not 90%, not 99%, but 100%.
So how can tax protestors possibly think that the cases support them? Are they blind? Just a bunch of uneducated losers?
You like to paint people with "tax protester". Juries decide cases not judges. Unfortunately in America today, juries are not permitted to examine all the evidence in tax cases. I wonder why? And if someone's understanding of the tax laws differs from yours, how does that make them a tax protester. My studies of the tax laws doesn't make me a tax protester. It only points out the fact that I really wish to know the real facts about the income tax law. Ask me a question I will answer honestly.
The day when any of these crackpot theories, especially the ones concerning the 16th Amendment, make any appreciable dent in the law as it stands today then, and only then, will I concede that you may have a point.
The day when any of these crackpot theories, especially the ones concerning the 16th Amendment, make any appreciable dent in the law as it stands today then, and only then, will I concede that you may have a point. That day will never come Bosun, The government won't admit to duping the public for all these years.
The day when any of these crackpot theories, especially the ones concerning the 16th Amendment, make any appreciable dent in the law as it stands today then, and only then, will I concede that you may have a point.
And just like the day that the IRS or Congress for that matter actually comes out and shows the law which makes American citizens liable for the income tax, instead of dodging the question altogether, then I too shall concede, but it's gotta come straight from the horses mouth.
and bill. don't worry. as soon as i get that pdf from benson i'll link it here and every single page about the 16th ammendment just to shut you up
Even without it you can see the IRS is full of shit just from the current law. (or absence of tax law enforcement whichever you wanna look at it). Title 26 my ass. LOL
but if you're already want to admit defeat that knox lied about the approval from the state of Kentucky already.. We can always skip this and move on to the next bullshit
we'll just slowly prove document after the next how idiotically misleaded you are.
^___~ it'll be a great day indeed. And that day is coming soon
Cite something that says income tax is only for Government employees. "Sure thing, here ya go RetSquid- 26 USC 3404 Return and Payment by Governmental Employer."
If it was for Gov't employees only I still would not be liable. The Military are NOT considered employees of the Gov't. (can't quit, go on strike, be a union, etc.).
?????? Please tell me your just joking RetSquid, you really can't be that dense, can you?
Notice the "IF", nothing about income tax being ONLY for employees OF the US.
Your half ass attempt at understanding law for how it's legally interpreted is your downfall. You better redo your research on military members/personnel not being considered government employees dumbass, who payed you when you were in the military? Now who's the WHACK you f'n moron. I didn't say income tax was "Only" for government employees, learn to read before you chime in with false intelligence.
Under the circumstances here recited it is obvious the appellees [whose property had been seized by the IRS to pay the taxes of another] are not taxpayers in the strict sense of the word, and therefore they do not come within the orbit of the income tax laws here invoked.
Footnote #3...The term "taxpayer" in this opinion is used in the strict or narrow sense contemplated by the Internal Revenue Code and means a person who PAYS, OVERPAYS, or is SUBJECT TO PAY his own personal income tax. (See Section 7701(a) (14) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.) A "nontaxpayer" is a person who does not possess the foregoing requisites of a taxpayer. (emphasis added)
Read the entire case to find out what it really means.
now how about an example of someone: who is NOT "person who PAYS, OVERPAYS, or is SUBJECT TO PAY his own personal income tax" An example would be an "American soveriegn citizen such as you and I or any non-government employee. Wait a minute, you're retired Navy Retsquid so that would make you subject to the income tax because you were a government employee which there happens to be a USC code for.
Cite something that says income tax is only for Government employees.
If it was for Gov't employees only I still would not be liable. The Military are NOT considered employees of the Gov't. (can't quit, go on strike, be a union, etc.).
The Military are NOT considered employees of the Gov't. (can't quit, go on strike, be a union, etc.).
No you can't strike because when you sign your government paperwork you're signing your rights and priviledges away to be able to strike, form a union, etc. You are considered a government pawn. If military personnel aren't considered government employees, then whose employees are the military personnel considered to be RetSquid?
Exactly, so does that not make you a government employee RetSquid? When the government told you to "run" didn't you reply "How fast?" When the government told you to "jump" didn't you reply "How high?". You went where your governmental boss told you to go. Now we here are telling you where to go as well!!
LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930) The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,'
This 1930 case superceeds your 1900 case Ya and this case superceeds your 1930 case. "The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law.Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, 470 F. 2d 585 (1972)
There are a handful of people who have avoided criminal (but not civil) penalties by convincing a jury that they were too STUPID or delusional to understand the tax laws and their violations were not "willful," but no one has ever won against the IRS in a tax collection case using one of the frivolous arguments described.
You're mental block which enables you RetSquid from properly defining and interpreting law for how it's legally written must be a burden. Here's a solid definition of "direct tax" from the US Supreme Court:
"Direct taxes bear upon persons, upon possessions, and enjoyment of rights"
Knowlton v. Moore, 178 US 41
So with this SC case mentioned, how again is the "income tax" constitutional again?
"The Sixteenth Amendment declares that Congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes on income, 'from whatever source derived' without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration. It was not the purpose or the effect of that amendment to bring any new subject within the taxing power. Congress already had the power to tax all incomes."
