This, plainly means that over 80% of Americans are “voluntarily” paying taxes to the U.S. Federal Government that they need not pay. The confusion exists because it was written to be ambiguous. The bottom line is that Americans who simply earn wages from a job here in US (not from an owned business) are not legally liable to pay income tax, and therefore form 1040 does not apply to them; legally, they don't need to fill it out. Their income is not taxable by law."
"Under subtitle A the income tax is to be levied on Non Resident Aliens, Foreign Corporations earning income in the United States, the Withholding agent for Foreign Corporations or Aliens, and finally American’s living aboard (outside the United States). THAT IS ALL. So in answer to your question if there is an income tax payable by Americans, yes definitely, but only if you fall into one of these categories. You have to pay of course if you are a Corporation.
I had meetings with this woman. She worked off of Franklin Road in Marietta, Ga. She was polite, sincere, very helpful and instructed me along the way. She knew her job inside and out. I consider her one of the most professional persons I've had the pleasure to meet. This was around 1990 or so. I only watched a small part of this video but I can assure you, she knows what she's talking about. I will never forget her honesty and integrity to an idiot such as me as long as I live. I kid you not.
BTW, I'm pretty broke at the moment...so with the little money I have, I am creating my own company. Long story short, even if I don't make one red cent, I'm still obligated to pay a minimum of $800 in taxes. Thats $800 I could pay another American for helping me...I'm super small scale, but maybe creating jobs is only hard because our government makes it complicated.
As a former IRS employee in the collection area for small business/self-employed, you do need to file income tax returns IF YOU ARE LIABLE. There is no doubt or question at this time. The people have the power to put pressure on our representatives, if they will listen. You do need to obey the current IRS rules and regs per publication 17 or risk audits, penalties, etc. Check out "Don't Mess With The IRS."
i like the humor of that one...but seriously, is this video just a hoax making people believe that they really dont have to pay taxes and since its a popular issue to pay tax it becomes an unwritten law.
question, so we are required to document under the 1040 but if it comes up that we owe money we don't have to pay but the majority of people under lack of education in this field will voluntarily pay it off?
She just got out of prison...smh...I'm yet to make up my mind on this and doing some research. But if she is right, then Americans got a lot of work to do.
@RetSquid Well that doesn't really help me make up my mind does it? I don't really care about why she was locked up, I just want to know if she has a point, plus she's not the only one who's saying it. Also, you cant say "she's not right that's why she's IN prison", look around the world, when you have dishonest governments, you don't always get locked up because you are wrong. If I remember, there was a Nobel prize winner in China that was imprisoned for fighting for human rights.
@RetSquid Again, I don't really care if she lied about her income tax or if she defrauded anyone...I only care about the legitimacy of both the 16th amendment and the IRS. And this is mostly due to wordings of the amendment itself. It gives unbridled (income taxing) power to the government..the constitution was created to limit the power of the government. People should never be at the mercy of the government and that amendment does just that.
@RetSquid I am not saying there is no law requiring people to pay income tax...I wish to know if what she is saying is true. It seems you have a pet peeve about this cause you've argued with many people. Well, its my right to be informed and I choose to be. Peace.
simplified .. IRS = KGB .. always has been . and until ppl are not the spinless greedy weasels they've been taught to be... they always will be... nuff said.
@RetSquid yes i do know the kgb had nothing to do with taxes and money.. but they were life ruining and power weilding power nuts without a lease because of who empowers them. and who empowers them?? if you know that then you would of known what i meant. dig deeper and educate yourself a lil further. good luck and cheers
>>>> WARNING: Don't waste your time debating with --------> "RetSquid."
He's either a paid dis-info agent of the IRS and/or the Federal Reserve, or he's simply a jack-off cheerleader for slavery incorporated.
Scroll through the old comments from this video and MANY others like it, and you'll see he's been trolling them for up to 4 YEARS. He trolls tax protest videos only. Strange, don't you think?
Law or not, just ask them what it takes to get it thrown out, most the time they say lack of evidence...then ask if there are any witnesses with personal first hand knowledge that you're a tax payer with taxable income, is there any addmissable evidence that I owe taxes? they'll stutter and fly into a fit of rage.
@RetSquid That's fine. All that shows is i have a job and get money to work. Doesn't prove I'm a taxpayer. other than the law they have nothing. no facts to back up their claim.
They don't have to first prove you are a taxpayer, they just have to prove that you made more than the deduction amount and owe taxes, that makes you a taxpayer.
@RetSquid really..well what evidence do they have that you owe taxes? what witnesses with personal first hand knowledge do they have that say i'm a taxpayer with taxable income? what do they need? facts. the law isn't a fact, it's an opinion, and you must use facts to back up that opinion. doesn't matter if they prove you made more than the deduction, the only thing that proves is ...you've made more than the deduction. not that you owe anyone money that you've earned.
@black9897 For example. If I said i'm going to kill you, took a bat and started swinging off at your head, those are the facts. the legal opinion is that I committed assault and battery. without those facts all you have is an opinion that cannot be backed up. the IRS has an opinion (and a gun) that cannot be backed up other than saying "that's the law" and "according to our information (opinion) you owe us money"
No, the IRS would have the fact that your employer paid you "$X" and the law says that anyone with income over "$Y" has to pay "$Z" amount of tax. If your "X" is greater than your "Y" then you must pay "Z". You can try to argue that the IRS has bad information about your income, but you have to rebut their information from your employer that he paid you "$X".
@RetSquid and that's ALL they would have. They're making the claim I owe them money, because i made something over such number . I may have made something over 'Y", which their titles and law say i then owe them money...but that's an opinion. opinions must be supported with facts, like the example I gave. also, is their complaint in the form of a contract or a tort?
You seem to be very confused on what an 'opinon' is. Court opinions are law, your opinion is not. An IRS 'complaint' is neither contract nor tort, it is either civil or criminal violations of law.
@RetSquid I agree they are law..and thank you for finally admitting the law is an opinion. and are these civil or criminal violations in the form of a contract or a tort? If it's neither then I have no obligation to pay anyone anything.
Court opinions are law, the law is not an opinion. Contract and torts are not civil and criminal law. Torts and contracts are between people, Civil/criminal laws are between the State and people.
Where did you get the idea that you are only bound by contract or tort?
@RetSquid You still didnt' answer my ques. what is used to support the law? facts are! you still haven't given me any witnesses or evidence to back up the claim. and what holds the people to these civil or criminal laws? contract or tort? or just "because we said so"?
Sorry, Title 26, Sections 1, 61, and 63 defined who owes taxes on their income. The law most definitely is a fact, not an opinion. Again, being called a 'taxpayer' has nothing to do with your liability for income taxes, the term comes after, not before.
@RetSquid ok. other than the title and sections what facts do you rely on that prove i am a taxpayer? with taxable income? what? you think the law is a fact? so I could come up to you and say you owe me some of your money, without ANY facts what so ever? first thing they'd ask me is why do you owe me money? i say becuase I said so. which is the exact same thing the law is.."because I said so" that is in no way shape or form a fact.
I don't have to prove you are a taxpayer, neither does the IRS, they just have to prove that you were paid more than the deduction amount and therefore you owe taxes on that income. Yes, the law is a fact, it exists. You would have to prove that your employer lied about how much you made.
