Most IRS Counsel people won\'t say this, but I love a good \"tax protester.\" (F

Question

Most IRS Counsel people won't say this, but I love a good "tax protester." (FYI - the IRS is not supposed to label someone a protester, so there are lots of other phrases that all mean the same thing; "compliance challenged" is one of my favorites, and DOJ's has lately been using the term "tax defier.") The reason I bring these lovely people up is because (1) they come up with some of the most creative arguments regarding the tax laws, and (2) because there is the frivolous filing penalty discussed in this session that is targeted at these creative arguments.

Take a look at http://www.irs.gov/Tax-Professionals/The-Truth-About-Frivolous-Tax-Arguments-Introduction and some of the arguments that people have come up with. For example, is income tax a violation of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment on illegal seizure? What about the argument that income tax is a form of involuntary servitude in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment? And then there are the people who claim that the income tax just does not apply to them because they are a "person of the land" or a citizen of the independent Republic of [Insert State Name] and not subject to the laws of the U.S. federal government. I've encountered several of these arguments proposed by people during my years with Chief Counsel.

How would you deal with a client who is a true believer of one of this positions?

Explanation / Answer

Tax protesters in the United States have advanced a number of arguments asserting that the assessment and collection of the federal income tax violates statutes enacted by the United States Congress and signed into law by the President. Such arguments generally claim that certain statutes fail to create a duty to pay taxes, that such statutes do not impose the income tax on wages or other types of income claimed by the tax protesters, or that provisions within a given statute exempt the tax protesters from a duty to pay.

These statutory arguments are distinguished from, although related to, constitutional, administrative and general conspiracy arguments. Statutory arguments presuppose that Congress has the constitutional power to assess a tax on incomes, but that the Congress has simply failed to levy the tax by enacting a specific statute.

In connection with various arguments that the Federal income tax should not apply to citizens or residents within the fifty states, some tax protesters have argued about the meanings of the terms "state" and "includes"

One argument is that the definitions of "state" and "United States" in most subparts and the general definition in the Internal Revenue Code are what other amending code sections[clarification needed][1][2] refer to as "a special definition of 'state'", where the statutory definitions include the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and some other territories, without mentioning the 50 states. Under this argument, the definition of "state" within the Code in general, or within those certain subparts of the Code, refers only to territories, or the possessions of the federal government, or the District of Columbia. Alaska and Hawaii were formerly included in the "special" definition of a "state" until each was removed from that general definition by the Alaska Omnibus Act[3] and the Hawaii Omnibus Act[2] when they were respectively admitted to the Union.

Under the following tax protester argument,[citation needed] the term "state" is used in an international meaning of "nation" or "sovereign." The argument is that this meaning refers to the foreign status of each state to every other state including the federal state, under private international law. Under this argument, all court opinions on the subject of states being foreign to each other (and also to the federal state and possessions) have upheld this concept,[citation needed] and have distinguished between meanings of foreignness by using the terms private international law and public international law. Under this argument, the latter term deals with the authority the 50 States delegated to the United States government to represent American interests outside of America, grouping all those that are bound by the United States Constitution as one body, relative to those that are not bound, such as France or Britain. Under this argument, the term "private international law" signifies the foreignness of the sovereign states, or nations, of the United States system to each other, within the system.

A: All Are Ex-IRS Agents Who Have Resigned Their Positions And Joined A Growing Number Of Former And Present IRS Officers, Attorneys, Certified Public Accountants, And Retired Judges Who Believe And Assert That:

1. There is NO LAW that requires most Americans to file a tax return, pay the federal income tax nor have the tax withheld from their earnings.

2. In 1913, the 16th Amendment (the "income tax" Amendment) was fraudulently

and illegally declared to be ratified by a lame-duck Secretary of State

just days before leaving office.

3. Also in 1913, Congress created the Federal Reserve System, a banking cartel

organized by the largest private banks in the country. By 1933, the FRS had

been granted the power to:

· Fabricate money out of thin air.

· Charge interest to the Government for the use of the Fed's currency.

· Receive taxes to pay the interest on the debt created therefrom, to be paid

with the American People's gold and silver.

This is all in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution.

NOTE: Most people do not know that the "Fed" is a privately owned

corporation functioning as a central bank. Nor do they know that the monetary

policies of the FRS (i.e., its foreign exchange and domestic open market

operations) have never been fully audited.

4. Those who file a Form 1040 "voluntarily" waive their 5th Amendment (Miranda)

right not to bear witness against themselves.

The IRS routinely violates citizens' 4th Amendment rights against illegal search

and seizure without a warrant issued by a court upon probable cause and

supported by oath and affirmation. IRS levies and seizures are unenforceable

because the IRS is UNABLE AND UNWILLING to swear under oath that a law

has been broken or that there is probable cause of a violation.

6. The IRS, as standard operating procedure, routinely violates citizens' due

process rights in its administrative procedures and operates far outside the

law. The courts cannot be relied upon to strike down such actions.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse M
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.