And you see there we go again Bosun relying on secondhand information "Because they said so." How does the SC know it was properly ratified without researching and witnessing the proper legal documents for themselves and better yet, How about showing that legal proof of ratification to the people. Afterall according to the U.S Constitution, Congress is supposed to work for the people, not the other way around. Instead of just relying on "Because they said so."
So what else is there besides the United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the land and the court that decides which laws are and are not constitutional?
This is pud pulling on your part to suggest that there is some other forum to decide this issue.
SHOW US THE LAW!
fuckilluminatiscum 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The US Constitution does NOT apply to the American people. They did not sign it therefore are NOT a party to it. USA went bankrupt in 1913. It doesn't exist anymore. There is now the USC (United States Corporation) Corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of Practice! The IRS is a Private Corporation. How can the IRS, a non-Governmental Body, show you a Law that does not exist for a country that does not exist? EDUCATION!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The US Constitution does NOT apply to the American people. They did not sign it therefore are NOT a party to it. USA went bankrupt in 1913. It doesn't exist anymore. There is now the USC (United States Corporation) Corporations don't have LAWS they have CODES of Practice! How can the IRS, a non-Governmental Body, show you a Law that does not exist for a country that does not exist? EDUCATION!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
He deserves to go to jail. You losers need to man up and pay your taxes.
proferic 10 months ago
@proferic There is no LAW. Just a TAX code which it not a Law. Do your research. God Bless
OneCoolPr 9 months ago
@OneCoolPr I did do my research. The Code was passed by Congress. It's the law.
proferic 9 months ago
@OneCoolPr
The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was passed by both houses of Congress as House Resolution 8300, and was signed by President Eisenhower on August 16, 1954, at about 9:45 a.m., becoming Public Law 83-591, 68A Stat. 3. The Internal Revenue Code (Title 26) is now known as the “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” as a result of changes made by Public Law 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085 (10/22/1986
RetSquid 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this free to look at go to Google video Douglas County, OR - Special Tax Liens Meeting 09-07-2007
stanleymims 1 year ago
Any word on Mr. Cryers Trial from Tue.1/11/11 ???
asicit2b 1 year ago
through fear and ignorance, the government keeps us its slaves..when will people ever wake up to reason...to deny people theyr rights, is to enslave them, regardless of what the law says... its ultimately the responsibility individual man and woman to defend and preserve theyr own rights... american law was meant to protect our rights, but when government fails to do that, or in this case, violates our rights, its our responsibility to take action...that is, if we want to be free
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." - Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
The IRS is apparently investigating Cryer's tax liabilities for the years 2002 through 2007, and filed a petition to enforce an IRS administrative summons against Cryer. The district court ordered Cryer to comply with the summons, rejecting his claim of 5th Amendment privilege. United States v. Cryer, No. 5:09-cv-01144-TS-MLH (U.S.D.C. W.D. La. 6/16/2010).
bosunbilly 1 year ago
Do any of you folks get the gut feeling that bosunbilly is an IRS Shill?
joe80dman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@joe80dman "Do any of you folks get the gut feeling that bosunbilly is an IRS Shill?"...You wish.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
The IRS has been the main intimidating factor in America. The Founders of this nation would have abhorred a private corporation like the IRS to run roughshod over the people. In fact, they would have taken up arms against them from the outset.
joe80dman 1 year ago
@joe80dman "The Founders of this nation would have abhorred a private corporation like the IRS to run roughshod over the people" Oh wow...and what's the latest from Thomas Jefferson on this subject? John Adams? Ben Franklin? That's right - nothing! Because they're dead and dead people don't give a shit what you think.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
Actualy theaddenume was never ratified, They just said it was and the sheep just followed along
darrellmellissa 1 year ago 2
@darrellmellissa Repeat after me: Congress has had the power to collect income tax, Congress has always had the power to collect income tax and Congress will always have the power to collect income tax. If your Kool-Aid swilling statement was remotely true (and it isn't) then please explain Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. That's right - you can't.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
@bosunbilly I suggest yopu go back and read it, Theres not a thing in there about income tax,, the wrd appropiations,for 2 years only, is there,, also congress prints the money not the fed bank.
darrellmellissa 1 year ago
@darrellmellissa First paragraph in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
bosunbilly 1 year ago
@darrellmellissa It never fails to amaze me how anyone can be on the Internet (the largest research library in the world) and make ignorant statements like yours.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bosunbilly Your on here ...Right!
tarotimes 1 year ago
@darrellmellissa Repeat after me: Congress has had the power to collect income tax, Congress has always had the power to collect income tax and Congress will always have the power to collect income tax.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
@bosunbilly Only if we comply. Everything comes down to COMPLIANCE!
sickasso72 1 year ago
@bosunbilly Wrong Goverment worker boy.
tarotimes 1 year ago
@bosunbilly Actually you made a mistake. There is nothing in there about "income" tax. And nothing in there about the the IRS being Congress- it only talks about Congress having the power----no other entity.
sickasso72 1 year ago
@sickasso72 And make sure you tell the judge that when he drops the hammer on you for not paying your taxes.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Here are some websites you can join to help in stopping the Federal Reserve's corruption and injustice!