@RetSquid oh really? so they don't have to have any witnesses or evidence to prove someone is a taxpayer? it all comes back to the facts. which i'm not sure why you keep confusing a fact with an opinion. let me ask : if i said you committed burglary, is that a fact or an opinion?
@RetSquid yeah...and so what? it's a fact that I have a job. that's it! I'm not arguing the law. I would like to know if there is a factual difference between income, and taxable income? again, not disputing the law or asking about the law. just the facts.
Yes, income is defined in Title 26, Section 61, taxable income is defined in Section 63. If your job pays you, that is covered in Section 61. "Compensation for services" also know as 'wages'. Your employer is testifying that he paid you "X" amount, that is a fact. You would have to dispute that fact in court.
@RetSquid No..I'm not asking about the law. I asked if there was a Factual difference, not what the law says. We all know what the codes , etc say. See, that's another opinion---that i'm a taxpayer with taxable income.
@RetSquid The only fact is being paid. Which doesn't prove anything. Saying I have Taxable income is not a fact, because it's based on the 'codes' which, surprisingly, are also opinions.
If you were paid it proves you have income, all income over the deduction amount is taxable income, that is a fact based on the Code, which is not an opinion.
@RetSquid That's circular reasoning. It still is coming back to the code which is an opinion. Other than the code all you have is an opinion backed by no fact. Please provide evidence the code is a fact without using the code or law. It's like me saying my opinion is right because it's my opinion.
You are really confused and confusing. The tax code is not an opinion.
No, it's like saying your opinion is your opinion, your opinion is not a fact, by definition. You want me to define the law without using any definitons of law.
@RetSquid I'm just sticking to the facts. You're sticking to opinions. Exactly, no one's opinion is fact, not even the IRS's. I did not ask for any definitions of laws. Now you sound like IRS agents. When asked for the fact they keep on giving the law (opinions). Go look up Marc Stevens on youtube.
Nope, just citing facts. LOL!! You asked me to prove the Code (income tax law) is the law without using the code or law. The current income tax Code became law after Public Law 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085 (10/22/1986) was signed into law.
How about this, what do YOU call 'facts'? I have posted nothing but facts, and you keep saying you want to see facts, but not what I posted. THAT is "going around in circles".
Title 26 is the Internal Revenue Code, it is also the law and THAT is a fact that is undeniable.
Again, the term 'taxpayer' just means someone liable to pay taxes under the law. it has no actual bearing on you having to pay income taxes. The term comes after the liability.
When “Freedom to Fascism” was made, 67 million didn’t file a 1040. That number was 34 million in 1975 and it’s about 70 million right now.
Russo understood that the key to defeating these criminals was to stop going along with an illegal tax system and to expose the real criminals behind 9/11/2001.
See “Reflections and Warnings” of Aaron Russo, an interview by Alex Jones.
People dont understand how to protect there sovereignty. American people are boys and girls in the real world. Some dude on a throne in the does not exist! Stop believing and learn how to KNOW! The mental of the masses are very sad mental slaves. And physical slaves lawfully.
Fact United States is a Corporation not a Country.it's'all a fraud. People need to learn about Status of Nations and Nationalize. And grab a Black law dictionary fast! And learn about Contracts.
When "Freedom to Fascism" was recorded 67,000,000 people were refusing to file their 1040. That’s the number of people the IRS claims are required to file “by law” and don’t. In 1975 that number was 34,000,000 and it’s about 70,000,000 now. Russo understood that exposing 911 and the fraudulent income tax would be the key to defeating these criminals.
Once people fully understand that 911 was a false flag operation, only lowlife scum will continue to finance these criminals.
@RetSquid I think you just like being an attention whore,I mean you were proven wrong on another video a few months ago and you are still at it.You either have a mental issue with attention or you a shill.Because if you looka t tax history and the word play that was used would open your eyes,but as I said in the beginning of my comment I think your just an attention whore.
Really? I have yet to be proven wrong on any major topic. The video is wrong, she is a convicted felon, her ideas have never worked in any court case, ever.
@michellegulino I agree. We need more people that understand that the 16th amendment was never properly ratified, and that the politicians are criminals - the REAL enemy.
@RetSquid It was illegally ratified. Research the circumstances in which the votes were taken/counted. Hence we have no real law compelling us to pay a tax on our wages. This is good because these sorts of taxes were not what our forefathers intended.
Sorry, every single State says you are wrong and that it WAS ratified properly. The 16th allows the income tax in it's present form, it does not impose it and even if the 16th was not ratified, your income can still be taxed. The Constitution says Congress only has two limits on it's taxing power, exports cannot be taxed and direct taxes have to be apportioned, income tax is neither.
@RetSquid I'm not here to debate this, and so good luck to you, as you seem to be operating without proper research. I manage a law office, and between me and the lead attorney, and the research we have done, from a legal standpoint I can tell you that it was illegally ratified with only partial membership available to vote.
As I stated, believe as you wish, but you are wrong. Take it from two experts in the research and legal fields.
WOW, I bet that law office is a complete failure!! From a completely "legal standpoint", it was ratified and the Supreme Court agrees with all the States that it was.
@RetSquid Well, "LOL", if you trust the same people that would attempt to prosecute you, to give you legal advice, then I have a bridge I can sell you.
I can't trust what she says. Because she just Misinterpreted the law pertaining to levy's. What it means is, all the government employees in that section ARE NOT excluded from having a levy placed upon them. IT DOES NOT MEAN they are the only ones who are able to have a levy placed upon them. That's why you can't trust Black Women. Their mouths work faster than their brains. This Idiot will get you LOCKED THE FUCK UP if you listen to her. She was better off as an IRS maid and not an Instructor..
The IRS has administrative clerks on the front lines collecting bribes.... Vote for Ron Paul in your state's primaries! He's been talking about abolishing the income tax for 30 yrs!!!
This is really good if you want to go to Federal Prison because no court has ever upheld any of these cases. Shut up, quiturewhining and pay the money or the gov't will F*** you . There is case law enough to prosecute anyone who does not pay their taxes.
@jmartinfaulkner You are right in a sense. But, the real achilles' heel in all of these claims is:
"Citizen" is an office. When you claim you are a citizen of the USA, you are affirming your officership, and thus your liability to pay income taxes.
I have revoked my consent to be considered a citizen of the USA. Furthermore I have waived all benefits. There is only one court in this country that can deal with me, and the bench thereof is abandoned.
Really, you HAVE to tell me where you get these goofy definitions. You don't have to be a Citizen to be liable for income tax, you just have to have income in the U.S. (wages, salary, interest, etc.).
@jmartinfaulkner Actually, there have been documented court cases and/or video in favor of the "citizen" not having to pay the income tax. Not that easy to find, shocker.
Many people don't pay income tax, they don't have enough income to be liable for it. But nobody has been taken to court and won by claiming the income tax was somehow illegal.
My reading & comprehension are just fine. YOU called people who understand a TRUTH,...long before the sleeping masses,....."nut jobs and conspiracy theorists."
It is the people who think OUTSIDE THE BOX, who are the undisputed leaders in this world,....and the obnoxious, narrow minded, fools like you,.....who are the followers.
People like you need to be TOLD what to believe,...you don't search for the truth for yourself.
You need to get yourself some manners, or SHUT UP.
