The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Comments on Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-04-2013, 07:52 AM
Lumpy Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 12,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
He stopped paying his mortgage (You can't make a free and natural citizen pay off debt that came from a strawman false corporate entity!).
He realized the Great Truth: since the bank didn't loan him actual gold, he doesn't owe a "real" debt. ( )
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #52  
Old 12-04-2013, 09:07 AM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: At the Diogenes Club
Posts: 47,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senegoid View Post
I demand everyone be banned who ever called me Senegold! Search for it on this board . . . there are at least 8 distinct instances!

(But I'd be honored to be called collybeauty. Collies are beautiful, y'know?)
If we spell it IN FULL CAPS, will it still be you?
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-05-2013, 02:57 PM
TSBG TSBG is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilyQuixote View Post
[...] Unless the IRS is a much kinder tax collection service then I am used to, I doubt the normal statute of limitations applies to them.
There are statutes of limitations for tax fraud and evasion--here's an article I plucked at random from a search:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwo...is-everything/

But they may be extended depending on circumstances. However, I think the kind of people who try the a4v scam aren't the types to do it once, then pay taxes afterwards hoping not to be found out. They'd keep on doing it and eventually get prosecuted.

I wonder how one of these jokers would react if you went into their store and gave them a check for whatever they sold with "accepted for value" written on it...
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-06-2013, 02:13 PM
qazwart qazwart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSBG View Post
There are statutes of limitations for tax fraud and evasion--here's an article I plucked at random from a search:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwo...is-everything/

But they may be extended depending on circumstances. However, I think the kind of people who try the a4v scam aren't the types to do it once, then pay taxes afterwards hoping not to be found out. They'd keep on doing it and eventually get prosecuted.
There is a debate whether people who participate in this type of scam (I'm not sure you an call this a scam because most of the time, it's more of a self scam) actually believe in this type of stuff, or deep back in their mind, they know it's not real.

However, if you're committing plain ol' tax fraud, and you hope to do it once, then not have the IRS find out until the statue of limitations runs out, you don't have to create a whole alternate legal world to justify anything. You might justify your failure to pay taxes as Everyone does it or I pay way more taxes that <Insert name of favorite multinational corporation> does. Why should they have all the fun?. But, you''re not coming up with legal theories that are based upon how you punctuate your name or whether or not you use zip codes.

These people do it, and do it until they get caught. They don't even stop when their friends and neighbors who participated get caught and sent away. They simply assume that these people did the legal incantations all wrong. They used a comma instead of a semicolon when separating their last name from their first name, or they forgot to put they weren't 14th amendment citizens, but natural born citizens.

I use to follow the machinations of various the Republic of Texas groups (they kept splintering and each becoming more bizarre than the last). At one time, they believed there was this Commonwealth Trust that had a ship filled with two billion dollars of gold floating off the Texas coast. They described this company or organization or group as the largest and oldest trust in the world. They thought that the trust would donate all those billions in gold to their newly found Texas government. You could tell how excited they were.

Then, there's their case before The Supreme Rabbinic Court of America which heard their case against the United States. This court was headed by Rabbi Herbert Gilner. He worked with all sorts of Christian groups and messianic Jewish groups that were around in the Waco area.

They were always sure that they were just days away from running Texas and that the U.S. were going to give them all billions of dollars (in gold of course), and that the world would once again be run by the righteous according to God's plan.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 12-06-2013, 03:09 PM
watchwolf49 watchwolf49 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Interesting that the US Supreme Court will hear the appeal of Hobby Lobby vs. Sebelius. The question is whether a for-profit corporation ( as a person under the 14th amendment ) is entitled to 1st amendment rights of religion. The 10th Court of Appeals said yes, they do ... and now the highest court will hear it themselves.

I seem to detect a common thread in all these "soffern sititen" claims. Comes down to trying to not pay what is otherwise a rightful obligation. If a flesh-and-blood person doesn't consent to be governed, then they also don't consent to be protected by such government. If he writes a4v on my invoice, can I break both his knee-caps with a baseball bat?
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 12-11-2013, 02:50 PM
tracer tracer is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Silicon Valley, Cal., USA
Posts: 15,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Oh no!!! By editing the thread title, you broke the Magic Words!
No no, they're in square brackets, which means they don't count.

(I actually had a "sovereign citizen" acquaintance who believed that if you put a ZIP code on a letter, you became subject to Federal jurisdication, but if you put the ZIP code in square brackets you didn't. Those sneaky Federal no-goodnicks!)
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 12-11-2013, 02:52 PM
tracer tracer is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Silicon Valley, Cal., USA
Posts: 15,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
He realized the Great Truth: since the bank didn't loan him actual gold, he doesn't owe a "real" debt. ( )
In which case, he should have no qualms about paying off that "fake" debt with worthless Federal Reserve Notes!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 12-11-2013, 06:41 PM
qazwart qazwart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by tracer View Post
No no, they're in square brackets, which means they don't count.

(I actually had a "sovereign citizen" acquaintance who believed that if you put a ZIP code on a letter, you became subject to Federal jurisdication, but if you put the ZIP code in square brackets you didn't. Those sneaky Federal no-goodnicks!)
There's a whole idea that you're a sovereign citizen of your State Republic, but by making you use zip codes, you acquiesce to become a 14th amendment citizen because zip codes do not respect state boundaries. By using a zip code, it becomes evidence that you're a citizen of the District of Columbia (the only place where the 14th amendment applies).

No, I am not making this up.

(I like the list on the end showing you how to avoid this trap. All they're missing is having to throw a horseshoe worn by a cross-eyed horse over your shoulder on a full moon.)
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 12-11-2013, 08:51 PM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 58,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by tracer View Post
I actually had a "sovereign citizen" acquaintance who believed that if you put a ZIP code on a letter, you became subject to Federal jurisdication, but if you put the ZIP code in square brackets you didn't. Those sneaky Federal no-goodnicks!
Back during the 2000 Bush-Gore election dispute, I had a coworker telling me how this was all a secret plot. Congress was using the election dispute as a means of taking over the government.

"So you're telling me the United States government is secretly plotting to take over the United States government?"
"Well...when you put it that way, it sounds stupid."
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 12-11-2013, 10:17 PM
Cerealbox Cerealbox is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
http://www.treasury.gov/about/organi...ts_index2.aspx

That seems like some pretty stern and serious language to me.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 12-12-2013, 11:11 AM
watchwolf49 watchwolf49 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Uh huh ... that's exactly what they want you to believe.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-28-2013, 12:12 PM
Lumpy Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 12,468
A new twist...

The other day I was reading a news article about someone who was legally declared dead and hasn't been able to reestablish their identity, when suddenly I was struck by the irony: these people, unwittingly and unwillingly, have actually achieved what the Sovereign Citizens have spent countless futile efforts attempting- the divorce of their "natural" self from their "legal personhood". And in this Ohio case, the forces of law and government seem to be hamstrung by the rules:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/us...udge.html?_r=0

So are these non-persons actually free of the government? I'm sure that in criminal cases a person could be prosecuted as "John Doe" if necessary, but how what about civil proceedings, taxes, etc.?
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-28-2013, 04:09 PM
Hershele Ostropoler Hershele Ostropoler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
SovCit nuttery takes root, in part, because a lot of people don't really know their neighbors. If you were the only one in your town paying what the government said you owed on taxes (or, rathr, what the "government" said you "owed" in "taxes"), would you even know?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
That's the fun part. Watching a sovereign citizen explaining how the laws of the United States tell us we don't have to obey the laws of the United States is hilarious.
More like the laws of the united States say we don't have to obay the directives promulgated as laws by the corporation called "The United States of America"

Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
There's a whole idea that you're a sovereign citizen of your State Republic, but by making you use zip codes, you acquiesce to become a 14th amendment citizen because zip codes do not respect state boundaries.
Um, what? Sure they do.

I can't think of anything that could possibly mean that even means anything, let alone lines up with facts. Was "do not respect state boundaries" expanded on at the link? I may have missed it in the eyebleed; I didn't stay long, this is a new computer and I didn't want it to catch the crazy.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-28-2013, 06:05 PM
Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Dogpatch/Middle TN.
Posts: 28,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senegoid View Post
I demand everyone be banned who ever called me Senegold! Search for it on this board . . . there are at least 8 distinct instances!

