Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
Protesters Flooding the IRS with bogus 1040 tax returns.
There is a terrible campaign under way by the name of "Drown the IRS 2003." It is organized on the web by an angry group of over-taxed, bitter libertarians. We must do everything we can to stop them. They are planning to send millions of bogus 1040 tax returns to the IRS next tax year. They are going to use freely-available W2 templates, social security numbers (SSNs), and employer identification numbers (EINs). They hope to swamp the IRS with their own paperwork.
This is a danger to our huge-government, socialist way of life. These dangerous freedom-lovers must be stopped. Life without a massive, all-powerful Federal Government is unthinkable. Please forward this warning to as many friends as possible. We must get the word out to as many people as possible in order to stop them.
The most disturbing part of this campaign is that it’s advocates have seized the moral high ground. They argue that they are following a creative, nonviolent, Gandhian form of civil disobedience, while the IRS pursues its agenda with jack-booted violence, brutality, property seizures, imprisonment, and other forms of physical terror. This point is one that we must work to obscure.
Here is a sample of their individualist propaganda. Decide for yourself how threatening it is to our system of punitive taxation and income redistribution: “Government is a system of institutionalized theft. All people can be divided into two groups. (A) the builders, the innovators, the creators, the entrepreneurs. They bring dynamic change and wealth to our economy. Their reward is oppressive taxation. These are the net tax-payers. (B) the socialist destroyers, bureaucrats and their constituency, the complainers, the lazy and unmotivated They suffocate the real economy with taxes and regulation. They are the parasites. These are the net tax-beneficiaries. When the parasites out-number the self-sufficient achievers, the democratic system self-destructs like in most Latin American countries. The answer is to start ignoring government.”
Middle-class tax-payers complain that Federal, State, Local, property, sales, inheritance, concession, airline, and other taxes consume nearly fifty percent of their income. Too bad.
These groups have been out there for a long time, claiming that paying income tax is unconstitutional. They have lost in the Supreme Court many times. It's sad that they are going to go to this extreme next year because the only ones that will get hurt by this is the common tax payer.
Re: Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
"Hello Mark and welcome.
These groups have been out there for a long time, claiming that paying income tax is unconstitutional. They have lost in the Supreme Court many times. It's sad that they are going to go to this extreme next year because the only ones that will get hurt by this is the common tax payer. "
Hmmmm......seems someone hasn't read the Constitution, but the Communist Manifesto where it says in the Second Plank:
2. A Heavy and progressive income tax
Before we start talking about Supreme Court cases, you should have some on hand to quote to prove your point. There are dozens of Supreme Courst cases that hold the income tax as unconstitutional.
LLOYD R. LONG, won his case against the Federal Government on failure to file income tax return charges in 1993. Read the transcript here:
Then go to the Constitution, Article 1, section 9, clause 4, where it states that a direct tax can only be collected if it is apportioned according to census or enumeration.....please tell me how a graduated income tax is apportioned to population???
Then you should study Congressional records from 1911 to see how many states refused to ratify the Sixteenth Amendment (income tax), but Secretary of State, Philander Knox declared it ratified anyway, thus committing fraud. Only 9 states out of the required 36 (needed 3/4ths of 48 states) properly ratified the amendment. So, legally, its not law, assuming that we still have Constitutional law.
Then lets look at what the income tax pays for. Absolutely nothing. The federal gas tax pays for the roads. The government takes in 250 million a day in gas taxes, and that doesn't count the diesel tax and the jet fuel tax.. then there is the alcohol tax and the tobacco taxes...then there is the Constitutionally mandated excise, duties and tariffs the government collects each day....
What does the income tax go to? The national debt, which is a debt the government owes to the Federal Reserve Banking Corporation. Yes, most people think the Federal Reserve is a part of the government but they are not. They are a private banking corporation and no more Federal than Federal Express. They just happen to have a complete and total monopoly on the monetary system in America. The Constitution only allows Congress to coin and print money, so why is the Federal Reserve doing it? Ask your Congressman.
In a free society, a persons labor cannot be taxed, otherwise you are turned into a feudal slave.
One last thing. The US Constitution is a document of limitations.....not on the people but on the government (see Article 1 section 8 ) . The government is the sevant of the people. Then why are we servants to the government???
Re: Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
I would appreciate it if you would tone down your attitude. Healthy discussion is good, anger is not. This board is not a platform for you but a help board. This post is staying because I do believe in freedom of speech.
Quote: The Lloyd Long case is one of the great "victories" of tax protesters, meaning that it is absolutely meaningless. Mr. Long was prosecuted for criminal failure to file and was acquitted by a jury, which apparently had a reasonable doubt about whether he had "willfully" failed to file. His acquittal does not "prove" that you are not required to file income tax returns, any more than the acquittal of O.J. Simpson "proves" that it is legal to kill your ex-wife.
direct tax at "#direct"
Quote: The precise question of whether an income tax was a "direct tax" within the meaning of the Constitution did not arise until the Union enacted an income tax during the Civil War. The Supreme Court followed the opinions from the Hylton decision and ruled unanimously that an income tax was an "excise," and not a "direct tax," and did not need to be apportioned among the states. Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1880).