You are disgusting and rude. The only 'NUT JOBS",......are the ones who can't see the TRUTH in front of their face, because they have their head inserted so far in their ass.
People who understand a TRUTH long before the sleeping masses, are LEADERS,....not followers. Now since you seem to be a brainless follower,...why don't you go sit in a corner, until someone tells you what to do next.
It’s the 21st Century, isn’t is about time that we expose the IRS as the exterminator of capitalism? They swoop in like terrorists and unlawfully seize years of hard work and leave you bankrupt – all in the name of justice. They gave my property away with a $12 Million tax credit to line the pockets of Jewish developers at the expense of 1500 low-income tenants and one Middle Eastern developer. Join my crusade against this governmental injustice.
MORONS!!!!!!!! YOU HAVE TO PAY AN INCOME TAX!!!!!!!!!!! Why, you ask? BECAUSE YOU NEED TO HELP DR. HENRY KISSINGER WITH LIFEKILL (Genocide) IN THE THIRD WORLD TO BALANCE OUT THE RESOURCES!!!! That is, to say, to eliminate useless eaters in the third world through overt warfare and silent genocide (ie: Depleted Uranium Weapons). Lifekill is not free, we must all help the Council on Foreign Relations commit genocide in order to balance "Economic Inductance" with "Economic Capacitance".
The IRS wanted my money. I wished I would have had that money to take with me for vacation. But no vacation now. I had to pay the IRS. sniff sniff :-(. Shame on the IRS! They wanted all of our money. They don't care if we needed the money or not.
There are lots of tangents to follow from here, and I'll not do so, but two that are very important for you to research are (1) look up the definition of "acquiescence" in a law dictionary, and (2) Google (including the quotes as shown): "social insurance" "Edward Mandell house"
Also ask the IRS the difference between income and taxable income - they won't be able to tell you. They can't even accurately tell you what plain old "income" is (although they'll try to mislead you to believe that it's any money you bring in). Income is money brought in from derivatives, stocks, bonds, interest, etc. Your paycheck is NOT income - it is equal exchange of value for labor already given. Yes, when you report your "income" you acquiesce.
@RetSquid - If you don't know how to argue it, sure it does. Here are only a few of hundreds of case law precedents I used effectively in support of my claim in court. If I don't discuss this with you further, it's because you've offered nothing tangible in support of your claims to the contrary.
Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. vs. Smietanka, 255 US 509, 518 - 519 (1921)
Butcher's Union vs. Crescent City, 111 US 746, 756 (1884)
Pollock vs. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co., 157 US 429, 629 (1895)
@RetSquid - Flint vs. Stone Tracy, 220 US 107, 151 - 152 (1911) U.S. vs. Whitridge, 231 US 144, 147 (1913) Stratton's Independence, 231 US 399, 417 (1913) Brushaber vs. Union Pacific, 240 US 1, 12 (1916) Stanton vs. Baltic Mining Co., 240 US 103, 112 -114 (1916) Doyle vs. Mitchell Bros., 247 U.S. 179, 183 (1918) Peck vs. Lowe, 247 US 165, 173 (1918) Southern Pacific vs. Lowe, 247 US 330, 335 (1918) Evans vs. Gore, 253 US 245, 263 (1920) Eisner vs. Macomber, 252 US 189, 205 - 206 (1920)
Bowers Vs. Kerbaugh is a capital gains issue, and are related to the fact that the losses plus the exchange rate still had no resulting income due to its relationship to a loan.
In Jerome H Sheip Co vs Amos, it is citing a state excise tax issue.
Redfield V Fisher argues against the ability of the Oregon Constitution to levy a property tax.
In Helvering Vs. Edison Brothers the commissioner was upheld... and the treasury regulations valid.
I really find it unnecessary to keep going. You state you cite laws that indicate the federal government was wrong but you either: 1. post cases that do not relate, 2. post cases where they won?
your reading comprehension skills need work. and you say you've talked to an auditor proving your case? bull. probably something else you are making up. someone else twisting words in hopes people don't actually research the lies you are spreading? geez man.
If they ask, "Are you a U.S. citizen," and you answer yes without asking which "U.S." they mean, you have just acquiesced to being the kind of citizen they want you to mean, which is the one subject to the corporation's rules (federal employee). Call the IRS and ask them for your "federal employee identification number" and they will tell you it's your social security number.
In the case of Hooven and Allison Co. v. Evatt, the Supreme Court warned that there are 3 distinctly different definitions of "United States" and that Americans should be cautious to not get them confused: one being the organic and de jure (true) united states of America, another relating to admiralty (international) jurisdiction and another related to federal forms. It therefore follows that there are multiple definitions of what it means to be a "citizen" of those things.
That is NOT what the court said. But you are a good example of people who don't know how to read a case getting things COMPLETELY wrong and taken out of context.
@RetSquid - Obviously the case is too lengthy to be posted here, but anyone who cares to find and read it, and who can understand it, will come to a conclusion differing from yours.
It probably does stand up in court. But it also probably does not mean what YOU think it does. You can be a Citizen of the United States and under that one of the Fifty States. You could also be a Citizen of one of the Territories of the United States and NOT one of the States, but you have the same rights as any other Citizen.
@RetSquid - I've posted the cases law that supports my position, and have successfully argued them before those who matter. When you post your cases to refute mine, there will be more for us to discuss (but not unless and until).
"The term 'United States' may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States ex-tends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution."
Citizenship has nothing to do with paying income tax if you live in any of the States or Territories.
@RetSquid - "Citizenship has nothing to do with paying income tax if you live in any of the States or Territories."
Pursuant to my discussions with the IRS, they disagree with you on that assertion. And having a social security number makes you an employee of the federal corporation, which makes you liable for all of its non-consumption taxes.
Well, Title 26, Section 1 imposes the income tax on the 'individual', not any person or Citizen. Now, if you are a Citizen you have to pay income tax on your world-wide income, where a resident alien does not. Unless specifically exempted by law any income in any of the United States and Territories is taxable.
First, the "united states of America" and "United States" are NOT the same thing. The former is the republic that we were guaranteed, while the latter is a for-profit corporation doing business with the misleading name, "United States" (just as the Federal Reserve is not "federal"). Look up "United States" on dnb dot com. See also the definitions section of 28 USC, sec. 3002 (15)(A): "'United States' means a federal CORPORATION."
Sorry, you are completely in the dark on this. The U.S., U.S.A., United States, United States of America, capital letters or small case, are all the same entity. And yes the U.S. is a corporation, just like every State, City, County and Town in the U.S.
On her comments beginning at 8:56, "that's not most people," she's actually incorrect upon missing a piece of the puzzle, though she does get close when she mentions acquiescence. People claim themselves to be fed. employees of the "United States" unknowingly. If you have a social security number, or claim to be a citizen of the U.S. without further clarification, you are unwittingly claiming to be a fed. employee. The explanation must be spread out over several comments, so read on...
Note: Tax Protestor, and former IRS Agent, Sherry Peel Jackson. Mrs. Jackson used to work for the Internal Revenue Service and now gives advice to tax protestors. Mrs. Jackson was sentenced to prision for evading income taxes. Google Sherry's name and you will see an article. There is no way to get around it - it is either you comply with the IRS or become a criminal. Some prefer to give up their U.S. citizenship - but that also has repercussions
People, sorry to say, but the legal obligation to pay your taxes do exist and apply to all U.S. citizens! No matter how you "interpret" the U.S. Law to defend your cause; in the end, your "interpretation" to them means nothing! It does not make any sense to "protest" the legality of paying or filing your taxes when they will "define" what is legal! Wake up! The options I see, is to either outrightly resist paying your taxes, comply with the IRS, or give up your U.S. citizenship!
If the Founders were against taxes, why did they give near-absolute power to Congress on the subject? The Founders would have thrown Sherry into prison, just like we did.
The U.S. Constitution does NOT apply to current U.S. 'Residents'! If you didn't sign it then you're not 'a party' to it and therefore it does NOT apply to you! The U.S.C. (United States Corporation) is a business. The U.S.A. does not actually exist anymore and hasn't done for quite a while! There are NO LAWS, merely Codes of Practice! You are NOT Citizens, you're 'property of the corporation'! Perhaps it is time for Americans to get an Education rather than a Big Mac!!!!
@TheChineseEmpire My point is that she said there is no law. But look, she was prosecuted under federal law. So there is indeed a law, and people should be aware of that.
Put scum like the “retsquid” out on the street or in prison where they belong. It’s time to drastically “downsize” this out-of-control, tyrannical, terrorist government.
Let’s start with the Fed, and their private police force, the IRS.
Refusing to pay illegal taxes was a “no-brainer” for our founders. They knew paying illegal taxes would only make things worse for them and posterity.
Meet the people our founders would have admired.
watch?v=IQ36h_TlKSs
Refusing to pay the illegal income tax is the right thing to do and so is exposing the truth about 9/11 and OK, City.
found it on yahoo
bnp143 2 weeks ago
This, plainly means that over 80% of Americans are “voluntarily” paying taxes to the U.S. Federal Government that they need not pay. The confusion exists because it was written to be ambiguous. The bottom line is that Americans who simply earn wages from a job here in US (not from an owned business) are not legally liable to pay income tax, and therefore form 1040 does not apply to them; legally, they don't need to fill it out. Their income is not taxable by law."
me: is this not true?
bnp143 2 weeks ago
@bnp143
Yes, that is not true. The law is very simple, go read Title 26, Section 1.
RetSquid 2 weeks ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
"Under subtitle A the income tax is to be levied on Non Resident Aliens, Foreign Corporations earning income in the United States, the Withholding agent for Foreign Corporations or Aliens, and finally American’s living aboard (outside the United States). THAT IS ALL. So in answer to your question if there is an income tax payable by Americans, yes definitely, but only if you fall into one of these categories. You have to pay of course if you are a Corporation.
bnp143 2 weeks ago
@bnp143
WRONG! Title 26, Section 1 makes 'every individual" liable for income tax. Your 861 argument has failed every time it has been tried.
RetSquid 2 weeks ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
Comment removed
bnp143 2 weeks ago
RetSquid . . is just here to smear. they dont want this to go viral.
split876 2 weeks ago
@split876
It's been here for four years. Most Americans know Russo is jsut a liar or crazy. And Sherry has been proven a liar in court.
RetSquid 2 weeks ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid were you there or was there a troll convention that day?
Meriamen 1 week ago
@Meriamen
When did you stop beating your mother?
RetSquid 1 week ago
@RetSquid when i started whooping YOUR ASS!!!
Meriamen 1 week ago
@Meriamen
WOW, it took you three DAYS to come up with that? I bet you had to ask a lot of your cousins/sisters for help.
RetSquid 1 week ago
I had meetings with this woman. She worked off of Franklin Road in Marietta, Ga. She was polite, sincere, very helpful and instructed me along the way. She knew her job inside and out. I consider her one of the most professional persons I've had the pleasure to meet. This was around 1990 or so. I only watched a small part of this video but I can assure you, she knows what she's talking about. I will never forget her honesty and integrity to an idiot such as me as long as I live. I kid you not.
MrAnonSC 2 weeks ago
@MrAnonSC
"she knows what she's talking about."
I can prove her wrong in just a few words on here. The law is Title 26. She has been proven wrong in court and was sentenced to four years.
RetSquid 2 weeks ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
BTW, I'm pretty broke at the moment...so with the little money I have, I am creating my own company. Long story short, even if I don't make one red cent, I'm still obligated to pay a minimum of $800 in taxes. Thats $800 I could pay another American for helping me...I'm super small scale, but maybe creating jobs is only hard because our government makes it complicated.
MichaelWhite78 2 weeks ago
Fraud, IRS?! Say it isn't so!! I'm with Ron Paul on this issue...we need to stream line our taxes and phase out the IRS.
MichaelWhite78 2 weeks ago
As a former IRS employee in the collection area for small business/self-employed, you do need to file income tax returns IF YOU ARE LIABLE. There is no doubt or question at this time. The people have the power to put pressure on our representatives, if they will listen. You do need to obey the current IRS rules and regs per publication 17 or risk audits, penalties, etc. Check out "Don't Mess With The IRS."
Carrie581 2 weeks ago
i was reading the comments and i was just thinking..., HAS ANYBODY EVEN SO MUCH AS LOOK AT THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS???
MCMJRM 3 weeks ago
i like the humor of that one...but seriously, is this video just a hoax making people believe that they really dont have to pay taxes and since its a popular issue to pay tax it becomes an unwritten law.
Bartrum2009 4 weeks ago
@Bartrum2009
Title 26 imposed the tax and says when and where to pay it. Sherry Jackson was sent to prison for not paying hers.
RetSquid 4 weeks ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
so Im confused, what is the relevance of this video in my quest to presenting the middle finger to tax collection that serves no representation
Bartrum2009 1 month ago
@Bartrum2009
You are represented, by your Congressman and your Senator.
RetSquid 1 month ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
question, so we are required to document under the 1040 but if it comes up that we owe money we don't have to pay but the majority of people under lack of education in this field will voluntarily pay it off?
Bartrum2009 1 month ago
@Bartrum2009
No, you do have to file income tax and you do have to pay.
RetSquid 1 month ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
Fuck the IRS.
StopIllegalAliens01 1 month ago
She just got out of prison...smh...I'm yet to make up my mind on this and doing some research. But if she is right, then Americans got a lot of work to do.
Visionwriter1 1 month ago
@Visionwriter1
She's not right, that's why she was IN prison. If she was right, why did she still file out tax forms for others and make over $400,000 doing it?
RetSquid 1 month ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid Well that doesn't really help me make up my mind does it? I don't really care about why she was locked up, I just want to know if she has a point, plus she's not the only one who's saying it. Also, you cant say "she's not right that's why she's IN prison", look around the world, when you have dishonest governments, you don't always get locked up because you are wrong. If I remember, there was a Nobel prize winner in China that was imprisoned for fighting for human rights.
Visionwriter1 1 month ago
@Visionwriter1
Look at it this way, either way, she lied about her income tax or she defrauded her employers.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid Again, I don't really care if she lied about her income tax or if she defrauded anyone...I only care about the legitimacy of both the 16th amendment and the IRS. And this is mostly due to wordings of the amendment itself. It gives unbridled (income taxing) power to the government..the constitution was created to limit the power of the government. People should never be at the mercy of the government and that amendment does just that.