We Are Patriots.us
Prison Planet.tv
Tea Party Patriots.org
Campaign For Liberty.com
Ron Paul.com
109740ewh 1 year ago
"Every war has cannon fodder."
And this is precisely how folks like Peter Hendrickson, Irwin Schiff, Bill Benson and other so-called de-tax gurus look at you.
You're cannon fodder.
If you end up in prison or getting taken to the cleaners, it's no big deal to them - you just didn't follow their instructions to the letter and it's your fault.
They get to walk around scott free - that is, until the IRS catches on to their little scheme, just like they did Hendrickson.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
@bosunbilly I see your on your side of the fence,
freepress666 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Google these videos for a good crash course on the legal/commercial system. Entertaining and informative.
1.Think Free : Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception
2.ThinkFree Presents : The Magnificent Deception
3.Marc Stevens - Adventures In Legal Land
Then For more advanced reading
1. Bill Benson "The law that never was" Endorsed by RetSquid at /watch?v=c1jqLximBZI&
2. LB Bork "The Red Amendment"
3.Famguardian "THE GREAT IRS HOAX.pdf" free download at website.
owensaruba 1 year ago
Google these videos for a good crash course on the legal/commercial system. Entertaining and informative.
1.Think Free : Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception
2.ThinkFree Presents : The Magnificent Deception
3.Marc Stevens - Adventures In Legal Land
Then For more advanced reading
1. Bill Benson "The law that never was" Endorsed by RetSquid at /watch?v=c1jqLximBZI&
2. LB Bork "The Red Amendment"
3.Famguardian "THE GREAT IRS HOAX.pdf" free download at website.
owensaruba 1 year ago
I don't want services from the government. Why should I be forced to pay for those that do?
sapher2020 1 year ago
no retsquid wages of the common worker in america is NOT taxable,read the laws. there is NO law saying the common worker has to pay taxes and never has been. some people do Federal workers,people who live in DC i cant remember them all but it is just a few people who have to pay taxes. what dont you get about there is now law that says you have to pay taxes.if everybody in merica has to sshow us the law from the law books period.
bunker2k1 2 years ago
@bunker2k1
TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1. Tax imposed
There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of-
(a) Married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses...Heads of households...Unmarried individuals...Married individuals filing separate returns....
a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
RetSquid 2 years ago
retsquid is on every 90 percent of irs related videos on youtube bashing all of the people against the irs, he is here to make us look crazy, i wouldnt be suprised if the irs hired him!
matt41083 2 years ago
dont be surprised , i know their behavior ive experience it enough , he is a disinfo agent
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
@matt41083
Make you look crazy? Why hire someone? Most of you guys do a great job all by yourself!
RetSquid 2 years ago
Roidz17 is a liar.
proferic 2 years ago
"retsquid" and "fredandshell" are liers. Don't listen to them think for yourselves...
roidz17 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People, what everyone needs to do is learn EXACTLY what the code says, and this is very important, HOW it says it. The code IS constitutional, yet taxing your private sector, unprivileged receipts is not. So, how can this be? You have told, and have allowed others to tell the Government your pay IS taxable so they tax you. How the hell did I do that you say? Find out the way I did. Google CRACKING THE CODE by Peter Hendrickson. Go to his website and start reading. Wake-up from the Matrix people
FredandShell 2 years ago
Don't listen to what RATsquid has to say. It is very obvious he's one of the 130,000 IRS PARASITES that are feeding on YOU every day. Google CRACKING THE CODE by Peter Hendrickson. Go to his site LOST HORIZONS and learn what the code REALLY says as apposed to what they want you to THINK it says
FredandShell 2 years ago
Would this be the same Peter Hendrickson who was just found guilty of ten counts failing to file?
Yeah, I'd listen to a guy like that.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
Pete Hendrickson Advocates filing! He also advocates claiming zero income.
Followers have recovered 10.5 Million including SSI and everything. He lost a summary judgment last I heard a couple of years ago. That is what happens when you give the the federal courts sole discretionary power to interpret their own laws, you will almost always lose!. But he is still at it!
losthorizon
dot
com
owensaruba 1 year ago
@owensaruba No, he's not.
He was recently found guilty on ten counts of 26 USC 7206 - filing a false and fraudulent tax return.
He's looking at about 5-30 years, depending on how the judge feels.
Those followers of his had to pay back all that money they recovered because the IRS caught on to their little scam.
Saying that Pete Hendrickson advocates filing is a lot like saying John Wayne Gacey advocates child safety.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
Not surprising, it isn't the way to go. Every war has cannon fodder. 10.5 million will not be recovered by the IRS and state agencies. Now that they got what they wanted very few will have to pay it back with the exception of some of the larger returns and those that don't know how to handle IRS notices. It is funny how much of YOUR tax money was paid to shut this guy down. Don't forget to file on April 15th, taxpayer.
I don't get the Gacey reference.
owensaruba 1 year ago
They already recovered it - all of it, with penalties and interest.
You really aren't up on current events, are you?