(But I'd be honored to be called collybeauty. Collies are beautiful, y'know?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
If we spell it IN FULL CAPS, will it still be you?
Only if we put gold fringe on the all caps.
__________________
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."
~~~William Butler Yeats
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-28-2013, 06:31 PM
Patch Patch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor View Post
Only if we put gold fringe on the all caps.
And type across the screen at a 45 degree angle. In green font.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-29-2013, 08:49 AM
postpic200 postpic200 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Back when I lived in Kansas, I knew a guy (forget his name now it was a long time ago) who claimed that bank loans were real unless it was loaned in "real" money, ie gold silver, wouldn't register his car, or pay taxes, fines, etc. because he was "Sovereign Citizen" and he got away with it for a few years, but one day he wasn't at the bar (he'd use funny money as he called it to pay for drinks and food because we were stupid enough to take it for goods). The police using arrested him, the bank took back his home, car, was in a REAL jail for 3 or 4 years.

So yea you probably could get away with it for a while, but sooner or later someone will notice and you'll end up in jail for a few years.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-29-2013, 11:59 AM
silenus silenus is offline
Hoc nomen meum verum non est.
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 40,598
I think the answer to all these kooks (and a number of others of their ilk) is to take a hunk of territory that doesn't really matter, like North Dakota, fence it off and dump them there. No contact with the outside at all. A modern Coventry. Shoot anyone who tries to leave. Then let them enjoy their sovereign citizenship without bothering those who wish to live in civilization.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-29-2013, 09:54 PM
dropzone dropzone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 22,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
(I like the list on the end showing you how to avoid this trap. All they're missing is having to throw a horseshoe worn by a cross-eyed horse over your shoulder on a full moon.)
(taking notes) Left or right shoulder? I want to do this right.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 04-01-2014, 01:18 PM
veewee77 veewee77 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludovic View Post
It is optional, but tax accountants are actually agents of the IRS! You see, this is a far-reaching conspiracy wide enough to ensnare millions secretly, yet is somehow weak enough that if you just use the three magical words, they are powerless to enforce their tyranny.
Think about it this way. . . If you look right on the back of the 1040, it clearly states something to the effect of ". . . thank you for making the IRS the world's most efficient voluntary tax collection system. . ."(paraphrased). Key word there is "voluntary".
Now, getting someone to. . .pay. . . taxes is the thing. Accountants and tax preparers aren't there for you, the individual. They are there for the IRS. They make you think you have less to. . .pay. . . but the key word there is "pay". you are still . . . paying. . . Using the A4V method is nothing more than using your Exemption (this is *their rules*) to discharge a debt. (Look up using your Exemption). one method of many, actually.

Advice: use your OWN DUE DILIGENCE with these methods. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING before you do!

JMHO - YMMV
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 04-01-2014, 01:25 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 38,956
Reported for ellipsis abuse.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 04-01-2014, 01:26 PM
running coach running coach is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 15,384
From TurboTax
Quote:
Although this might easily be the most blatant falsehood on the list, there is a surprisingly large number of people who contend that because the Form 1040 instruction book describes the tax system as “voluntary,” that means they have no legal obligation to actually file. This is not the case. The term voluntary refers to the fact that each individual is responsible for determining the correct amount of tax they owe, and has absolutely no relation to whether or not filing taxes is actually an option. It’s not. Unless you have a legitimate dispute, trying to get cute with the IRS and contesting the payment or filing of taxes is always a bad idea.
However, feel free to give it a try. Get back to us on how it worked.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 04-01-2014, 01:51 PM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 15,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by veewee77 View Post
Think about it this way. . . If you look right on the back of the 1040, it clearly states something to the effect of ". . . thank you for making the IRS the world's most efficient voluntary tax collection system. . ."(paraphrased). Key word there is "voluntary".
Now, getting someone to. . .pay. . . taxes is the thing. Accountants and tax preparers aren't there for you, the individual. They are there for the IRS. They make you think you have less to. . .pay. . . but the key word there is "pay". you are still . . . paying. . . Using the A4V method is nothing more than using your Exemption (this is *their rules*) to discharge a debt. (Look up using your Exemption). one method of many, actually.

Advice: use your OWN DUE DILIGENCE with these methods. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING before you do!

JMHO - YMMV
What is "voluntary" is that you fill out the forms yourself, and can submit what you want (filing jointly, filing individually, etc). In contrast, in many countries, you simply bring your information to the tax authorities and they fill out the forms and tell you what you owe.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 04-01-2014, 01:52 PM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
IMHOtep the Justifed
