Is this guy serious? (Fasting/tax law)


I don’t doubt that the person doing this exists or that he is really fasting. What I’m interested in is what makes him think there is no basis in law for the income tax.
What gives him the idea that the IRS is collecting taxes and the goverment is spending them - with out anyone having enacted a law to that effect?

I don’t know specifically what give shim the idea, Mort, but I can tell you that the idea he’s espousing is one of the same tired old nags trotted out by tax protesters all the time… that there is a “secret” way to avoid taxes, because the entire taxation system and the IRS itself is founded on some sort of massive fraud, and if you only know the right way to ask the question, the IRS, fearful of losing its status and power, will leave you alone.

Of course, so far as I can tell, he’s not doing anything illegal. The link merely says he’s stopped eating; it doesn’t say he’s stopped filing.

And lest anyone doubt it – the federal income tax is legal, and proclaiming yourself a citizen of a state does not negate your United States citizenship somehow.

  • Rick

The Tax Protestor’s FAQ:

I shold have dug deeper. I thought he was just convinced that there were no laws, not that the existing laws were unconstitutional.

Same difference. It’s all covered in the Tax Protester FAQ. They’re just variations of the same delusion.

I had reason to drive past this corner yesterday but I didn’t see this fellow. They’re building a bank right on the coner now and I guess he’s further up the street than i could see.

What’s really silly is that this guy apparently can’t even be bothered to read section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code. Since he’s a complete loony and allegedly suicidal to boot, I’ll assume that he’s an “unmarried individual,” in which case the relevant provision is section 1©:

“Taxable income,” by the way, is defined in section 63 of the Internal Revenue Code.

The Master speaks: Is U.S. income tax invalid because Ohio wasn’t legally a state when the 16th amendment was ratified?

See also this thread:Can I really skip paying income taxes?

One thing you guys are missing here, he is asking the question:

“Where is my tax liability in the law?”

Even after all of this he has yet to get an answer from the IRS.

Perhaps they haven’t answered because it’s a stupid question. I could ask them what the exchange rate would be if I wanted to pay my tax bill in banana peels and Oreo filling, but I doubt I’d get a response.

Maybe he’s a Breatharian.

He has, actually. In fact, it’s posted on the website that the OP links. He sent an e-mail to the IRS, which responded to him. The relevant passage from the IRS reply states:

Sounds pretty responsive to me: Congress enacted the tax code; under the tax code paying income tax is mandatory; the courts have confirmed that point.

We’re not missing that; we’re scoffing at it.

Assuming he’s about 6 feet tall or so and based on the pic of him in the chair I have a real problem believing he’s lost 50 lbs in 34 days. Sitting, fasting a chair most of the day wil let him burn about a lb a day or so at best.

I find this incredibly depressing, especially since the man compares himself to Gandi.

Gandi was a hero. He inspired millions by his non-violent example, which he used to gain freedom and independence for an entire nation.

This guy is ready to die because he’s … not sure of the legal basis of US taxes. :rolleyes:
He could just have asked a lawyer. :smack:

Still, look on the bright side (all together now: always look on the bright side of life) - soon he won’t have to pay those taxes (apart from death duties). :eek:

Another example of ‘evolution in action’ (Niven + Pournelle - ‘Oath of Fealty’; or a Darwin Award? :confused:
You decide, I can’t be bothered.

I still don’t see that the IRS answered his question specifically.

“…various public laws comprising the Internal Revenue Code.”

Why can’t they cite them specifically? This has gone round and round again with the IRS and those that claim they have no legal right to take people’s money. I really don’t know at this point, the huge amount of info out there has me a little confused on what the actualy legalities are. But I do know that if you don’t pay your taxes then you get in trouble which is how it should be. But this guy should be entitled to an answer with a specific cite pointing to the law that makes it so, we should not have to take the word of the IRS that its that way. Hes asking them to prove his tax liability and claims they have not done so.

Can anyone here give that man what he wants?

There are two issues here.

First off, the Internal Revenue Code was last revamped entirely in 1986. It has been amended many times since then by many laws. “The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended,” is a perfectly good way to refer to it for most people. For someone who wants to know “which specific statutes” impose tax on me, it would probably take 10 pages or so just to list each year’s amendments since 1986. This is why the IRS refers to “various public laws comprising the Internal Revenue Code.” The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, fills a bookshelf, and that doesn’t include relevant case law, interpretations, etc.

Next, the IRS is not an accounting firm. That “voluntary compliance” stuff the tax dodgers love to cite? What that means is that you have to do the leg work and (usually) calculate your own taxes with your own little computer program or calculator. The IRS can’t “prove his tax liability” because, until he reports his income, expenses, deductions, etc., the IRS doesn’t know what his liability is.

As to whether the income tax is constitutional, the Tax Protestor’s FAQ and the IRS blurb cited above set out the IRS’s position. This question has been answered: he just doesn’t like the answer and refuses to accept it or he can’t understand it.

Does it seem to anybody else that these guys are doing a variation on the Brady Bunch “exact words” dodge? They come up with a set of words that don’t appear in the Tax Code, and that according to them, are essential to impose a tax. They then ask over and over again where those words appear, and when they are pointed to the actual words in the statute, go “Nyah, nyah, you’re admitting that my exact words don’t appear”. Unbelievably childish, but they all seem to think they’re geniuses.

The IRS e-mail also gives a link to the IRS web-page. If you poke around on that a bit, you find a handy little pdf publication of the IRS, on this page, entitled “The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments.” If you download it, you find that it’s about 30 pages of detailed responses to a wide variety of goofy arguments about the validity of the income tax. One part of it seems to directly address this guy’s question:

So, the IRS has sent him an e-mail in response with a general reply, given him the link to their web-page, and on the web-page is a 30 page booklet debunking all the common tax myths, with oodles of legal cites.

Rube’s got it right - these guys don’t really want the answer. They don’t like the answer they’re getting, and so pretend they’ve not been answered.