Visionwriter1 1 month ago
@Visionwriter1
The Constitution itself only has two limits on taxation, direct taxes must be apportioned and exports can't be taxed.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid I am not saying there is no law requiring people to pay income tax...I wish to know if what she is saying is true. It seems you have a pet peeve about this cause you've argued with many people. Well, its my right to be informed and I choose to be. Peace.
Visionwriter1 1 month ago
@Visionwriter1
What part of what she is saying sre you wondering about?
RetSquid 1 month ago
simplified .. IRS = KGB .. always has been . and until ppl are not the spinless greedy weasels they've been taught to be... they always will be... nuff said.
simbad909 1 month ago
@simbad909
You do know that the KGB had nothing to do with money or income taxes, right?
RetSquid 1 month ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid yes i do know the kgb had nothing to do with taxes and money.. but they were life ruining and power weilding power nuts without a lease because of who empowers them. and who empowers them?? if you know that then you would of known what i meant. dig deeper and educate yourself a lil further. good luck and cheers
simbad909 1 month ago
@simbad909
OK, so you were just trolling. I understand now.
RetSquid 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
>>>> WARNING: Don't waste your time debating with --------> "RetSquid."
He's either a paid dis-info agent of the IRS and/or the Federal Reserve, or he's simply a jack-off cheerleader for slavery incorporated.
Scroll through the old comments from this video and MANY others like it, and you'll see he's been trolling them for up to 4 YEARS. He trolls tax protest videos only. Strange, don't you think?
BRYAN351 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To understand the fraud, the real question of liability is: "what law gives force and effect to the IRC?" NeOn314.webplus.net
NeOne314IamOne 1 month ago
Law or not, just ask them what it takes to get it thrown out, most the time they say lack of evidence...then ask if there are any witnesses with personal first hand knowledge that you're a tax payer with taxable income, is there any addmissable evidence that I owe taxes? they'll stutter and fly into a fit of rage.
black9897 2 months ago
@black9897
Usually the just have to show the information that your employer has paid you, either from the employer or your own bank accounts.
RetSquid 2 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid That's fine. All that shows is i have a job and get money to work. Doesn't prove I'm a taxpayer. other than the law they have nothing. no facts to back up their claim.
black9897 2 months ago
@black9897
They don't have to first prove you are a taxpayer, they just have to prove that you made more than the deduction amount and owe taxes, that makes you a taxpayer.
"other than the law" What else do they need?
RetSquid 2 months ago
@RetSquid really..well what evidence do they have that you owe taxes? what witnesses with personal first hand knowledge do they have that say i'm a taxpayer with taxable income? what do they need? facts. the law isn't a fact, it's an opinion, and you must use facts to back up that opinion. doesn't matter if they prove you made more than the deduction, the only thing that proves is ...you've made more than the deduction. not that you owe anyone money that you've earned.
black9897 2 months ago
@black9897 For example. If I said i'm going to kill you, took a bat and started swinging off at your head, those are the facts. the legal opinion is that I committed assault and battery. without those facts all you have is an opinion that cannot be backed up. the IRS has an opinion (and a gun) that cannot be backed up other than saying "that's the law" and "according to our information (opinion) you owe us money"
black9897 2 months ago
@black9897
No, the IRS would have the fact that your employer paid you "$X" and the law says that anyone with income over "$Y" has to pay "$Z" amount of tax. If your "X" is greater than your "Y" then you must pay "Z". You can try to argue that the IRS has bad information about your income, but you have to rebut their information from your employer that he paid you "$X".
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid and that's ALL they would have. They're making the claim I owe them money, because i made something over such number . I may have made something over 'Y", which their titles and law say i then owe them money...but that's an opinion. opinions must be supported with facts, like the example I gave. also, is their complaint in the form of a contract or a tort?
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
You seem to be very confused on what an 'opinon' is. Court opinions are law, your opinion is not. An IRS 'complaint' is neither contract nor tort, it is either civil or criminal violations of law.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid I agree they are law..and thank you for finally admitting the law is an opinion. and are these civil or criminal violations in the form of a contract or a tort? If it's neither then I have no obligation to pay anyone anything.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
Court opinions are law, the law is not an opinion. Contract and torts are not civil and criminal law. Torts and contracts are between people, Civil/criminal laws are between the State and people.
Where did you get the idea that you are only bound by contract or tort?
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid You still didnt' answer my ques. what is used to support the law? facts are! you still haven't given me any witnesses or evidence to back up the claim. and what holds the people to these civil or criminal laws? contract or tort? or just "because we said so"?
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
Sorry, Title 26, Sections 1, 61, and 63 defined who owes taxes on their income. The law most definitely is a fact, not an opinion. Again, being called a 'taxpayer' has nothing to do with your liability for income taxes, the term comes after, not before.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid ok. other than the title and sections what facts do you rely on that prove i am a taxpayer? with taxable income? what? you think the law is a fact? so I could come up to you and say you owe me some of your money, without ANY facts what so ever? first thing they'd ask me is why do you owe me money? i say becuase I said so. which is the exact same thing the law is.."because I said so" that is in no way shape or form a fact.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
I don't have to prove you are a taxpayer, neither does the IRS, they just have to prove that you were paid more than the deduction amount and therefore you owe taxes on that income. Yes, the law is a fact, it exists. You would have to prove that your employer lied about how much you made.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid oh really? so they don't have to have any witnesses or evidence to prove someone is a taxpayer? it all comes back to the facts. which i'm not sure why you keep confusing a fact with an opinion. let me ask : if i said you committed burglary, is that a fact or an opinion?
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
If you employer paid you for a job that you did, is that opionion or fact? It's a fact unless you can prove otherwise.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid yeah...and so what? it's a fact that I have a job. that's it! I'm not arguing the law. I would like to know if there is a factual difference between income, and taxable income? again, not disputing the law or asking about the law. just the facts.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
Yes, income is defined in Title 26, Section 61, taxable income is defined in Section 63. If your job pays you, that is covered in Section 61. "Compensation for services" also know as 'wages'. Your employer is testifying that he paid you "X" amount, that is a fact. You would have to dispute that fact in court.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid No..I'm not asking about the law. I asked if there was a Factual difference, not what the law says. We all know what the codes , etc say. See, that's another opinion---that i'm a taxpayer with taxable income.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
No, if you are paid, then you have income, if that income is over the dedcution amount you have taxable income, those are all facts.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid The only fact is being paid. Which doesn't prove anything. Saying I have Taxable income is not a fact, because it's based on the 'codes' which, surprisingly, are also opinions.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
If you were paid it proves you have income, all income over the deduction amount is taxable income, that is a fact based on the Code, which is not an opinion.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid That's circular reasoning. It still is coming back to the code which is an opinion. Other than the code all you have is an opinion backed by no fact. Please provide evidence the code is a fact without using the code or law. It's like me saying my opinion is right because it's my opinion.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
You are really confused and confusing. The tax code is not an opinion.
No, it's like saying your opinion is your opinion, your opinion is not a fact, by definition. You want me to define the law without using any definitons of law.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid I'm just sticking to the facts. You're sticking to opinions. Exactly, no one's opinion is fact, not even the IRS's. I did not ask for any definitions of laws. Now you sound like IRS agents. When asked for the fact they keep on giving the law (opinions). Go look up Marc Stevens on youtube.
black9897 1 month ago
@black9897
Nope, just citing facts. LOL!! You asked me to prove the Code (income tax law) is the law without using the code or law. The current income tax Code became law after Public Law 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085 (10/22/1986) was signed into law.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@RetSquid You're citing code. No, I asked for facts...you keep going around in circles.
black9897 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@black9897
How about this, what do YOU call 'facts'? I have posted nothing but facts, and you keep saying you want to see facts, but not what I posted. THAT is "going around in circles".
Title 26 is the Internal Revenue Code, it is also the law and THAT is a fact that is undeniable.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@black9897
Again, the term 'taxpayer' just means someone liable to pay taxes under the law. it has no actual bearing on you having to pay income taxes. The term comes after the liability.
RetSquid 1 month ago
Where is part 2?
mistermassive1 2 months ago
Don’t censor this comment you treasonous rats.
When “Freedom to Fascism” was made, 67 million didn’t file a 1040. That number was 34 million in 1975 and it’s about 70 million right now.
Russo understood that the key to defeating these criminals was to stop going along with an illegal tax system and to expose the real criminals behind 9/11/2001.
See “Reflections and Warnings” of Aaron Russo, an interview by Alex Jones.
KevinMerck 2 months ago
@MoronMerck
Those numbers include the entire population, 47% of which do not pay income tax due to the lower incomes.
RetSquid 2 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
This has been flagged as spam show
The real question is: "What laws give force and effect to the Internal Revenue Code?" NeOne314.webplus.net
NeOne314IamOne 2 months ago
People dont understand how to protect there sovereignty. American people are boys and girls in the real world. Some dude on a throne in the does not exist! Stop believing and learn how to KNOW! The mental of the masses are very sad mental slaves. And physical slaves lawfully.
The89FLYGUY 3 months ago
Fact United States is a Corporation not a Country.it's'all a fraud. People need to learn about Status of Nations and Nationalize. And grab a Black law dictionary fast! And learn about Contracts.
The89FLYGUY 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When "Freedom to Fascism" was recorded 67,000,000 people were refusing to file their 1040. That’s the number of people the IRS claims are required to file “by law” and don’t. In 1975 that number was 34,000,000 and it’s about 70,000,000 now. Russo understood that exposing 911 and the fraudulent income tax would be the key to defeating these criminals.
Once people fully understand that 911 was a false flag operation, only lowlife scum will continue to finance these criminals.
KevinMerck 3 months ago
@retsquid would just love this video :)
venuecam 3 months ago
@venuecam
I do, it gives me a chance to show people what the truth is, as opposed to the lies in the video.
RetSquid 3 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid I think you just like being an attention whore,I mean you were proven wrong on another video a few months ago and you are still at it.You either have a mental issue with attention or you a shill.Because if you looka t tax history and the word play that was used would open your eyes,but as I said in the beginning of my comment I think your just an attention whore.
OurOxygen 3 months ago
@OurOxygen
Really? I have yet to be proven wrong on any major topic. The video is wrong, she is a convicted felon, her ideas have never worked in any court case, ever.
RetSquid 3 months ago
WE NEED MORE PEOPLE LIKE HER!!! ASAP
michellegulino 3 months ago
@michellegulino
We need more lying, cheating, ex-convicts?
RetSquid 3 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@michellegulino I agree. We need more people that understand that the 16th amendment was never properly ratified, and that the politicians are criminals - the REAL enemy.
tomperanteau 3 months ago in playlist More videos from nalldavid
@tomperanteau
Too bad that the States are the one to ratify Amendments and they ALL agree that they DID properly ratify the 16th Amendment.
RetSquid 3 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid It was illegally ratified. Research the circumstances in which the votes were taken/counted. Hence we have no real law compelling us to pay a tax on our wages. This is good because these sorts of taxes were not what our forefathers intended.
tomperanteau 3 months ago
@tomperanteau
Sorry, every single State says you are wrong and that it WAS ratified properly. The 16th allows the income tax in it's present form, it does not impose it and even if the 16th was not ratified, your income can still be taxed. The Constitution says Congress only has two limits on it's taxing power, exports cannot be taxed and direct taxes have to be apportioned, income tax is neither.
RetSquid 3 months ago
@RetSquid I'm not here to debate this, and so good luck to you, as you seem to be operating without proper research. I manage a law office, and between me and the lead attorney, and the research we have done, from a legal standpoint I can tell you that it was illegally ratified with only partial membership available to vote.
As I stated, believe as you wish, but you are wrong. Take it from two experts in the research and legal fields.
tomperanteau 3 months ago
@tomperanteau
WOW, I bet that law office is a complete failure!! From a completely "legal standpoint", it was ratified and the Supreme Court agrees with all the States that it was.
RetSquid 3 months ago
@tomperanteau
You might want to send a letter to all fifty Attorney General's and the Supreme Court that they are wrong. LOL!!!!
Would you like the citations of the cases that prove you and your 'lead attorney' wrong?
RetSquid 3 months ago
@RetSquid Well, "LOL", if you trust the same people that would attempt to prosecute you, to give you legal advice, then I have a bridge I can sell you.
tomperanteau 3 months ago
@tomperanteau
I don't trust clueless YouTube lawyers.
RetSquid 3 months ago
wow we are whores and the federal reserve is the pimp!
istofal 3 months ago
I can't trust what she says. Because she just Misinterpreted the law pertaining to levy's. What it means is, all the government employees in that section ARE NOT excluded from having a levy placed upon them. IT DOES NOT MEAN they are the only ones who are able to have a levy placed upon them. That's why you can't trust Black Women. Their mouths work faster than their brains. This Idiot will get you LOCKED THE FUCK UP if you listen to her. She was better off as an IRS maid and not an Instructor..
commonman80 4 months ago
Fuck the IRS.
Einsteinbomb 4 months ago
The IRS has administrative clerks on the front lines collecting bribes.... Vote for Ron Paul in your state's primaries! He's been talking about abolishing the income tax for 30 yrs!!!
SimonAlbert1776 5 months ago
@SimonAlbert1776
Too bad the President doesn't have the power to do that, huh?
RetSquid 4 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
This is really good if you want to go to Federal Prison because no court has ever upheld any of these cases. Shut up, quiturewhining and pay the money or the gov't will F*** you . There is case law enough to prosecute anyone who does not pay their taxes.
jmartinfaulkner 5 months ago
@jmartinfaulkner You are right in a sense. But, the real achilles' heel in all of these claims is:
"Citizen" is an office. When you claim you are a citizen of the USA, you are affirming your officership, and thus your liability to pay income taxes.
I have revoked my consent to be considered a citizen of the USA. Furthermore I have waived all benefits. There is only one court in this country that can deal with me, and the bench thereof is abandoned.
The const. is just a goddamn piece of paper!
d3ejmz 5 months ago
@d3ejmz
Really, you HAVE to tell me where you get these goofy definitions. You don't have to be a Citizen to be liable for income tax, you just have to have income in the U.S. (wages, salary, interest, etc.).
RetSquid 5 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid Do your own due diligence.
d3ejmz 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@d3ejmz
I have, that is how I know you are wrong. You can't even come up with anything to defend your own claims.
RetSquid 5 months ago
@jmartinfaulkner Actually, there have been documented court cases and/or video in favor of the "citizen" not having to pay the income tax. Not that easy to find, shocker.
twocan140 4 months ago
@twocan140
Many people don't pay income tax, they don't have enough income to be liable for it. But nobody has been taken to court and won by claiming the income tax was somehow illegal.