Of course you don't get the Gacey reference. You're too brain dead to look anything up which is why your information on Hendrickson and his little scam is hopelessly out of date.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
"Every war has cannon fodder."
And that's why you're too chickenshit to not file your taxes. You'd rather someone else get it in the neck while you talk a big game.
I've seen your kind before. You secretly file while you tell everyone else they don't have to and hope someone's stupid enough to take your word and if they're successful, you take all the credit.
If they aren't - well, they're cannon fodder.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
"Don't forget to file on April 15th, taxpayer. "
I always file my taxes. I get great refunds, too.
And I'm not rotting in a prison or losing my house because the IRS put a lien on it to recover the taxes I didn't pay.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
@bosunbilly : Well, just make sure you pack Mr. Glock, and Mr. Assault Rifle when they come knocking on your door. Wouldn't IRS agents be Trespassing on private property if they came to your door? Would they expect you to just cower, and remove yourself from your own dwelling? They'll always send their "expendables" to do their dirty work. Be brave! No one lives forever anyway.
joe80dman 1 year ago
@joe80dman "Wouldn't IRS agents be Trespassing on private property if they came to your door?" Wow...welcome to joe's alternate universe - where we only agree with the laws we like and IRS agents coming to your door on official business are trespassers.
bosunbilly 1 year ago
@bosunbilly : Wrong, retard boy. NOBODY can enter onto private property unless they have the proper, legal documentation, or an invite from the property owner. This would be a Search warrant. Yes, many arrogant agents, who think scripted TV shows are instructional and real, become decapitated by righteous land owners. Yes, they die, and all because they wanted to be tough, and arrogant.
Oh, don't worry! The media will air a bagpipe parade to patronize those dumb souls!
joe80dman 1 year ago
the IRS has won many times more cases than they have lost.. it is mostly due to the knowledge of the person being put on trial.. if they think they can bulldoze u they will ..very few lawyers will defend u even if they take ur case ..they know their career in law would be over
victor2cutube 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"they know their career in law would be over "
That's because they know they will get laughed out of court and fined for stupid ideas like these.
RetSquid 2 years ago
The rich use the poor against the middle class it's as old as the wheel
BeantownJim 2 years ago
and you are no conservative for which youd know there is no law
BeantownJim 2 years ago
You can't read can you? Title 26 is proof that there 'is a law'.
RetSquid 2 years ago
biggest lie is to tell americans it's their duty to pay income tax
BeantownJim 2 years ago
why? It's the law.
RetSquid 2 years ago
its imposed not self imposed I'm a free man I do not owe another human being a dam thing!
BeantownJim 2 years ago
If enough people hear of this There would be such a CHANGE! in US govt' hahahaha
BeantownJim 2 years ago
IRS reports as from last year revenues are down 34% hmmm sounds like a tax revolt hahaha
BeantownJim 2 years ago
And maybe people and companies are not making as much money? You know, recession?
RetSquid 2 years ago
recession is only a hidden tax agenda for those who are not paying taxes. That's why obama increased taxes on tonic and cigarettes across the nation. And the boycot's will continue.
BeantownJim 2 years ago
This has nothing to do with the legality of income tax.
RetSquid 2 years ago
It's not america's duty to pay for free healthcare to 12 million illegal aliens for their healthcare or homes or credit cards go fuck yourself you communist
BeantownJim 2 years ago
Actually I'm a conservative.
If you don't like what is done with the money, vote them OUT!
RetSquid 2 years ago
not just vote them out stop paying income tax
BeantownJim 2 years ago
Squid you response is FRIVOLOUS...."liable for" is not in any of the garbage you listed..... you are hereby sanctioned in the amount of $50,000.00
iwtfunow 2 years ago
The plain language of the IRC, however, belies this assertion, stating in section 1 that a tax is hereby IMPOSED on the taxable income of every individual (emphasis added). Although plaintiff attempts to distinguish between imposing a tax and creating a liability for a tax, there is no difference. Every individual has an affirmative duty to pay taxes.
Porcaro v. United States
RetSquid 2 years ago
what duty? thats imposed. That's tyrranis to saying socialism and is not Constitutional
BeantownJim 2 years ago
What isn't constitutional?
The tax is imposed, the duty to pay the tax is imposed, you are liable to pay your taxes.
RetSquid 2 years ago
explain to me how its my duty to pay income taxes off my hard earned money?
BeantownJim 2 years ago
Easy, because you are a resident of the United States and it is the law.
RetSquid 2 years ago
No im not a resident either i'm an citizen
BeantownJim 2 years ago
You don't live within the borders of the U.S.?
If you are a citizen you owe taxes no matter where you are.
RetSquid 2 years ago
come get these so called taxes and you will be mightely dissapointed
BeantownJim 2 years ago
Nice to see that you're a wanna-be convict.
RetSquid 2 years ago
millions will do the same hahahahaha wait and see
BeantownJim 2 years ago
And many more tens of millions will continue to support the United States.
RetSquid 2 years ago
they sure will the hard way when obongo taxes the industries and those companies pass it onto the consumer just like cigarettes and cokes. And jimmy carter style politics are back in swing. gl
BeantownJim 2 years ago
I don't like osama.....obama either, but that doesn't mean the tax laws aren't law.
RetSquid 2 years ago
Good then you can pay mine hahahaha
BeantownJim 2 years ago
So you agree that income taxes are the law?
RetSquid 2 years ago
no they are not. but if you want to keep paying them thats your buisness
BeantownJim 2 years ago
O.K. why are the laws in Title 26 not the law?
RetSquid 2 years ago
re read the constitution for yourself try even talking to a constitutional attorney do your own research
BeantownJim 2 years ago
You mean this?:
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises
Amendment 16 - 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.
RetSquid 2 years ago
never rattified always titled or subjected
BeantownJim 2 years ago
According to the House of Representatives
Alabama, Kentucky, South Carolina, Illinois, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Maryland, Georgia, Texas, Ohio, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Montana, Indiana, California, Nevada, South Dakota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, Michigan, North Carolina, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, Maine, Tennessee, Arkansas, Wisconsin, New York, Arizona, Minnesota, Louisiana, West Virginia, New Mexico, Massachusetts, New Hampshire all ratified it.
RetSquid 2 years ago
titles and sections and irs codes yes but no law specifically says you gotta file
BeantownJim 2 years ago
This court recognizes that the Internal Revenue Code is positive law applicable to disputes concerning whether taxes are owed by someone like the plaintiff. This court refuses to embrace the plaintiff's position that the tax laws of the United States are some kind of hoax designed by the IRS to violate the constitutional rights of United States citizens. Quite simply, the court finds plaintiff's position preposterous.
YOUNG, v. IRS
RetSquid 2 years ago
must really eat you knowing that tom cryer is not guilty hahahaha
BeantownJim 2 years ago
There are a handful of people who have avoided criminal (but not civil) penalties by convincing a jury that they were too STUPID or delusional to understand the tax laws and their violations were not willful, but no one has ever won against the IRS in a tax collection case using one of the TPs frivolous arguments.
RetSquid 2 years ago
I have won using the law in the legal sense.... I have also obtained an injunction against the United States of America....Have you or has anyone you know or heard of ? You are a Squid all right now pay your bills.
iwtfunow 2 years ago
Prove it.
RetSquid 2 years ago
You are ignorant of Statutory Tax Construction.....Duty is not in the Statutes at all....duty is a weasel word meaning exactly what it is and not what they walso ant you to assume what it is...Duty is a moral or legal obligation..(BLACK'S LEGAL LAW DICTIONARY) .in the voluntary system of taxation it is in the moral sense and not the legal.....Just like the weasel word owe....l may owe you a favor but you will play hell collecting it if I decide not to grant it. Favor is another weasel word..
iwtfunow 2 years ago
Duty is not in the statutes, but 'imposed' is.
RetSquid 2 years ago
WRONG!
TITLE 26, Subtitle A, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter A, PART I,
§ 1. Tax imposed
There is hereby imposed a tax determined in accordance with the following table[s]:
It is a legal obligation.
RetSquid 2 years ago
legal obligation on what?
iwtfunow 2 years ago
Legal obligation on the individual to pay the tax.
It's kind of hard to have a legal obligation on the inanimate.
RetSquid 2 years ago
tax is on income not individual....your missing a link, just like your box is missing a couple of rocks.
iwtfunow 2 years ago
No, you are just confused.
What do you think is missing?
RetSquid 2 years ago
As if you care what is missing. You just respond with automatic pre-programed diatribe. Looks to me that you are a card carrying member of the third oldest profession.
iwtfunow 2 years ago
Whatever you think is missing, isn't.
RetSquid 2 years ago
OKAY STUPID....SQUID... READ READ YOU IDIOT...TAX IS ON ".....INCOME...." NOT ON WAGES , DOLLARS, DIVIDENDS, ETC.... You and everyone else are trying to make a direct tax out of a indirect excise tax...... read you moron.... then go out an get a real job.
iwtfunow 2 years ago
Let us now put [the question] to rest: WAGES ARE INCOME. Any reading of tax cases by would-be tax protesters now should preclude a claim of good-faith belief that wages or salaries are not taxable
United States v. Koliboski
Whether the tax is to be classified as an excise is in truth not of critical importance. If not that, it is an impost [citations omitted] or a duty [citations omitted].
Chas. C. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582 (1937)
RetSquid 2 years ago
koliboski represents that the income from wages is taxable...big difference..... the other Machine co is a social security contribution....READ READ YOU FOOL
iwtfunow 2 years ago
"get a real job. "
What part of 'retired' don't you understand?
RetSquid 2 years ago
Ret as you display is retarded not retired.
iwtfunow 2 years ago 2
Yeah! Thanks for posting this!!!!
Keep up the good work!
I LOVE YOU DUDE!
joygarner 2 years ago
There is no Law.......so now what.?....No one so far has been smart enough to use that knowledge.....Just plain ignorant!!!!!!