Ratification of the 16th Amendment at "#ratification"
I won't bother to quote the counter-argument, but the claim was that only 4 (rather than the 9 our poster claims) states "properly" ratified the Amendment. No state among the 38 (36 required) ratification that Knox received complained that they hadn't ratified the Amendment, although Minnesota apparently hadn't sent in the formal declaration.
Quote: Who Owns the Fed? Banks that hold stock in the Fed are called member banks. All nationally chartered banks hold stock in the Federal Reserve. State-chartered banks may choose to be members, upon meeting certain standards. However, holding Fed stock is not like owning publicly traded stock. Fed stock cannot be sold or traded. Member banks receive a fixed, 6 percent dividend annually on their stock, and they do not control the Fed as a result of owning this stock. They do, however, elect six of the nine members of Reserve Banks’ boards of directors.
So who owns the Fed? Although it is set up like a private corporation and member banks hold its stock, the Fed owes its existence to an act of Congress and has a mandate to serve the public. So the most accurate answer may be that the Fed is “owned” by the citizens of the United States.
(Even if the Federal Reserve were a private bank) Authority to print money at "#money"
Quote: ... Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution states that "No State shall ... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ...," but Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 states that Congress shall have the power "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin," with no mention of any restriction to gold or silver. This difference has been clearly recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court
Actually, none of these provisions prevents a private bank from printing money, even if the Federal Reserve were not specifically authorized by Congress to print money.
Re: Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
Thank you, Arthur. You certainly did some research. I don't have time for this argument right now that's why I made my responce short but if you want to continue it, feel free to do so.
I post not to cause trouble, but to help educate my fellow Americans. The income tax is 100% communistic in nature and incompatible with a free society. The income tax was never part of the original Constitution because the founders understood the delicate balance between freedom and tyranny. King George, whom we rebelled against, NEVER levied and income tax on the colonist EVER.
The income tax was the dream of the new communist and progressive movement that began in the mid to late 1800's.
If most Americans knew that the money they have extorted from their hard work every year does not pay for any function of the government, then there would be another revolution by tomorrow morning. If the founders knew we let such a tax become law after they gave everything to free us from lesser oppression, they would come back from the grave to lead the revolution themselves.
Americans need to face the fact that they have been turned into economic slaves, toiling for their master, the federal government. Fail to pay your tribute to your master, and that master takes what it thinks is rightfully his.
Re: Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
Hmmm..shall I post the names of the thousands of slaves that tried to fight for their freedom in the south...or were they just "Slavery Protestors"???
Did you know what happened to the signers of the Declaration of Independence?? They were all sentenced to hang for treason. Most lost everything and died in poverty. Some were imprisoned and never saw their families again. One signer turned the cannons on his own estate to prevent it from falling into British (government) hands.
Was Rosa Parks a hero or a protestor?? She sat on a bus, and violated segregation laws. Yes, laws that were legal and binding, but she finally had enough and drew her line in the stand. She refused to give up her seat. She was willfully arrested because it was the right thing to do....or was it Arthur??
What about the lone student in Tieniman Square, making a stand in front of the tank (he was eventually run over and smashed).
Just because something is law, or color thereof, doesn't make it just law.
Your labor belongs to YOU and no one else. The PRODUCTIVITY of your labor belongs to YOU and no one else. If you think otherwise, then I feel sorry for you...really I do. The government has no more right to your stuff than I do. The government is not God, it is just a group of people no different than you and I. If it is against the law for me to extort money, why is it legal for a larger group?? This is called legalized extortion.
By signing a 1040 tax return, you violate your Fifth Amendment rights to self incrimination. You are certifying that the information you have included is correct. If the IRS finds otherwise, they will hold you to your signature, regardless. IT WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU in a court of law.
It is so easy to throw the words "Tax Protestor" around. I do not oppose taxes. I know the Constitution calls for them but I only support and pay legal excise, duties and tariffs. I have no problem paying my local sales taxes. I have no problem paying my vehicle registration taxes, or my cable taxes, or my cellphone taxes, or my telephone taxes, or my fuel taxes....
I protest the "INCOME" tax.
You can be a slave if you want, but don't force me into servitude.
Re: Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
Well, there are two statements to be made here.
1. (Federal) personal income tax is morally repugnant.
I tend toward yes, but perhaps not as strongly as TRTofmaui, but I can see his point.
2. Income tax is illegal; you can avoid paying it.
This is clearly false. That's the point I'm trying to make. If you feel that going to jail in order to avoid voluntarily paying income tax is worth it to make your point, then go ahead.
As for two specific points:
Quote: By signing a 1040 tax return, you violate your Fifth Amendment rights to self incrimination.
In summary, tax returns are civil testimony, which can be compelled unless there is a reasonable possibility of criminal prosecution. However, the 5th Amendment does apply in some cases. From that section:
Quote:
Having said all that, there are at least two ways in which the 5th Amendment can be relevant to tax returns.
As the Supreme Court recognized in Sullivan, you cannot be compelled to disclose criminal activity on a tax return. For example, if you are sell heroin or cocaine, you are required to report your income from your illegal sales, but you are not required to describe your illegal activities, or provide any other information that might incriminate you. (You could describe your income simply as "income from sales" without describing what you are selling.) If you choose to identify your occupation or the nature of your sales, that information can be used against you. (In Garner v. United States, 424 U.S. 648 (1976), the defendant identified himself as a "gambler" on his tax return, and that information was ruled to be admissible against him in a criminal trial for illegal gambling activities.)
If you fail to file a return, or file a fraudulent return, the government cannot compel you to testify or provide information that could be used against you in the criminal tax case arising out of the failure to file or the fraudulent return. In other words, the 5th Amendment does not prevent the government from requiring you to file a return or from prosecuting you if you fail to file, but it does prevent the government from compelling you to provide information to help with your own conviction after you have failed to file.
And
Quote: It is so easy to throw the words "Tax Protestor" around. I do not oppose taxes. I know the Constitution calls for them but I only support and pay legal excise, duties and tariffs.
The income tax is an excise tax. See Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1880).
But lets not forget the fact that the America survived about 130 years without an income tax.
President Lincoln was the first to impliment an income tax to fund the civil war.He had to declare martial law to do so. It was repealed in 1870 for being "UNCONSTITUTIONAL".
The income tax of 1894 was also struck down by the Supremes for being UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
How in the world did the U.S. survive and become a superpower without an income tax? By duties, tariffs and excises. In fact, the treasurer spoke before Congress during the debate of the income tax in 1911 and said the income tax was wholly unnecessary because the government was running on an "embarrassing Surplus".
The income tax of 1913 was never intended to be a tax on wages or compensation on the American citizen. I own a book published in 1911 called "The History of the Income Tax, at Home and Abroad" by Edwin Seligman, Professor of Economics at Columbia University.
He has a whole chapter dedicated to the "Proposed Sixteenth Amendment" including debates amongst the Senators. Interesting that the wages, compensation and other incomes of the citizen were not even discussed. The income tax was meant to be a tax on incomes of corporations and state municiple bonds. In fact, the term income as defined in this book, also by Congress, meant profit and gains realized from corporate activity and state income. Congress was watching huge corporations rise up around them, amassing huge fortunes, yet escaping taxation because of the apportionment rule of the Constitution and they didn't like it one bit. See (Flint v Stone Tracy Co).
The Sixteenth Amendment was originally meant to tax the "incomes" of these corporations and states without Constitutional apportionment.
One Democratic Senator even remarked that taxing incomes in such a way would turn the Democratic Party into the Socialist Party, or the Quasi Communist Party and he didn't want to have anything to do with it.
So, how did the government operate before the income tax? What ever it didn't raise by tariffs, duties and excises, it would go to the states to make up the difference. Each state paid its share according to population. That is how it was successfully done until 1913.
The Constitution is a document of limitations. Not on the people, but on the government. I know we are a long way from a Constitutional government and the Constitution has been torn apart for so long that it means nothing to most Americans, but it still means something to me. I defended the Constitution in the military and took a few bullets defending it. As a veteran, I will still defend it.
Re: Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
I forgot to mention that the "Pollock" case of the 1890's reversed the Springer case. It killed the income tax of 1894 and ruled it a direct tax, and thus unconstitutional because it violates the apportionment clause of the Constitution.
Hylton and Springer were limited (or "distinguished") in 1894, when the Supreme Court decided to re-examine the question of whether an income tax was a "direct tax." In the first Pollock decision, a narrow majority of the court (5 of the 9 justices) began with the premise that a tax on the income from property is the same as a tax on the value of the property itself, a premise completely inconsistent with every other Supreme Court decision before or since. The Court then concluded that a tax on rents received from real property was a "direct tax" and unconstitutional unless apportioned. Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1894). On rehearing, the same five justices decided that a tax on dividends, interest, and other income from personal property (property other than land) was also a "direct tax" and so unconstitutional unless apportioned. Pollock v. Farmers Bank and Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601 (1895)
The Pollock court was very clear that it was only a tax on the incomes from property that was a "direct tax," and other forms of income could be taxed without apportionment. This was confirmed by the court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916).
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies 
Punitive Taxation is a VICIOUS hate crime.
![[Blue Ribbon Campaign icon]](http://br.eff.org/br.gif)