RetSquid 4 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012
RON PAUL 2012
End the Fed!
mrtundra45 5 months ago
@anotherdumbcomment
My reading & comprehension are just fine. YOU called people who understand a TRUTH,...long before the sleeping masses,....."nut jobs and conspiracy theorists."
It is the people who think OUTSIDE THE BOX, who are the undisputed leaders in this world,....and the obnoxious, narrow minded, fools like you,.....who are the followers.
People like you need to be TOLD what to believe,...you don't search for the truth for yourself.
You need to get yourself some manners, or SHUT UP.
rainbo5250 5 months ago
@anotherdumbcomment
you projectin', bro?
Elivyndyr 5 months ago
@anotherdumbcomment
You are disgusting and rude. The only 'NUT JOBS",......are the ones who can't see the TRUTH in front of their face, because they have their head inserted so far in their ass.
People who understand a TRUTH long before the sleeping masses, are LEADERS,....not followers. Now since you seem to be a brainless follower,...why don't you go sit in a corner, until someone tells you what to do next.
Maybe you can wait for your TV to tell you.
rainbo5250 5 months ago 7
@anotherdumbcomment
lol you're cool you can denigrate people without looking at the main point of their argument, you must be a winner.
Elivyndyr 5 months ago 5
It’s the 21st Century, isn’t is about time that we expose the IRS as the exterminator of capitalism? They swoop in like terrorists and unlawfully seize years of hard work and leave you bankrupt – all in the name of justice. They gave my property away with a $12 Million tax credit to line the pockets of Jewish developers at the expense of 1500 low-income tenants and one Middle Eastern developer. Join my crusade against this governmental injustice.
mouradprotest 6 months ago
MORONS!!!!!!!! YOU HAVE TO PAY AN INCOME TAX!!!!!!!!!!! Why, you ask? BECAUSE YOU NEED TO HELP DR. HENRY KISSINGER WITH LIFEKILL (Genocide) IN THE THIRD WORLD TO BALANCE OUT THE RESOURCES!!!! That is, to say, to eliminate useless eaters in the third world through overt warfare and silent genocide (ie: Depleted Uranium Weapons). Lifekill is not free, we must all help the Council on Foreign Relations commit genocide in order to balance "Economic Inductance" with "Economic Capacitance".
DRLAPAGLIA 7 months ago
The IRS wanted my money. I wished I would have had that money to take with me for vacation. But no vacation now. I had to pay the IRS. sniff sniff :-(. Shame on the IRS! They wanted all of our money. They don't care if we needed the money or not.
dmana3172 7 months ago
There are lots of tangents to follow from here, and I'll not do so, but two that are very important for you to research are (1) look up the definition of "acquiescence" in a law dictionary, and (2) Google (including the quotes as shown): "social insurance" "Edward Mandell house"
Echelon2600 8 months ago
Also ask the IRS the difference between income and taxable income - they won't be able to tell you. They can't even accurately tell you what plain old "income" is (although they'll try to mislead you to believe that it's any money you bring in). Income is money brought in from derivatives, stocks, bonds, interest, etc. Your paycheck is NOT income - it is equal exchange of value for labor already given. Yes, when you report your "income" you acquiesce.
Echelon2600 8 months ago
tell that to the judge!
KripDrip 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
"it is equal exchange of value for labor already given. "
That argument fails everytime it is used in court.
RetSquid 7 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid - If you don't know how to argue it, sure it does. Here are only a few of hundreds of case law precedents I used effectively in support of my claim in court. If I don't discuss this with you further, it's because you've offered nothing tangible in support of your claims to the contrary.
Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. vs. Smietanka, 255 US 509, 518 - 519 (1921)
Butcher's Union vs. Crescent City, 111 US 746, 756 (1884)
Pollock vs. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co., 157 US 429, 629 (1895)
Echelon2600 7 months ago
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
I've seen some of these cases, and those support the IRS's ability to tax you on your wages, no matter your citizenship.
BTW Evans v. Gore was over-rulled by O’Malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939).
RetSquid 7 months ago
@RetSquid -
Bowers vs. Kerbaugh-Empire, 271 US 170, 174 (1926)
Jerome H. Sheip Co. vs. Amos, 100 Fla. 863, 130 So. 699, 705 (1930)
redfield vs. Fisher, 135 Or. 180, 292 P. 813, 819 (Ore. 1930)
Helvering vs. Edison Brothers, 8th Cir. 133 F2d 575 (1943)
U.S. vs. Ballard, 535 F2d 400 (1976)
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
Bowers Vs. Kerbaugh is a capital gains issue, and are related to the fact that the losses plus the exchange rate still had no resulting income due to its relationship to a loan.
In Jerome H Sheip Co vs Amos, it is citing a state excise tax issue.
Redfield V Fisher argues against the ability of the Oregon Constitution to levy a property tax.
In Helvering Vs. Edison Brothers the commissioner was upheld... and the treasury regulations valid.
The first 4 cases you provide are bogus.
rotiart 4 months ago
I really find it unnecessary to keep going. You state you cite laws that indicate the federal government was wrong but you either: 1. post cases that do not relate, 2. post cases where they won?
your reading comprehension skills need work. and you say you've talked to an auditor proving your case? bull. probably something else you are making up. someone else twisting words in hopes people don't actually research the lies you are spreading? geez man.
rotiart 4 months ago
If they ask, "Are you a U.S. citizen," and you answer yes without asking which "U.S." they mean, you have just acquiesced to being the kind of citizen they want you to mean, which is the one subject to the corporation's rules (federal employee). Call the IRS and ask them for your "federal employee identification number" and they will tell you it's your social security number.
Echelon2600 8 months ago
In the case of Hooven and Allison Co. v. Evatt, the Supreme Court warned that there are 3 distinctly different definitions of "United States" and that Americans should be cautious to not get them confused: one being the organic and de jure (true) united states of America, another relating to admiralty (international) jurisdiction and another related to federal forms. It therefore follows that there are multiple definitions of what it means to be a "citizen" of those things.
Echelon2600 8 months ago
@Echelon2600
That is NOT what the court said. But you are a good example of people who don't know how to read a case getting things COMPLETELY wrong and taken out of context.
RetSquid 7 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
@RetSquid - Obviously the case is too lengthy to be posted here, but anyone who cares to find and read it, and who can understand it, will come to a conclusion differing from yours.
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@RetSquid - It's an inference, by the way, which does stand up in court.
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
It probably does stand up in court. But it also probably does not mean what YOU think it does. You can be a Citizen of the United States and under that one of the Fifty States. You could also be a Citizen of one of the Territories of the United States and NOT one of the States, but you have the same rights as any other Citizen.
RetSquid 7 months ago
@RetSquid - I've posted the cases law that supports my position, and have successfully argued them before those who matter. When you post your cases to refute mine, there will be more for us to discuss (but not unless and until).
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
How about you summarize your claim so I know exactly what you are trying to argue?
RetSquid 7 months ago
@RetSquid - Let me know how many hundred cases you want in support of my position.
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
Go for it.
RetSquid 7 months ago
"The term 'United States' may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States ex-tends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution."
Citizenship has nothing to do with paying income tax if you live in any of the States or Territories.