What happened to all the legal minds who blow judical tyranny and oppression for no other reason they are just plain ignorant and want to blame thier lack of knowledge on irs oppression and judicial bias...They lose because they are legally incompetent...Bobby Fisher they are NOT !!
iwtfunow 2 years ago
Here is the law: Title 26
Section 1, imposes the tax
Section 61 defines Gross income
Section 63 defines Taxable income.
Section 6012 requires you to file a tax return if you have income of more than the exemption amount, and
Section 6151 requires you to pay the tax at the time and place fixed for the filing of your return.
RetSquid 2 years ago
hey wheres the law you quoted sections and titles and rhetoric
BeantownJim 2 years ago
Title 26 is the tax code, it is the compilation of tax laws.
RetSquid 2 years ago
What kind of freedom is that which requires free people to legally pay for anothers dreams, schemes, wants, desires, pleasures, wealth building, failures bailouts & other legal mischief when I cannot force my neighbor to pay for my dreams, schemes...?
HOW CAN THERE BE LAW OR COURTS OF LAW THAT PERMITS LEGAL STEALING & LEGAL SLAVERY?
FORGET LEGAL THIEF ARGUMENTS ITS TIME TO BAND TOGETHER. We need unity not legal arguing.
CAMPAIGNforLIBERTY*COM
RESTOREtheREPUBLIC*COM
TRUTHATTACK*ORG
ifreemantoo2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I-FEEL-MAN-TOOLS[1,2,3,4,...]/stoplegalthiefspam[1,2...]/SpamOLabeler[1,2...] (and many others) says, and therefore I define the words to my benefit and protection."
Maybe you need to use words as everyone else uses them and not make up your own definitions.
RetSquid 2 years ago
after seen Ron Paul on reality report man am proud u have men like him in america n i joined Restore the Republic even am not american live or ever visited the usa but because i believe you have been robbed systematically by the thugs running your financial institutions including the fed res n to me ANY wrong committed by ANYONE against another human is wrong can't do much other than send to all my friends all the information i get from R t R but its many like me all over the world on u r side
polygamous1 2 years ago
Thanks so much, i'm not gonna file my income tax either, maybe they'll come after me next.
05311990frog 2 years ago
sorry to say the IRS wins the majority of cases when people go to trial.. if u r lucky and get a good jury & judge u might win but most judges will support the government 100%.. most juries can be "packed" by a good lawyer to give the best results for his case.
victor2cutube 2 years ago
ANybody know the status of Irwin Schiff. It is a shame they imprisoned him for telling the people the truth.
mightytrains 2 years ago
On January 21st, 2004 Schiff filed a brief in the District Court of Nevada Civil Case CV-S-01-0895-PMP (LRL) claiming "Insanity" in his defense for failing to pay his Federal Income Taxes! He contends he suffers from a mental disease or defect and exhibits symptoms of chronic severe delusional personality disorder!
RetSquid 2 years ago
lies
BeantownJim 2 years ago
because THERE IS NO LAW!!!!!! HAHAHAAHAHAHAH
FilmPA 2 years ago
however in a since its about liability you signed a w4 saying they could withhold so they do. cancel the w4 ! losthorozons
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
How do you cancel the w4? I have the book I just don't get it.
thedeadtellnotales 2 years ago
i had to read it 3 times before it hit me but i had studied it for yesrs and this is the ket to it all. I would from ecperiance add to the letter on page 152 first email or write to the payroll person if the co. is a federal intity or contractor. after you get a reply saying no . then write up the short letter on page 152 and find a W4-T (termination). thats it they have to do it , no more withholding . as for what was wrongfully withheld previously you file a 1040 with a 4852 not the w2 .
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
Thanks, I will try it. Is it to late to file the 1040 with a 4852?
thedeadtellnotales 2 years ago
did you file already . if so then you have to do an amendment file and thats a pain . i would just work on stopping the withholding the right way . that way next year you only have a small amount to file for and then the next year nothing.
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
From 4852 says:
Penalties. The IRS will challenge the claims of individuals who
attempt to avoid or evade their federal tax liability by using Form
4852 in a manner other than as prescribed. Potential penalties
include:
c Accuracy-related penalties equal to 20 percent of the amount
of taxes that should have been paid,
c Civil fraud penalties equal to 75 percent of the amount of
taxes that should have been paid, and
c A $5,000 civil penalty for filing a frivolous return
RetSquid 2 years ago
and....
they didnt "challenge" my 4852 ... because it was accurate , not fraudulent, and non frivolous.
walked right into that one. i know from experience you read useless code without application.
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
and by the way , i also had my employer cancel my w-4 and end withholding.
one more comment: as above
The IRS will challenge the claims of individuals who
attempt to avoid or evade their federal tax liability by using Form
4852 in a manner other than as prescribed.
they challenge it first to see what you know , and the reason the irs has the form is to correct an incorrect or missing w2. they cant prove it is in error if used to dispute the w2 claim because the filer has the final word.
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
That "wages" are not income under the revenue laws
That the "subject" of the income tax is never identified in the law
income only means corporate profits
IRSFRAUDEXPOSED 2 years ago
Taxpayers' argument that compensation for labor is not constitutionally subject to the federal income tax is without merit. There is no constitutional impediment to levying an income tax on compensation for a taxpayer's laborsthe term income includes the compensation a taxpayer receives in return for services rendered. Taxpayers' argument that wages received for services are not taxable as income is clearly frivolous. Funk v. Commissioner
RetSquid 2 years ago
TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1. Tax imposed
There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of:
every married individual, every surviving spouse, Heads of households, Unmarried individuals, Married individuals filing separate returns, Estates and trusts.
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services,...
NEXT!
RetSquid 2 years ago
Stop paying taxes
BeantownJim 2 years ago
I noticed that the videos Tom Cryer posted have been deleted..wow.....
BigBStatz 3 years ago
In fact, ever since the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment nearly a hundred years ago, no cases, from the Supreme Court or from any other federal court, have ruled favorably on any tax protestors theories, while hundreds of cases have specifically considered and rejected them. Judicial decisions are 100% against tax protestor theories—not 90%, not 99%, but 100%.
So how can tax protestors possibly think that the cases support them? Are they blind? Just a bunch of uneducated losers?
BEDESQUIRE 2 years ago 2
You like to paint people with "tax protester". Juries decide cases not judges. Unfortunately in America today, juries are not permitted to examine all the evidence in tax cases. I wonder why? And if someone's understanding of the tax laws differs from yours, how does that make them a tax protester. My studies of the tax laws doesn't make me a tax protester. It only points out the fact that I really wish to know the real facts about the income tax law. Ask me a question I will answer honestly.
almartin77 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wanna see my boObs? lol just check out my personal page 0
ankitonair 3 years ago
I've seen bigger boobs on Kandyassmoron.
PNWScout2 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
21/f/single hiiiii boys S
chinaman03 3 years ago
The day when any of these crackpot theories, especially the ones concerning the 16th Amendment, make any appreciable dent in the law as it stands today then, and only then, will I concede that you may have a point.
Until then, you're just deluding yourself.
bosunbilly 3 years ago
The day when any of these crackpot theories, especially the ones concerning the 16th Amendment, make any appreciable dent in the law as it stands today then, and only then, will I concede that you may have a point. That day will never come Bosun, The government won't admit to duping the public for all these years.
PNWScout2 3 years ago
The day when any of these crackpot theories, especially the ones concerning the 16th Amendment, make any appreciable dent in the law as it stands today then, and only then, will I concede that you may have a point.
And just like the day that the IRS or Congress for that matter actually comes out and shows the law which makes American citizens liable for the income tax, instead of dodging the question altogether, then I too shall concede, but it's gotta come straight from the horses mouth.
PNWScout2 3 years ago 2
hahah nice reply bro.
and bill. don't worry. as soon as i get that pdf from benson i'll link it here and every single page about the 16th ammendment just to shut you up
Even without it you can see the IRS is full of shit just from the current law. (or absence of tax law enforcement whichever you wanna look at it). Title 26 my ass. LOL
supermalv85 3 years ago 2
Hmmm...one tin foil hat conspiratist presenting proof and evidence from another tin foil hat conspiratist - whose also an ex-con to boot.
Talk about the blind leading the blind.
Yeah, you go ahead and show me that PDF of only one state that rejected the amendment.
Which state was it again? Kentucky? Hmmm...don't you mean Florida, Rhode Island, Connecticut or Utah? See...Benson's already lying to you again.
bosunbilly 3 years ago
we'll just start with kentucky.
but if you're already want to admit defeat that knox lied about the approval from the state of Kentucky already.. We can always skip this and move on to the next bullshit
we'll just slowly prove document after the next how idiotically misleaded you are.
^___~ it'll be a great day indeed. And that day is coming soon
supermalv85 3 years ago
Cite something that says income tax is only for Government employees. "Sure thing, here ya go RetSquid- 26 USC 3404 Return and Payment by Governmental Employer."
If it was for Gov't employees only I still would not be liable. The Military are NOT considered employees of the Gov't. (can't quit, go on strike, be a union, etc.).
?????? Please tell me your just joking RetSquid, you really can't be that dense, can you?
PNWScout2 3 years ago
TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Subtitle C - Employment Taxes
CHAPTER 24 - COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGES
Sec. 3404. Return and payment by governmental employer
If the employer is the United States...
Notice the "IF", nothing about income tax being ONLY for employees OF the US.
You need to read your references before posting. They don't say what you think they say.
WHACK!!
GOOD LUCK!
RetSquid 3 years ago
Notice the "IF", nothing about income tax being ONLY for employees OF the US.
Your half ass attempt at understanding law for how it's legally interpreted is your downfall. You better redo your research on military members/personnel not being considered government employees dumbass, who payed you when you were in the military? Now who's the WHACK you f'n moron. I didn't say income tax was "Only" for government employees, learn to read before you chime in with false intelligence.
PNWScout2 3 years ago
ME:"Cite something that says income tax is only for Government employees."
You:"Sure thing, here ya go RetSquid- 26 USC 3404 Return and Payment by Governmental Employer."
Me:"Notice the "IF", nothing about income tax being ONLY for employees OF the US."
You:"Your half ass attempt at understanding law for how it's legally interpreted is your downfall."
WHACK!!!
