Quantcast

Tax dodgers taunt police from hilltop compound

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Matt King, Jun 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
    There have been several cases won against the IRS. I can only find one right now, but there are more.
    Vernice Kuglin won her case.
    http://www.sierratimes.com/03/08/10/ar_IRS_vs._KUGLIN.htm
    There are more, I just need to find them. I saw a video of one of the jurors, some time ago. The court could not produce the Law. Jury found defendant NOT guilty.
     
  2. Cel

    Cel Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    204
    The IRS Rebuttal to my earlier post. See, I'm fair.

    Still doesn't mean it's right.

    http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=106508,00.html




    A. Contention: The Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States.

    Some argue that the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States but rather a private corporation, because it was not created by positive law (i.e., an act of Congress) and that, therefore, the IRS does not have the authority to enforce the Internal Revenue Code.

    The Law: There is a host of constitutional and statutory authority establishing that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court stated in Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 534 (1971), "[w]e bear in mind that the Internal Revenue Service is organized to carry out the broad responsibilities of the Secretary of the Treasury under § 7801(a) of the 1954 Code for the administration and enforcement of the internal revenue laws."

    Pursuant to section 7801, the Secretary of Treasury has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce such laws. Based upon this, the Internal Revenue Service was created. Thus, the Internal Revenue Service is a body established by "positive law" because it was created through a congressionally mandated power. Moreover, section 7803(a) explicitly provides that there shall be a Commissioner of Internal Revenue who shall administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.

    Relevant Case Law:
    Salman v. Dept. of Treasury, 899 F. Supp. 471 (D. Nev. 1995) - The court described Salman's contention that the Internal Revenue Service is not a government agency of the United States as wholly frivolous and dismissed his claim with prejudice.

    Young v. I.R.S., 596 F. Supp. 141 (N.D. Ind. 1984) - The court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, rejecting Young's claim that the Internal Revenue Service is a private corporation, rather than a government agency.

    B. Contention: Taxpayers are not required to file a federal income tax return, because the instructions and regulations associated with the Form 1040 do not display an OMB control number as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Some argue that taxpayers are not required to file tax returns because of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. § 3501, et seq. ("PRA"). The PRA was enacted to limit federal agencies' information requests that burden the public. The "public protection" provision of the PRA provides that no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to maintain or provide information to any agency if the information collection request involved does not display a current control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] Director. 44 U.S.C. § 3512. Advocates of this contention claim that they cannot be penalized for failing to file Form 1040, because the instructions and regulations associated with the Form 1040 do not display any OMB control number.

    The Law: The courts have uniformly rejected this argument on different grounds. Some courts have simply noted that the PRA applies to the forms themselves, not to the instruction booklets, and because the Form 1040 does have a control number, there is no PRA violation.

    Other courts have held that Congress created the duty to file returns in section 6012(a) and "Congress did not enact the PRA's public protection provision to allow OMB to abrogate any duty imposed by Congress." United States v. Neff, 954 F.2d 698, 699 (11 th Cir. 1992).

    Relevant Case Law:
    United States v. Wunder, 919 F.2d 34 (6 th Cir. 1990) - The court rejected Wunder's claim of a PRA violation, affirming his conviction for failing to file a return.

    Salberg v. United States, 969 F.2d 379 (7 th Cir. 1992) - The court affirmed Salberg's conviction for tax evasion and failing to file a return, rejecting his claims under the PRA.

    United States v. Holden, 963 F.2d 1114 (8 th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 958 (1992) - The court affirmed Holden's conviction for failing to file a return and rejected his contention that he should have been acquitted because tax instruction booklets fail to comply with the PRA.

    United States v. Hicks, 947 F.2d 1356, 1359 (9 th Cir. 1991) - The court affirmed Hicks' conviction for failing to file a return, finding that the requirement to provide information is required by law, not by the IRS. "This is a legislative command, not an administrative request. The PRA was not meant to provide criminals with an all-purpose escape hatch."

    Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1445 (10 th Cir. 1990) - The court found that the PRA "is inapplicable to 'information collection request' forms issued during an investigation against an individual to determine his or her tax liability."
     
  3. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
  4. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Well thanks for admitting that the info you posted from wikipedia is pure BS.

    Whether you like it or not there is an income tax as established by the 16th Amendment, and Title 26 of the US Code. The IRS was created by the Department of the Treasury, under the statutory authority given to the Sec. of the Treasury by Congress. All of which I clearly posted.

    Finding sources much better than wikipedia, where any nutjob can create, add, or delete information on any topic, will serve you well.
     
  5. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    Are you even aware she is not talking about a federal income tax case?

    Try to learn just a little bit about the nonsense before you post it.

    :rolleyes:
     
  6. Refirignis

    Refirignis Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    42
    Paperwork Reduction Act can't be used? Then why did this guy's use of it send them running away? :rolleyes:
     
  7. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
    From ICE
    http://www.curiousevidence.com/(tc355fneovafob45qemh1q2s)/ice.aspx
     
  8. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
  9. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    So just because the government doesn't convict every defendant does not mean the law doesn't exist? :rolleyes:

    You live in Michigan according to your posted information. If I can show you cases were defendants were acquitted or had their cases dismissed for murder charges in the State of Michigan does that mean there is no law against murder in your state?

    Try a better, and at least somewhat rational argument next time.
     
  10. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    not meaning to thread drift

    but how are the Browns doing?
     