RetSquid 7 months ago
@RetSquid - "Citizenship has nothing to do with paying income tax if you live in any of the States or Territories."
Pursuant to my discussions with the IRS, they disagree with you on that assertion. And having a social security number makes you an employee of the federal corporation, which makes you liable for all of its non-consumption taxes.
Echelon2600 7 months ago
@Echelon2600
Well, Title 26, Section 1 imposes the income tax on the 'individual', not any person or Citizen. Now, if you are a Citizen you have to pay income tax on your world-wide income, where a resident alien does not. Unless specifically exempted by law any income in any of the United States and Territories is taxable.
RetSquid 7 months ago
First, the "united states of America" and "United States" are NOT the same thing. The former is the republic that we were guaranteed, while the latter is a for-profit corporation doing business with the misleading name, "United States" (just as the Federal Reserve is not "federal"). Look up "United States" on dnb dot com. See also the definitions section of 28 USC, sec. 3002 (15)(A): "'United States' means a federal CORPORATION."
Echelon2600 8 months ago
@Echelon2600
Sorry, you are completely in the dark on this. The U.S., U.S.A., United States, United States of America, capital letters or small case, are all the same entity. And yes the U.S. is a corporation, just like every State, City, County and Town in the U.S.
RetSquid 7 months ago in playlist Stupid tax arguments
On her comments beginning at 8:56, "that's not most people," she's actually incorrect upon missing a piece of the puzzle, though she does get close when she mentions acquiescence. People claim themselves to be fed. employees of the "United States" unknowingly. If you have a social security number, or claim to be a citizen of the U.S. without further clarification, you are unwittingly claiming to be a fed. employee. The explanation must be spread out over several comments, so read on...
Echelon2600 8 months ago
criminals!!!!!!
sevenfo306 8 months ago
Some people would rather be in a rubber dinghy in the middle of the ocean with Dr. Phil than deal with the IRS.
norjop 8 months ago
Note: Tax Protestor, and former IRS Agent, Sherry Peel Jackson. Mrs. Jackson used to work for the Internal Revenue Service and now gives advice to tax protestors. Mrs. Jackson was sentenced to prision for evading income taxes. Google Sherry's name and you will see an article. There is no way to get around it - it is either you comply with the IRS or become a criminal. Some prefer to give up their U.S. citizenship - but that also has repercussions
Mwaterfall 9 months ago
People, sorry to say, but the legal obligation to pay your taxes do exist and apply to all U.S. citizens! No matter how you "interpret" the U.S. Law to defend your cause; in the end, your "interpretation" to them means nothing! It does not make any sense to "protest" the legality of paying or filing your taxes when they will "define" what is legal! Wake up! The options I see, is to either outrightly resist paying your taxes, comply with the IRS, or give up your U.S. citizenship!
Mwaterfall 9 months ago
Comment removed
Mwaterfall 9 months ago
Last time I checked, this award winning ex-IRS employee, married mother of 2 young chilren is still locked up in jail indefinately.
PETEtheTRAINER 9 months ago
@PETEtheTRAINER
No, she just got out on probation/half-way house.
RetSquid 9 months ago
Why pay the federal income tax?
Refusing to pay illegal taxes was a “no-brainer” for our founders. They knew paying illegal taxes would only make things worse for them and posterity.
Meet the people our founders would have admired.
watch?v=IQ36h_TlKSs
Refusing to pay the illegal income tax is the right thing to do and so is exposing the truth about 9/11 and OK, City.
KevinMerck 9 months ago
@KevinMerck
If the Founders were against taxes, why did they give near-absolute power to Congress on the subject? The Founders would have thrown Sherry into prison, just like we did.
RetSquid 9 months ago
The U.S. Constitution does NOT apply to current U.S. 'Residents'! If you didn't sign it then you're not 'a party' to it and therefore it does NOT apply to you! The U.S.C. (United States Corporation) is a business. The U.S.A. does not actually exist anymore and hasn't done for quite a while! There are NO LAWS, merely Codes of Practice! You are NOT Citizens, you're 'property of the corporation'! Perhaps it is time for Americans to get an Education rather than a Big Mac!!!!
Itsmeeman1 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Itsmeeman1
Yes, YOU need some education.
RetSquid 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
taxes are illegal and we DONT OWE THE IRS, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO A GOOGLE SEARCH ON IT BECAUSE I CANT REPOST THE LINK IN YOUTUBE
ShiZi999 9 months ago
@ShiZi999
Google "THE TAX PROTESTER FAQ"
RetSquid 9 months ago
That's all well and good, but Sherry Peel Jackson ended up in Federal Prison.
philnoll 9 months ago
@philnoll, and that's ok for you? A woman siting in federal prison for standing up for your rights? Your just a coward!
TheChineseEmpire 9 months ago
@TheChineseEmpire My point is that she said there is no law. But look, she was prosecuted under federal law. So there is indeed a law, and people should be aware of that.
philnoll 9 months ago
@philnoll
It's amazing how many people miss that simple point.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid :-D There's another guy who won't follow orders because he says Obama's not the president.
philnoll 9 months ago
@philnoll
Yeah, but he's on his way to prison now, isn't he?
RetSquid 9 months ago
@philnoll
IIRC, she actually claimed that she didn't file because she couldn't find a definition of 'individual' in Title 26.
RetSquid 9 months ago
@RetSquid Or that the term individual is defined as an alien.
I would have never thought to check to see if I'm an individual.
Doesn't seem right.
philnoll 9 months ago
Taxfree 15/april strike
Stay home, don’t buy, don’t comply.
Put scum like the “retsquid” out on the street or in prison where they belong. It’s time to drastically “downsize” this out-of-control, tyrannical, terrorist government.
Let’s start with the Fed, and their private police force, the IRS.
KevinMerck 9 months ago 18
@KevinMerck
Idiot, lying spammer.
RetSquid 9 months ago
EVERY ONE PLEASE NOTICE----(RetSquid) is A Shill...
Every post he makes is going to be twist's on the Facts.
Like a spin on the truth in news. Disregard his BS "expert knowledge"
TheAmericanArm 9 months ago 2
@TheAmericanArm
Show me ANYTHING that I have posted that is factually wrong and I will correct it.
RetSquid 9 months ago
God bless this lady for being honest, telling the truth and being a great american !
merphis10 10 months ago 2
@merphis10
She is none of those three, and God will not bless liars and frauds.
RetSquid 10 months ago
Damn, great video
escapethisall 10 months ago 5
Why pay the federal income tax?
Refusing to pay illegal taxes was a “no-brainer” for our founders. They knew paying illegal taxes would only make things worse for them and posterity.
Meet the people our founders would have admired.
watch?v=IQ36h_TlKSs
Refusing to pay the illegal income tax is the right thing to do and so is exposing the truth about 9/11 and OK, City.
KevinMerck 10 months ago
@KevinMerck
You area a complete idiot.
RetSquid 10 months ago
im glad she actually got morals the the bravery to step forward and give the people an important informative insight.thank you!
condemned13 10 months ago
@condemned13
She is a convicted liar and fraudster. You must have strange morals to like liars.
RetSquid 10 months ago
@RetSquid Post links! Surely there's an article somewhere you've read.
LastCupOSorrow 10 months ago
@LastCupOSorrow
Don't you read the news? Or her case?
RetSquid 10 months ago