(As in playing whack-a-mole)
RetSquid 3 years ago
cont...
Under the circumstances here recited it is obvious the appellees [whose property had been seized by the IRS to pay the taxes of another] are not taxpayers in the strict sense of the word, and therefore they do not come within the orbit of the income tax laws here invoked.
RetSquid 3 years ago
Footnote #3...The term "taxpayer" in this opinion is used in the strict or narrow sense contemplated by the Internal Revenue Code and means a person who PAYS, OVERPAYS, or is SUBJECT TO PAY his own personal income tax. (See Section 7701(a) (14) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.) A "nontaxpayer" is a person who does not possess the foregoing requisites of a taxpayer. (emphasis added)
Read the entire case to find out what it really means.
RetSquid 3 years ago
A "nontaxpayer" is a person who does not possess the foregoing requisites of a taxpayer. Exactly!!
PNWScout2 3 years ago
True, now how about an example of someone: who is NOT "person who PAYS, OVERPAYS, or is SUBJECT TO PAY his own personal income tax"
RetSquid 3 years ago
now how about an example of someone: who is NOT "person who PAYS, OVERPAYS, or is SUBJECT TO PAY his own personal income tax" An example would be an "American soveriegn citizen such as you and I or any non-government employee. Wait a minute, you're retired Navy Retsquid so that would make you subject to the income tax because you were a government employee which there happens to be a USC code for.
PNWScout2 3 years ago
Cite something that says income tax is only for Government employees.
If it was for Gov't employees only I still would not be liable. The Military are NOT considered employees of the Gov't. (can't quit, go on strike, be a union, etc.).
RetSquid 3 years ago
The Military are NOT considered employees of the Gov't. (can't quit, go on strike, be a union, etc.).
No you can't strike because when you sign your government paperwork you're signing your rights and priviledges away to be able to strike, form a union, etc. You are considered a government pawn. If military personnel aren't considered government employees, then whose employees are the military personnel considered to be RetSquid?
PNWScout2 3 years ago
The Military are not concidered 'employees' at all. There are members of the military, but members are not employees.
RetSquid 3 years ago
There are members of the military, but members are not employees.
Then what are they?
PNWScout2 3 years ago
Members of the Military, Part of the Armed Forces of the United States of America.
RetSquid 3 years ago
Exactly, so does that not make you a government employee RetSquid? When the government told you to "run" didn't you reply "How fast?" When the government told you to "jump" didn't you reply "How high?". You went where your governmental boss told you to go. Now we here are telling you where to go as well!!
PNWScout2 3 years ago
For the fourth time: MEMBERS OF MILITARY ARE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
If Federal civilian employees get a pay raise, it does not affect the Military.
If the Military got a raise, it would not affect the civilians in the Federal government.
RetSquid 3 years ago
U.S. Supreme Court
LUCAS v. EARL, 281 U.S. 111 (1930) The Revenue Act of 1918 approved February 24, 1919, c. 18, 210, 211, 212(a), 213(a), 40 Stat. 1057, 1062, 1064, 1065, imposes a tax upon the net income of every individual including 'income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service ... of whatever kind and in whatever form paid,'
This 1930 case superceeds your 1900 case
RetSquid 3 years ago
This 1930 case superceeds your 1900 case Ya and this case superceeds your 1930 case. "The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law.Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, 470 F. 2d 585 (1972)
PNWScout2 3 years ago
There are a handful of people who have avoided criminal (but not civil) penalties by convincing a jury that they were too STUPID or delusional to understand the tax laws and their violations were not "willful," but no one has ever won against the IRS in a tax collection case using one of the frivolous arguments described.
RetSquid 3 years ago
Your assertion that the "arguments described" are frivolous is frivolous.
RP 08 FTW
ProspectorSam 3 years ago
You're mental block which enables you RetSquid from properly defining and interpreting law for how it's legally written must be a burden. Here's a solid definition of "direct tax" from the US Supreme Court:
"Direct taxes bear upon persons, upon possessions, and enjoyment of rights"
Knowlton v. Moore, 178 US 41
So with this SC case mentioned, how again is the "income tax" constitutional again?
PNWScout2 3 years ago
"The Sixteenth Amendment declares that Congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes on income, 'from whatever source derived' without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration. It was not the purpose or the effect of that amendment to bring any new subject within the taxing power. Congress already had the power to tax all incomes."
Bowers, Collector v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co
RetSquid 3 years ago
And how do we know the 16th Amendment was properly ratified?
PNWScout2 3 years ago
Because 90 years of the US Supreme Court's rulings said so.
bosunbilly 3 years ago
And you see there we go again Bosun relying on secondhand information "Because they said so." How does the SC know it was properly ratified without researching and witnessing the proper legal documents for themselves and better yet, How about showing that legal proof of ratification to the people. Afterall according to the U.S Constitution, Congress is supposed to work for the people, not the other way around. Instead of just relying on "Because they said so."
PNWScout2 3 years ago
So what else is there besides the United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the land and the court that decides which laws are and are not constitutional?
This is pud pulling on your part to suggest that there is some other forum to decide this issue.
bosunbilly 3 years ago