Visualize Snoopy of Peanuts fame, sitting on the Roof of his Doghouse, and with his typewriter, pounding out the following Message: “Dear IRS, I’m writing to you to cancel my subscription. Please remove my name from your mailing list.”
The extremely curious part is that, apparently, a large percentage of former taxpayers have done precisely as Snoopy was attempting to do. Only their paperwork was far more legalistic. The best part is that there is allegedly a process by which an individual, aka a human being, can in fact remove themselves from the IRS list of taxpayers. This is one of those areas where anyone who considers this must do their own research, assume their own responsibility for any subsequent actions, and then abide by the outcomes.
The information contained within the pages of this website is for educational purposes only. Nothing set forth herein is intended to be legal advice or able to be construed as such. This discussion is private in entirety and non-negotiable between the parties. Anyone acting on any of the contents herein does so solely on the basis of her or his own volition and at his or her own risk. Everyone has the duty and absolute right to think, evaluate, research, learn, and act autonomously. Inasmuch as Law equates to the “right” to use deadly force (destructive violence), it would appear prudent for anyone to refrain from adopting any course of action without first understanding the basis and reasons thereof and how to defend it if challenged.
The difficulty, of course, for those willing to pay is that the income tax system is grossly unfair in providing loopholes for the wealthy, while sticking it to the poor and middle class -- particularly the latter who are wage earners, as opposed to entrepreneurs and owners of their own business. Simply put, the individual who works for someone else (instead of working for themselves) is taxed to the max; while the business owners, corporations, and self-employed and/or retired persons find all manner of loopholes, strange deductions, and so forth. If two business owners take each other to lunch on two separate days, then their cost of lunch is tax deductible, whereas for the wage earner not on an expense account this is not an option.
On a much more fundamental level, however, is the issue of whether or not individuals who are natural persons (i.e. human beings created by God, divine intervention, or nature) are even required to pay income taxes -- whether or not for these people, paying income taxes is a voluntary decision!
The two fundamentally basic arguments for this radical (but possibly true) concept are:
I) The 16th Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America was never properly ratified, and thus the entire income tax system is fraudulent, and
II) Natural persons are not required to file an income tax return. This is due to the fact that: 1) natural persons (aka human beings) do not come under the purview of the 16th Amendment, 2) a human being cannot be legally classified as a “taxpayer”, 3) the IRS has consistently failed to show or provide any legal basis which would require such an individual to file an income tax return and pay the appropriate taxes thus indicated, and 4) because to file a return would violate the individual’s rights under the Constitution’s Bill of Rights -- specifically the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.
The details of the facts, court cases, tax code sections, and so forth which support the above statements are included under the topics of IRS Fraud? and IRS Agent. Anyone finding these two documents to be credible, should as a minimum do a significant amount of homework, including looking up and carefully reading the relevant citations, as well as considering other sources not mentioned in these documents.
It should be noted, for example, that it will probably be difficult to simply dismiss the 16th Amendment on the basis that it was not properly ratified. This is a problem of practicality. On the other hand, the argument for not paying taxes can include this argument as a means to justify oneself in court by providing evidence that one at least had legitimate doubts as to the validity of the income tax laws. In this regard, one informative source is <http://www.originalintent.org/edu/mmedia/viewclips.php?mmedia_id=speakeasy>, where you can “Learn About: Constitutions, The Law, Citizenship, Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Constitutional Taxation, Federal Income Tax, Employment Tax, State Sales Tax,” and so forth and so on. Be warned, however, that the site is seriously legalistic.
“Speak Easy” specifically addresses the issue of a human being not being required to file an income tax return in the first place. This approach appears to have considerably more potential for profitable savings.
In addition to the arguments put forth in IRS Fraud? and IRS Agent, there is also the Straw Man concept which is worth exploring. Basically, this assumes that the all capital letters name of the individual is a “straw man”, in effect a corporation -- the latter which by the 14th Amendment is defined as a “person”, and thus is a “taxpayer”. But if the human being’s name written with capital letters only on the first letter of each name is a separate legal entity from the straw man, then it is the former which is not the taxpayer -- even when the latter is. One view of this concept is eloquently described in The Wizard of Oz. The straw man, for example, is... guess who? But the story is far more instructive and worth reading in detail. Seldom has such symbolism informed so brilliantly. It’s noteworthy that the timing of the Wizard of Oz movie was also particularly apropos!
