*Note: I emailed Boston T. Party, author of the classic (and superb) “Good-Bye April 15th!” book, regarding this thread. He emailed his response. *Here it is:
From author Boston T. Party:
At Crafter_Man’s behest, I read your thread concerning the IRS, income taxes, etc. and offer a few comments.
I challenge any skeptic to quote the Internal Revenue Code Section which unequivocably requires us to pay income taxes on our private-sector wages.
Look, here’s the short spiel. We got tricked into surrendering away specific rights and “voluntarily” entering a tax jurisdiction which otherwise wouldn’t affect us. Through the IRS’s cunning (mis)use of certain words and phrases (e.g., “employee, wages,
U.S., income,” etc.) we imagine their conversational meanings and act accordingly.
Your private-sector remuneration CAN be (under Section 3402§) treated as IF they were IRC Section 3401 “wages” (i.e., from government employment) if you file a Form W-4 (“which constitutes a request for withholding.”) Section 3402§ is titled, by the way, VOLUNTARY WITHHOLDING AGREEMENTS. (Evans, of the Tax Protestor FAQ, ignores this crucial IRC Section.)
Former IRS Special Agent Joseph Bannister resigned after learning the truth about the income tax fraud (which his IRS superiors never condescended to refute). Bannister is now a leading national speaker on the subject.
Now, some specific comments to particular authors:
Danielinthewolvesden & johnson: My book “Good-Bye April 15th!” does not reinvent the “square wheel” with failed tax protestor arguments.
Untaxation, properly done, is successful at the “administrative” level within the IRS, and no court battles have been necessary. Often, the IRS itself issues the untaxer his/her “walking papers.”
By the IRS’s own estimates, there are now as many as 40-60 million non-filers. Amongst them are my own readers, many of whom have sent me photocopies of their new paycheck stubs which reflect zero withholding (including FICA!) from their wages. This was accomplished after their employers contacted the IRS for clarification.
Furthermore, there is an IRS form letter which says, “Based on the information you provided, we agree that you are no longer required to file a Form 1040.” Many successful untaxers have received this letter, and I’ve seen many reader copies. The letter’s number is, if memory serves me, 9879 (though I’ll look it up in my book, wherein I show a copy of one).
So, Dan, what do all these people know that you don’t (or vice versa!). If you want to remain a wage slave (who pays a higher rate than the serfs’ 25%), then keep on filing!
ruadh: I’ve downloaded Evans’s site and will go through it when I’ve the time. (Meanwhile, I’ll forward it on to a colleague of mine who focuses on untaxation.)
Regarding the “U.S. doesn’t always mean the U.S.A.” issue (which is fairly pivotal for untaxation), I noticed that Evans never mentions the highly-illuminating 1945 decision of Hooven v. U.S.
Evans also utterly fails to recount the full history of the 16th Amendment, which was to unquestionably “constitutionalize” the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909 (a crucial Act also never mentioned by Evans). “Income” meant, and still means, corporate profit (which was then seen as being under-taxed, to the unfairness to the working man who primarily supported the USG through excises and duties). Why else would the States have (ostensibly) ratified the 16th, if not to “get at the fat cats”? In fact, the Congress of the day explicitly assured the public that the common man’s wage would NOT be affected. (Read Senator Ira Borah’s (R-ID) remarks to the Senate in 1910, for example.)
Finally (for now), Evans places far too much faith in the scholarly objectivity of Federal judges and Justices. These are men and women, paid by the USG, who naturally wish to uphold the effective status quo of income taxation. Just because a Federal court has ruled against a “tax protest” argument does not mean that the ruling was actually correct. To assume the courts’ 100% integrity would be like justifying the Holocaust because the Nazi courts ruled that Jews were “nonpersons” under the law.
On a related point, there have been no recent and significant rulings (in any meaningful numbers) to limit (much less rollback) the USG. So, according to Evans, the USG can do no wrong and never violates the Constitution? Gee.
Are there fatuous tax protest arguments out there? Certainly!
HOWEVER, is it possible (or even likely) that ALL tax protest arguments, developed and refined by thousands of dedicated (and often extremely intelligent) people, are fatuous? No, it is not.
Somewhere, at least occasionally, the tax protestors have valid points. But Evans would claim that they NEVER do. So, who’s the extremist here?
“Hear the other side.” – ancient Chinese proverb
Remarks such as “all those arguments are crap” dilute the purpose of a message board: to exchange actual ideas and challenge presumptions. Blathering on about what one supposedly “knows” is symptomatic of intellectual bigotry, and isn’t there already quite enough of that?
I pass along the above merely as obiter dicta, and do not wish to create another thread from there. I will, however, reply to questions and comments from actual readers of “Good-Bye April 15th!”.
Thank you all for your attention,
Boston T. Party
http://www.javelinpress.com