  11. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
    My point was only that people have won cases. The fact that most people do not fight the system is another question.
    I pay my taxes, and I am tired of it.
    Most of America is tired of it. It is no surprise that some folks rebel.
    Whether the Browns are crazy or not, They are doing what many lack the guts to do.
    I am still fighting to get my 2nd amendment rights back.
    I'll fight one battle at a time.
     
  12. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    No, anyone that reads your post can see you were clearly claiming that the Kuglin case, and the case you mentioned, and later posted a video link for, proved the federal income tax law doesn't exist. However, you were later shown that the Kuglin case was not about whether the law existed, and as I pointed out the case discussed in the video is NOT about federal tax law. So now you're backpedalling.
     
  13. Cel

    Cel Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    204
    You are so very welcome being that you are such a defender of the government's position. And for the record, no I do not like it. I do pay my taxes however. It does not mean I have to like it and it does not mean that there really COULD be some BS behind the whole tax thing. That's why we have discussions. I actually like this thread alot because I am learning a lot from it. Don't think that just because the Feds say something that it is so just because they said it. A lot of people still think that the Federal Reserve Bank is government owned but it is not. and that is FACT. That could start a whole other thread though so we won't get into that. I'm sure we are all learning here but the very fact that this thread exists should show that there is something going on that is up to interpretation, rather right or wrong. With that said the article on Wikipedia is not BS. All I did was look up the word income on there and that was just straightforward information. I really don't know for sure if the IRS is privately owned or not. But I am looking. :D Kinda funny though, the gov feels the need to tax us to death even though they let the FRB print all they money they would ever need.
     
  14. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........

    So rather than burn them out later, the townsfolk want the Feds to burn them out NOW? :crazy:
     
  15. ConstitutionCowboy

    ConstitutionCowboy member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    A Little Tidbit For You All To Consider...

    This from DMF in comment #106...

    ...Is just what I was talking about in comment #5 in [thread=283511]this thread[/thread]. The Constitution gets changed up all the time by Congress "defining" words. (The Court has done the same.)

    Knowing this little tidbit, now consider that this "definition" of "income" was written into law AFTER the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified. That wasn't the definition of "income" when the amendment became the law of the land. The REAL definition of "income" is more akin to what Cel posted in Comment #103.

    Woody

    Look at your rights and freedoms as what would be required to survive and be free as if there were no government. Governments come and go, but your rights live on. If you wish to survive government, you must protect with jealous resolve all the powers that come with your rights - especially with the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Without the power of those arms, you will perish with that government - or at its hand. B.E. Wood
     
  16. JerryM

    JerryM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    836
    Location:
    New Mexico
    I am not on the side of the Browns. Pay taxes or take the consequences.

    I do not approve of some of the things my tax money goes for, and if I knew everything, I would disapprove even more. I pay too much in taxes, and wish there were a flat tax.

    But the law is the law, and until it is changed I will pay my taxes honestly to the degree I, and my tax program, understand it.

    So however it comes out whether the Browns are arrested or force the issue into a shootout and die, they will get what they deserve in my view.

    Jerry
     
  17. Jeff

    Jeff Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    720
    Location:
    Vermont
    Yup. So, too, were slavery and, much more recently, segregation.

    I'm not trying to equate the injustices of slavery and segregation to federal tax law. They are obviously not commensurate.

    But saying the "law is the law" won't cut it. Never did and never will.

    Man in power is a corrupt animal. And the current size and scope of our federal gov't is a bona fide Hogzilla.
     
  18. FeebMaster

    FeebMaster Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    275
    Why not?
     
  19. Jeff

    Jeff Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    720
    Location:
    Vermont
    Okay.....


    I'm sure you've payed taxes before. Does your life suck? If so, does it suck because you pay taxes?

    I'm also sure you have never been violently incarcerated to break your back and give your sweat to the Man, against your will. Would you like to? Would it suck worse than your life now?

    I'm also sure you have never been told where to sit on a bus, or from what lunch counter to dine, or from what fountain to drink. Would you like to? Would it suck worse than your life now?
     
  20. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    wow

    cel you really believe that?:eek:
    if i'm not prying you wouldn't be fairly young would ya?
     
  21. FeebMaster

    FeebMaster Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    275
    Not particularly.

    It would certainly be better if I wasn't working 5 months out of the year to pay the man. I suppose I should be thankful they leave me as much as they do.


    Well if I don't pay my taxes I suppose some violence would ensue. Either that or I'd have to lock myself up in my compound until they burned me out.


    Can't argue with that really. Although if a private businessman doesn't want my money, I'm sure I can find another who would be more than happy to take it.
     
  22. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    so young

    "I'm sure you've payed taxes before. Does your life suck? If so, does it suck because you pay taxes?

    I'm also sure you have never been violently incarcerated to break your back and give your sweat to the Man, against your will. Would you like to? Would it suck worse than your life now?

    I'm also sure you have never been told where to sit on a bus, or from what lunch counter to dine, or from what fountain to drink. Would you like to? Would it suck worse than your life now?"


    you really sure? some of us are old enough to havre had those things in their life.
    its a failing of youth to use phases like "i'm sure" you;ll get over it
     
  23. Cel

    Cel Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    204
    Believe what?
     
  24. Jeff

    Jeff Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    720
    Location:
    Vermont
    Why, yes. Yes I am.

    Like segregation? Yup, I agree. But not the ones who question the equality of slavery/segregation and paying taxes. I'm sure it didn't happen to them.

    Get it yet?
     
  25. helpless

    helpless Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2006
    Messages:
    770
    In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce and brave man, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice