Dont pay taxes

[knelson]

mangmntsuks

Okay mangmntsuks,

Lets hypothetically say your friends little "federation-of-texas/hippy-movement/conspiry theorist" type theory is correct. It makes no difference to me whether you pay taxes or not. Quite honestly, I hope you don't: they put guys like you away (illegally, I know. . . unconstitutional right?). But, until you get caught and are out mooching of a generally hard-working society, please just honor a few simple requests of us. . . the taxpaying citizens of the best d@mn country in the world.

1. Do not drive on our streets. We paid for them, they are our property.
2. If your house is on fire, don't call our fire department. (don't go down to the lake to get water either, it would be a whole lot more contaminated if our government hadn't passed legislation on what you could and could not put in it)
3. Don't spend a nice afternoon in our park, it's ours. . . get your own with all those tax dollars you are saving.
4. Stay out of our airspace, those are our controllers.
5. Keep out of those airline terminals too, please. . . city tax dollars hard at work!
6. Take a look around you and realize all the things your former tax dollars were going to.

I am not saying that paying taxes is great and every dollar does wonderful things. I am simply saying that this would be an entirely different country is we did not have a society that the majority of pay their taxes. It's not a "they're all out to get you" type of thing, it's simply a matter of making it all work.

Please, look at the whole picture before you decide to let your fellow, hard-working, law-abiding (yes, it IS LAW!!!) contributors to society down.

 

[DesertFalcon]

RIVERANEWS

December 9, 2002

www.edrivera.com





Dear Subscriber:



Because it is extremely important that your status as a nonfiler be recognized and respected, you must let your Senators know of your interest in the President’s nominee for Secretary of the Treasury. The following letter is provided to assist you in preparing your own letter to your Senators. For those of you who are new on our subscription list, I am attaching the request for nonfiler status form and opinion letter that most of you received in an earlier riveranews edition.







Dear Senator:



I have obtained legal counseling from Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, an attorney admitted to the Bar in California with respect to my obligation to make U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns and to pay federal income taxes. The announcement of the nomination by the President of John W. Snow as nominee to replace Secretary of the Treasury Paul H. O' Neill compels me to suggest that you consider the important area of IRS reform the Congress implemented in 1998, when you consider Mr. Snow’s nomination.



The Secretary of the Treasury is, pursuant to §7801 Title 26 U.S.C., the officer of the United States charged with the administration and enforcement of Title 26 U.S.C. Former Secretary of the Treasury Paul H. O' Neill confessed total ignorance of income taxation when he confided to New York Times reporter Richard W. Stevenson, in a July 16, 2001, New York Times article by about the overhaul of the federal tax structure:



Paul O’Neill, the treasury secretary, called the tax code “9,500 pages of gibberish.” As Head of the Cabinet department that oversees the IRS, he said part of his motivation for supporting overhaul efforts “is not liking to be at the top of an organization that gets the level of ridicule and criticism for its inability to administer the tax code the way it is.”



Apparently, Paul H. O' Neill’s inability to understand the Code the way it is led to his own departure. The Code, as explained by Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, is absolutely clear: the Secretary of the Treasury is in charge of the IRS, which consists entirely of employees. Even the position of Commissioner of Internal Revenue is described in §7802 is terms of an employee whose duties are assigned by the Secretary. Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, himself a nonfiler, to borrow a term from the IRS Mission Statement strives to keep IRS employees from harassing his clients. Dr. Rivera must strive because no one but the employer can control an employee in the doing of his or her work. However, no employee has any power or authority outside the work place. The task of keeping IRS employees out of a nonfiler’s private affairs is becoming increasingly difficult with incompetent leadership in the Department of the Treasury.



The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, title III, Section 3707, July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 778, codified as a note to Section 6651,Title 26 U.S.C. provides for a procedure by which the nonfiler status of a person may be recognized and made a part of the federal government’s income tax record. No IRS employee, no Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and no Secretary of the Treasury has any power or authority of administration and enforcement over a nonfiler. The aggressive elements of the IRS that continue to harass nonfilers must be dealt with by the new Secretary.



Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera has established that an IRS employee or official has determined that I am an “appropriate taxpayer” who qualifies to be treated as a nonfiler yet I continue to receive correspondence from the IRS addressed to “Dear Taxpayer.”



The new Secretary of the Treasury must demonstrate a minimum amount of knowledge of federal income taxation before he is confirmed by the Senate. Ignorance of the IRC and IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, by Secretaries of the Treasury have caused the IRS to go unsupervised for too long. Do not confirm John W. Snow unless he can demonstrate sufficient tax knowledge to recognize my status as a nonfiler.



Very truly yours,







Nonfiler Name

 

[DesertFalcon]

Dear Subscriber:

In my latest opinion letter I present the law and facts that establish that, no one outside government, has had a legal duty to make a U.S. Individual Income Tax Return since Secretary of State Philander Knox announced that the 16th Amendment had been ratified:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

The imposition of a duty to make a return or list of taxable income always creates a direct tax so the only way to have a lawful income tax is to forever remove the duty and impose it in another way. The Amendment makes it clear that all future income taxes will be indirect and that the taxes will be voluntarily made by the individual office holders of the national government making the returns. No attempt is made to grant the power to assess a direct tax. This is one of the reserved powers retained by the people of the states. A tax on government is essentially a pay cut and such a reduction in pay is ok if the Constitution has been amended to provide for a voluntary income tax.

The federal income tax in the 1913 Tariff Act stated in Section II, Paragraph A. Subdivision 1:

That there shall be levied, assessed, collected and paid annually upon the entire net income arising or accruing from all sources in the preceding calendar year to every citizen of the United States, whether residing at home or abroad, and to every person residing in the United States, though not a citizen thereof, a tax of 1 per centum per annum upon such income,

Because the 1913 federal income tax contains no legal duty to make returns the Collector of Internal Revenue cannot give notice or demand that one be paid except as to members of the national government. Since 1952 all federal taxes have been voluntarily paid, because with the abolition of the Collector of Internal Revenue, no officer of the United States has the duty, power, or authority to give notice of a tax due or to demand that one be paid. The written address by William Howard Taft found on pages 3344 and 3345 of the Congressional Record—Senate for June 16, 1909 establishes that the purpose of the 16th Amendment was to establish that the federal income tax would be a tax on the federal government’s highest officers.

The federal income tax located in the Tariff Act of 1913 does not contain a duty to make and render a list or return to anyone. The duty to make and render a return never appears again in a federal income tax law. Only the members of the national government that take oaths of office are subject to the federal income tax. In the place of a duty to make a return there is found in Section D of the 1913 Act the requirement that:

a true and accurate return, under oath or affirmation, shall be made by each person of lawful age, except as hereinafter provided, subject to the tax imposed by this section, and having a net income of $3,000 or more for the taxable year, to the collector of internal revenue for the district in which such person resides or has his principal place of business,

The Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, §3707 (b) Designation Of Nonfilers Allowed, confirmed that a federal income tax can only be determined by the voluntary making and filing of a U.S. Individual Income Tax Return. Only members of the national government are still subject to the federal income tax along with those that subject themselves by making returns. It has not been possible or necessary to protest a federal tax since 1952, the normal process is to simply not pay the tax. However, the IRS has branded anyone who has refused to volunteer an “illegal tax protester.” Section 3707 (a) prohibits use of that pejorative. The designation, nonfiler, is the congressional solution to what to call those who have no legal liability for the federal income tax:

§3707 (b) DESIGNATION OF NONFILERS ALLOWED—An officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service may designate any appropriate taxpayer as a nonfiler, but shall remove such designation once the taxpayer has filed income tax returns for 2 consecutive taxable years and paid all taxes shown on such returns.

If you do not file such returns, you have no federal income tax liability. There is no other means by which a person in your position can be subject to or liable for any income tax. To obtain a nonfiler designation according to §3707 (b), complete IRS Form 4506 according to the instructions. Be sure to check 8 (b), showing that you want verification of being a nonfiler. It appears that up to four years may be requested on each form.


Dr. Eduardo Rivera
Attorney at Law

(Dr. Rivera is a graduate of the UCLA Law school and has 30 years experience in Constitutional Law.)

 

[mangmntsuks]

I have been immersing myself in research concerning this "income tax" thing and I have come across gov't documents that contradict what we have taken for granted that the income tax really is.

It would appear that the word "income", for taxable purposes has absolutely nothing to do with earnings, wages, salaries, inheritances, winnings or anything else that we have assumed "income" to mean. Supreme Court decision #492, decided May 20, 1918, Doyle vs Mitchell Bros. (247 U.S. 179, 38 S. Ct 467), says in part " Whatever difficulty there may be about a precise an scientific definition of "income" it imports as used here, something entirely distinct from principal or capital either as a subject of taxation or as a measure of the tax: conveying rather the idea of GAIN or INCREASE arising from CORPORATE activity". A gain or increase in corporate activity is a profit!

The Supreme Court rendered another decision on the subject in March 28, 1921 in it's Merchants Loan and Trust vs Smietanka,,(255 U.S. 509, 41 S. Ct. 386) when it said, " There can be no doubt that the must be given the SAME MEANING AND CONTENT in the Income Tax Acts of 1916 and 1917 that it had in the Act of 1913. When to this we add that in Eisner vs Macomber, supra, a case arising under the same Income Tax Act of 1916 which is here involved, the definition of "income" which was apllied was adopted from Stratton's Independence vs Howbert, supra arising under the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909, with the addition that should include, "profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets, "there would seem to be NO ROOM TO DOUBT that the word must be given the SAME MEANING IN ALL OF THE INCOME TAX ACTS OF CONGRESS that was given to it in the Corporation Excise TAX ACT and what that meaning is has now become definitely settled by decisions of this Court".

Now I may be wrong, but it seems to me that as soon as you match the word "income" up with the word "taxable",, it has to mean a Corporate profit according to the Supreme Court. You and I are NOT Corporations. There are no other definitions that I can find for "individual" income taxes. It doesn't exist. The decisions above still stand. What do you guys think?? And for the moment, please dispense with the emotional replies of me leaving the country or stop using certain services provided by the gov't et al. because I don't want to pay income taxes. I'm trying to make some kind of sense out of a cloudy subject.

 

[TXCAP4228]

I'm tired of this.

mgmtsuks, go read the freakin' websites that ms6073 posted. They respond to the "definition of income" argument you made.

Tell you what, go ahead and try this and we're gonna laugh our a$$e$ off when you go to jail.

I'd really like to see you reply to my last post, but I think that's a lost cause.

Actually I am impressed with how smart you are and I am thinking about cutting you in on a business deal I have got in the works right now. You see, the moon is really made of green cheese and I am starting a company to go mine it. Don't believe the whole apollo program, that was a government consipiracy. If you send me all of your money I'll make a huge profit and cut you in on the deal. Come on, dude, here's your chance to get in on the ground floor of a growth business. PM me with your bank account numbers and credit card numbers, I'll take care of all the details for you.

 

[Purple Haze]

Even this small excerpt from the table of contents tells me Congress thinks the tax code is law. Maybe mangmntsuks will have computer access from his federal prison cell and he can keep us posted on future findings. I remember a similar debate when I was in high school -- but then I grew up. I think you had better listen to TXCAP4228 a little more, and to your tax-avoiding friend A LOT less.

An Act to revise the internal revenue laws of the United States
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
(a) Citation
(1) The provisions of this Act set forth under the heading ''Internal Revenue Title'' may be cited as the ''Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (formerly I.R.C. 1954)''.
(2) The Internal Revenue Code enacted on February 10, 1939, as amended, may be cited as the ''Internal Revenue Code of 1939''.
(b) Publication
This Act shall be published as volume 68A of the United States Statutes at Large, with a comprehensive table of contents and an appendix; but without an index or marginal references. The date of enactment, bill number, public law number, and chapter number, shall be printed as a headnote.
(c) Cross reference
For saving provisions, effective date provisions, and other related provisions, see chapter 80 (sec. 7801 and following) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(d) Enactment of Internal Revenue Title into law.The Internal Revenue Title referred to in subsection (a)(1) is as follows: * * *.(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 3; Pub. L. 99-514, Sec. 2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095.)
AMENDMENTS
1986 - Subsecs. (a)(1), (c). Pub. L. 99-514 substituted ''Internal Revenue Code of 1986'' for ''Internal Revenue Code of 1954''.
REDESIGNATION OF INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1954; REFERENCES Pub. L. 99-514, Sec. 2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095, provided that:
''(a) Redesignation of 1954 Code. - The Internal Revenue Title enacted August 16, 1954, as heretofore, hereby, or hereafter amended, may be cited as the 'Internal Revenue Code of 1986'.
''(b) References in Laws, Etc. - Except when inappropriate, any reference in any law, Executive order, or other document -
''(1) to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 shall include a reference to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and
''(2) to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall include a reference to the provisions of law formerly known as the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.''

 

[TXCAP4228]

Hey, mgmtsuks!!

Hey buddy, my offer is still open. I never got that PM from you with your credit card and bank account numbers. I'm telling you, you are going to miss out on a GREAT oppurtunity if you pass this up.

Listen, I was talking about this with another one of my investment partners and we're willing to let your other "I don't wanna pay income tax" genius friends in on this investment plan, so have them PM me with their credit card and bank account numbers too.

Just think dude, all the green cheese you could ever eat and TONS of money in profit. This is your last chance bro.... let me know if you're in!

 

[DesertFalcon]

Re: I'm tired of this.

TXCAP4228

Open your mind! Unless you have studied the tax issue, in depth, your reaction tells us, your are defensive because this information is contrary to your belief systems.

I would suggest you look at the Law at: www.taxgate.com

Also, lots of posts at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/joyfoundation/

If, you wish to pay tribute to the King via the Voluntary Income Tax system.... You may continue to do so.

DesertFalcon

mgmtsuks, go read the freakin' websites that ms6073 posted. They respond to the "definition of income" argument you made.

Tell you what, go ahead and try this and we're gonna laugh our a$$e$ off when you go to jail.

I'd really like to see you reply to my last post, but I think that's a lost cause.

Actually I am impressed with how smart you are and I am thinking about cutting you in on a business deal I have got in the works right now. You see, the moon is really made of green cheese and I am starting a company to go mine it. Don't believe the whole apollo program, that was a government consipiracy. If you send me all of your money I'll make a huge profit and cut you in on the deal. Come on, dude, here's your chance to get in on the ground floor of a growth business. PM me with your bank account numbers and credit card numbers, I'll take care of all the details for you.

 

[TXCAP4228]

Re: Re: I'm tired of this.

TXCAP4228

Open your mind! Unless you have studied the tax issue, in depth, your reaction tells us, your are defensive because this information is contrary to your belief systems.
DesertFalcon

What a bunch of psychobabble crap!!

I'm not being defensive, I'm LMAO at you two!

Jeez, I hope this is a big joke!

You want in on my greencheese project too?

 

[DesertFalcon]

Re: Re: Re: I'm tired of this.

You sir,

Obviously have no idea of what the law says about the Income Tax system. Nor do you wish to take your head out of the sand of ignorance to find out the truth!

I rest my case.

DesertFalcon

==============================================

What a bunch of psychobabble crap!!

I'm not being defensive, I'm LMAO at you two!

Jeez, I hope this is a big joke!

You want in on my greencheese project too?

 

[TXCAP4228]

Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm tired of this.

You sir,

Obviously have no idea of what the law says about the Income Tax system. Nor do you wish to take your head out of the sand of ignorance to find out the truth!

I rest my case.

DesertFalcon

==============================================

Ok, lets review.

Desert Falcon, both you and mgmtsuks have had days to respond to my 12/9 post where I actually provide both the LAW and the CONSITUTIONAL SUPPORT FOR THAT LAW (with direct VERBATUM quotes) to refute your claims that the law is not legitimate.

Instead of making direct responses to the LAW and FACTS I have posted you wave your arms up and down continue to tell me to open my mind saying I don't get it.

Further, since I have posted THE LAW on this thread but neither you nor mgmtsuks has, it defines comprehension that you tell me:

"Obviously have no idea of what the law says about the Income Tax system. "

Now for the last part, I really liked this:

I rest my case.

Nobody who has read this thread actually saw you make one.

Have a great day.