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 9,878
But did the TurboTax floppy disk have gold fringes? Hmmmm?
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 04-01-2014, 02:38 PM
Exapno Mapcase Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 23,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by veewee77 View Post
Think about it this way. . . If you look right on the back of the 1040, it clearly states something to the effect of ". . . thank you for making the IRS the world's most efficient voluntary tax collection system. . ."(paraphrased). Key word there is "voluntary".
Now, getting someone to. . .pay. . . taxes is the thing. Accountants and tax preparers aren't there for you, the individual. They are there for the IRS. They make you think you have less to. . .pay. . . but the key word there is "pay". you are still . . . paying. . . Using the A4V method is nothing more than using your Exemption (this is *their rules*) to discharge a debt. (Look up using your Exemption). one method of many, actually.

Advice: use your OWN DUE DILIGENCE with these methods. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING before you do!

JMHO - YMMV
Better to think about it this way. You are. . .wrong. . .in what you say. Your. . .wrongness. . .is absolute. Accountants can and do know how to allow you to pay less than you. . .wrongly. . .would otherwise. We know this because if this weren't true then the numerous complaints about millionaires using tax loopholes to reduce taxes even to zero levels be. . .wrong. . .and they are not. The key word here is. . .wrong. . .The A4V system is so totally and completely. . .wrong. . .that it is hard to express it in mere words so I will confine those words to. . .wrong. . .wrongness. . .wrongnicities. . .wrongitude. . .and. . .wrongacalifragilisticexpialidocious. . .
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 04-01-2014, 04:15 PM
XT XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 26,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by veewee77 View Post
Think about it this way. . . If you look right on the back of the 1040, it clearly states something to the effect of ". . . thank you for making the IRS the world's most efficient voluntary tax collection system. . ."(paraphrased). Key word there is "voluntary".
Now, getting someone to. . .pay. . . taxes is the thing. Accountants and tax preparers aren't there for you, the individual. They are there for the IRS. They make you think you have less to. . .pay. . . but the key word there is "pay". you are still . . . paying. . . Using the A4V method is nothing more than using your Exemption (this is *their rules*) to discharge a debt. (Look up using your Exemption). one method of many, actually.

Advice: use your OWN DUE DILIGENCE with these methods. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING before you do!

JMHO - YMMV
Well, considering that I know someone who actually went to jail and is still working out the mess with the IRS over this loopy idea, my mileage definitely DOES vary from your own. My WAG is you have never actually tried to do this, and have little to no idea what the actual, real world legal ramifications would be, and thus are just talking out of your ass.

But, as others have mentioned, feel free to give it a whirl and let us know how it turns out. Assuming they let you post to this message board from prison, that is.

Last edited by XT; 04-01-2014 at 04:16 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 04-01-2014, 04:17 PM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
IMHOtep the Justifed
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 9,878
I'd guess it's more a case of never actually having had to pay any taxes... just file the 1040EZ for a refund and spend it getting drunk and bitching about tax rates.

Hits Save humming "Too Much Time On My Hands"...

Last edited by Amateur Barbarian; 04-01-2014 at 04:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 04-01-2014, 07:57 PM
TimeWinder TimeWinder is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 3,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Better to think about it this way. You are. . .wrong. . .in what you say. Your. . .wrongness. . .is absolute. Accountants can and do know how to allow you to pay less than you. . .wrongly. . .would otherwise. We know this because if this weren't true then the numerous complaints about millionaires using tax loopholes to reduce taxes even to zero levels be. . .wrong. . .and they are not. The key word here is. . .wrong. . .The A4V system is so totally and completely. . .wrong. . .that it is hard to express it in mere words so I will confine those words to. . .wrong. . .wrongness. . .wrongnicities. . .wrongitude. . .and. . .wrongacalifragilisticexpialidocious. . .
This entire post (and the one it's mocking) should be read in the voice of William Shatner.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 04-01-2014, 08:22 PM
ftg ftg is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
This entire post (and the one it's mocking) should be read in the voice of William Shatner.
That was the first thing I went with when reading it. Bill is King of The Dots.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 04-01-2014, 09:49 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: At the Diogenes Club
Posts: 47,992
Shatner, definitely, with a bongo drum accompaniment.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 04-01-2014, 10:12 PM
Princhester Princhester is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 11,397
Hmmm, I was thinking more Hugo Weaving as Agent Smith from the Matrix.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 04-01-2014, 10:24 PM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
IMHOtep the Justifed
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 9,878
How about Shatner auditioning for the Agent Smith role in Matrix IV: And Then The Little Boy Woke Up and It Was All a Dream?
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 04-01-2014, 11:41 PM
Senegoid Senegoid is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 7,496
Actually, everybody, veewee77 speaks wisely:

Quote:
Originally Posted by veewee77 View Post
Advice: use your OWN DUE DILIGENCE with these methods. KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING before you do!
Can't find fault with that advice, now, can we?
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 04-02-2014, 04:39 AM
Irishman Irishman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by veewee77 View Post
Using the A4V method is nothing more than using your Exemption (this is *their rules*) to discharge a debt. (Look up using your Exemption). one method of many, actually.
What exemption is that? Excuse me, Exemption. Gotta capitalize it, doncha know.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-02-2014, 06:34 AM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 15,919
Exemption from common sense, it's Regulation XLII(A)(17)(s)(3) in the tacks code.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-02-2014, 10:40 AM
Exapno Mapcase Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 23,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven View Post
Exemption from common sense, it's Regulation XLII(A)(17)(s)(3) in the tacks code.
That's the part where it's swept under the carpet. And you know you always have to take up the tacks before you can take up the carpet.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-02-2014, 02:42 PM
qazwart qazwart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by veewee77 View Post
Think about it this way. . . If you look right on the back of the 1040, it clearly states something to the effect of ". . . thank you for making the IRS the world's most efficient voluntary tax collection system. . ."(paraphrased). Key word there is "voluntary".
I just looked on the back of a Form 1040, and see nothing with the word voluntary. In fact, the copy I have is completely blank. Not a word. Is it written in invisible ink?

By the way, I love this answer about whether filling out the form 1040 is voluntary:

Quote:
It is absolutely voluntary. In exactly the same way that not stopping for a stop sign, not braking your car to avoid killing someone and not beating your spouse are voluntary.

Obeying the law is voluntary but always be prepared to accept the consequences of your actions. And the consequences of not obeying the law can be either civil and/or criminal and may cost you thousands of dollars and can, if if "unvolunteer" enough, land you in federal prison.

The filing is voluntary. Responsibility for the tax is not. If you don't volunteer, then the government has the authority to determine what your tax is on its own, assess it, then come after you to have you pay it (or seize property if you don't). Note that such usually does NOT account for any deductions beyond the standard nor any personal exemptions beyond that of the taxpayer himself - so it's often better for a person that does have deductions to file himself.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-03-2014, 09:23 PM
Senegoid Senegoid is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 7,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
By the way, I love this answer about whether filling out the form 1040 is voluntary:
Similarly, being inspected before you board an airplane (for security purposes) used to be voluntary. For years, before the TSA took over, there were searches of people and carry-on before reaching the boarding areas, but they were extremely perfunctory compared to what happens now. At the entry area to the boarding areas, there were always signs posted nearby assuring passengers that such inspections were voluntary, but that passengers who decline to be inspected may not be transported.

Some voluntary.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-04-2014, 10:24 AM
sbunny8 sbunny8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
voluntary doesn't necessarily mean optional.

IIRC, the hubbub centers around an internal manual used by the IRS in the 1980s which boasted about how successful their program was when you consider the fact that it's based on "voluntary compliance"

According to Collins World English Dictionary, the word "voluntary" has two meanings in the context of law:
a. acting or done without legal obligation, compulsion, or persuasion
b. made without payment or recompense in any form

The latter describes what happens when a citizen spends their own time filling out forms. Lawyers get paid a salary and IRS agents get paid a salary and members of congress get paid a salary but Joe Schmoe filling out a 1040 doesn't get paid anything. He is acting as an unpaid volunteer. The alternative is that a tax professional could be hired to do the work instead, and that person is generally not a volunteer.

Look at it this way. 100 years ago, cities used to hire street sweepers to clean up animal dung out of the streets on a daily basis. Now, we expect the owners of the animals to clean it up themselves. The old system was based on paying somebody money to get it done. You could describe the new system as voluntary. But that doesn't mean it's optional.

There's another usage of the word I'd like to throw out there. Imagine a group of soldiers standing around and the sergeant walks up and says "Okay troops, there's a ditch that needs to be dug. Any volunteers?" Whether the ditch gets dug isn't optional. The only thing that's optional is whether this private digs it or that private digs it. Either way, the ditch has to get dug and the sergeant will make sure it does. The same thing applies to your taxes. Whether you fill out the forms or if you hire someone to fill out the forms or you get someone else to do it for you, whether you send in your payment or the IRS has to garnish your paycheck, those are the optional parts. But either way, the payment must be made.

Still, I have yet to see anyone post a law which actually says paying your taxes is optional. All I've seen is statements from government employees which talk about how nice it is that the system relies so much on volunteers and yet things actually get done without having to put a gun to people's heads.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-06-2014, 03:56 PM
qazwart qazwart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by watchwolf49 View Post
Interesting that the US Supreme Court will hear the appeal of Hobby Lobby vs. Sebelius. The question is whether a for-profit corporation ( as a person under the 14th amendment ) is entitled to 1st amendment rights of religion. The 10th Court of Appeals said yes, they do ... and now the highest court will hear it themselves.
Hobby Lobby, Inc. Converts to Paganism
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 04-06-2014, 10:09 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senegoid View Post
Similarly, being inspected before you board an airplane (for security purposes) used to be voluntary. For years, before the TSA took over, there were searches of people and carry-on before reaching the boarding areas, but they were extremely perfunctory compared to what happens now. At the entry area to the boarding areas, there were always signs posted nearby assuring passengers that such inspections were voluntary, but that passengers who decline to be inspected may not be transported.

Some voluntary.
Maybe not voluntary. Aren't there cases of people being arrested or detained for declining the searches and choosing not to fly because they are suspected of "testing security"?
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 04-07-2014, 06:27 PM
Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Dogpatch/Middle TN.
Posts: 28,613
The OP is a "One-Post-Charlie".
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 04-07-2014, 06:53 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: At the Diogenes Club
Posts: 47,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
Love it! And did you see this?: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickunga...ous-objection/
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 04-07-2014, 08:17 PM
qazwart qazwart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor View Post
The OP is a "One-Post-Charlie".
Oh, the OP will reply as soon as they aren't so detained by their current circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 04-07-2014, 08:26 PM
Lord Mondegreen Lord Mondegreen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Maybe not voluntary. Aren't there cases of people being arrested or detained for declining the searches and choosing not to fly because they are suspected of "testing security"?
Not sure if any cases exist, however it is true that once you enter the security area you no longer have the option to say, "forget it, I won't bother flying today" and then turning around and leaving.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 04-08-2014, 11:21 AM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Mondegreen View Post
Not sure if any cases exist, however it is true that once you enter the security area you no longer have the option to say, "forget it, I won't bother flying today" and then turning around and leaving.
Maybe a SD lawyer can fill us in. I know an issue discussed in another thread was about administrative searches and how they do not violate the 4th Amendment. Basically if you choose to participate in an optional action knowing a specific search may be had like crossing state lines (ag inspection) or traveling out of the country (customs) that you in effect consent to a search because you have the option to not participate in that activity. So if I cannot choose to not fly and thereby avoid the search, it's not really an administrative search n'est pas?
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 04-08-2014, 03:49 PM
John W. Kennedy John W. Kennedy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chatham, NJ, USA
Posts: 4,721
Apart from children, idiots, and prisoners in transit, who cannot refuse to fly?
__________________
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. Taliessin through Logres: Prelude
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 04-08-2014, 04:49 PM
qazwart qazwart is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Maybe a SD lawyer can fill us in. I know an issue discussed in another thread was about administrative searches and how they do not violate the 4th Amendment. Basically if you choose to participate in an optional action knowing a specific search may be had like crossing state lines (ag inspection) or traveling out of the country (customs) that you in effect consent to a search because you have the option to not participate in that activity. So if I cannot choose to not fly and thereby avoid the search, it's not really an administrative search n'est pas?
The Ninth Circuit Court ruled in 2007 that Airport Screening Not Dependent on Consent.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 04-09-2014, 02:49 AM
Irishman Irishman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by John W. Kennedy View Post
Apart from children, idiots, and prisoners in transit, who cannot refuse to fly?
I think what Saint Cad is saying is that once you buy your ticket and show up, you can no longer opt out of the screening even by deciding you don't wish to fly that day and want to leave. Because of security concerns, that raises TSA scrutiny. There is concern about checking baggage and then not loading on the plane, for instance.

But the consent comes from choosing to purchase the ticket in the first place. That is when you had the option to choose not to fly and chose to fly. You could fail to show up and check in, but once you start the confirmation process, you are consenting to security procedures.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 04-11-2014, 01:05 PM
Powers Powers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
Posts: 906
Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
The Ninth Circuit Court ruled in 2007 that Airport Screening Not Dependent on Consent.
... because 9/11, apparently. Stupefying. Apparently our rights vary depending on how severe the threat of terrorism is?


Powers &8^]
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 04-11-2014, 01:40 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 38,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by qazwart View Post
The Ninth Circuit Court ruled in 2007 that Airport Screening Not Dependent on Consent.
No-What they ruled was that once consent is given you don't get to change your mind mid-search if you think it might not go your way.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.