A major difficulty in making a decision to investigate the fundamental basis of the IRS tax system is that one must consider what one can do on a practical basis once they were to become convinced that they didn’t have to file income tax returns nor pay income taxes to the federal government. There are several concerns to be addressed in this regard.
· Does the potentially fraudulent nature of the federal government’s tax code also imply that one need not pay State taxes in those fifty states of the union which have a state income tax?
· Do you work for the federal government, or in any of the territories which legitimately require you to pay taxes?
· Are you sufficiently knowledgeable that you can: 1) write the letters, respond to the IRS notices (many of which will be ill-disguised, dire threats of bodily and other harm), and take on the IRS with the appropriate legal arguments, and 2) potentially face the IRS in court using the same legal arguments?
· If you work for an employer, will the employer cooperate in not with-holding taxes from your pay check? [This is a biggie!]
[Note that many employers -- particularly State and local governments -- may be very loath to go up against the IRS on your behalf. Note also that filing a W-4 with a whole wrath of exemptions to reduce the with-holding may not be a good idea, in that by signing the W-4, you may have given away your rights and have acquiesced to the necessity to pay taxes. For example, if you file a federal income tax return and sign your name, you are liable for the taxes! Period! You have voluntarily entered into a contract with the federal government, have voluntarily given up your rights, and must now comply with the rules and regulations of the IRS Code. Hopefully, each year is a new situation, and having filing a return in the year 2000 does not necessarily imply your volunteering to file a return in 2002, 2003, and so forth. This is likely, due to Remedy and Recourse.]
PLEASE NOTE: Anyone deciding to reclaim what is potentially their inalienable rights will ultimately need to become very well versed in the laws. Not just Common Law or something equally compatible with Justice and Liberty, but the statutory, Admiralty, Equity, Maritime, and the myriad of other laws designed by managers to control the larger population. In the control-oriented systems of law, logic and fairness are not at issue. You might have such in a Restorative Justice setting, but not in the courts you might find yourself if you decide to challenge the IRS. There is always the possibility, of course, that the IRS will decide you’re really not worth the trouble, and simply acquiesce to you. But that also presupposes that you’re not out there making waves by telling everyone else how to do what you did. The IRS gets really negative toward such folks!
Finally, you need to consider whether or not filing an income tax return and paying taxes is the preferred route. It has the patriotic flavor that you are supporting your country, which has in turn provided a safe haven for you to prosper. This will, of course, require you to overlook the graft, corruption, gross incompetence and bureaucratic inefficiencies, and the grotesque misuse of power by those in public office. But there are also some good things about the federal government -- like the Smithsonian. The idea is to focus on the positive. It’s about Creating Reality to your own personal preference.
Alternatively, there is the moral issue of not supporting a government which is no longer amenable to paying attention to its own Constitution for the United States of America. There is also the radical idea proposed by some that when the “Constitution is [considered] ‘Inappropriate and Anachronistic,’” that the “Only One Non-Violent Option Left for the People: [i.e.] It is Un-American to Fund This Government.” This is pretty heady stuff.
To avoid anything that might give you a headache -- like doing homework on a horribly complicated issue -- there is also the mental agility exercises of filing a return and finding every conceivable way to legally reduce one’s taxes -- an mental activity which can be quite entertaining. After all, it’s the old “use it or lose it” concept applied to the brain.
It’s also not handing over your tax preparation duties to a CPA, tax preparer, or what not -- those professionals who basically work for the IRS! Note that any professional tax person who reaches for every possible deduction, tends to find everyone of his or her clients audited by the IRS. When this becomes common knowledge among the client base, the tax person soon begins looking for another line of work).
For those ready and willing to do their own thing, remember, that since 1988, the IRS has lost some 25,000 employees (or 21% of its staff). In 1997, the IRS carried out 4.2 million liens, levies, and seizures. In the year 2000, the number was only 507,000 (a massive 88% reduction!) in a universe of 230 million persons from which it normally collects money. In 1995, a U.S. Taxpayers chance of being audited was 1 in 67. In 2001, it was less than 1 in 200. Finally, Congress is now talking publicly about abolishing the IRS, or at least the current income tax structure. The IRS is under fire!
In other words -- within the necessary legal constraints -- you should feel sufficiently emboldened to: Go for the Gold!
2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved