Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/24/2006 1:48:33 PM EDT
The 16th amendment authorizes Congress to lay and collect taxes on income. Other provisions in the Constitution LIMIT the Congress on what it can spend the money on. It is clear that the Congress and the President abuse the Constitution by spending OUR money on programs that are not authorized by the Constitution.
As an example, there is no provision allowing the Feds to have any say so in public education, therefor public education is a states right. The Feds have a Dept of Education that spends tax money on an entire department that is prohibited by law. They use the money as a carrot, and effectively run public education.
If you decide not to pay your income tax, based on the illegal spending by the government, what would a federal tax judge say? Can the Feds successfully prosecute you knowing that The Congress violates the Constitution? Is the government legitimate if it violates the Constitution?
What say you!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 1:50:12 PM EDT
Many have tried, many have failed.


Let us know how it goes, if you decide to try it.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 1:51:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EDDIECRUM:

What say you!



I say it's a good way to end up in a federal "pound me in the ass" prison.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:00:18 PM EDT
Didn't a woman not pay her taxes and win because supposedly nowhere in the tax code it says you HAVE to pay income tax?
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:03:24 PM EDT
Maybe you haven't realised, but, the .gov does not care what the Constitution says.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:05:11 PM EDT
The voices in my head said you be the devil
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:06:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FunYun1983:
Maybe you haven't realised, but, the .gov does not care what the Constitution says.



And all the apologists chime in now, "but the courts have upheld..."

Don't hate the game. Hate the players who ruin it.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:08:06 PM EDT
In the quest to figure out how to avoid being a decent citizen, I wonder if some people ever stop to ponder IF they should avoid being a decent citizen.

Pay your damn taxes and bitch like the rest of us.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:09:35 PM EDT
insanity

crime of passion
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:09:36 PM EDT
Haven't really read much of this site, but see what these guys have to say: www.paynoincometax.com/
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:10:19 PM EDT
Here's how I see things like this:

In my (and most other's on this board) opinion, I have a right to own newly manufactured machine guns. I also agree that my income taxes are spent contrary to that which is Constitutional, therefore I believe I do not rightfully owe them.

Acting on either will land me in jail, regardless of how "right" I am. There are plenty of unconstitutional laws enforced RIGHT NOW. None are worth taking up arms over.

Yet.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:13:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By leakycow:
In the quest to figure out how to avoid being a decent citizen, I wonder if some people ever stop to ponder IF they should avoid being a decent citizen.

Pay your damn taxes and bitch like the rest of us.



But it would be more fun to leech off the rest of you!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:15:08 PM EDT
Plead the 5th.

Putting down info on the 1040 form is self incrimination.


Tell them the tax only applies to non citizens.


Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:18:55 PM EDT
Considering we are involved in a shooting war with thousands of American troops depolyed in the feild....how can you even pose such a question in good concience? Stand on yer hind legs, be an American, and pay yer fuckin taxes!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:20:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
Tell them the tax only applies to non citizens.



And to income, not wages!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:26:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Older_Crow:

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
Tell them the tax only applies to non citizens.



And to income, not wages!



Don't tell them anything. There's gold fringe on them there flags. If you answer, you submit to the jurisdiction of the court, and federal courts fall under the Admirality and Special Jurisdiction of the United States, and the Law of the Flag applies in admirality, and those gold fringed flags are military flags, and....
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:28:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:
Here's how I see things like this:

In my (and most other's on this board) opinion, I have a right to own newly manufactured machine guns. I also agree that my income taxes are spent contrary to that which is Constitutional, therefore I believe I do not rightfully owe them.

Acting on either will land me in jail, regardless of how "right" I am. There are plenty of unconstitutional laws enforced RIGHT NOW. None are worth taking up arms over.

Yet.




Well said!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:29:43 PM EDT
I am not advocating not paying my taxes...I'm happy to pay taxes that pay for those government actions that are provided for...by law. The military is a legitimate constitutionally established responsibility of the government. I object paying for the Dept of Education and literally thousands of other government programs that violate the Constitution. People like you who just allow the government to do what they want remind me of the Jews in WWII...just get in line, do what they say.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:32:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JohnTheTexican:

Originally Posted By Older_Crow:

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
Tell them the tax only applies to non citizens.



And to income, not wages!



Don't tell them anything. There's gold fringe on them there flags. If you answer, you submit to the jurisdiction of the court, and federal courts fall under the Admirality and Special Jurisdiction of the United States, and the Law of the Flag applies in admirality, and those gold fringed flags are military flags, and....



I saw a guy claim this in a trial once. He was a loon!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:34:49 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:43:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EDDIECRUM:
I am not advocating not paying my taxes...I'm happy to pay taxes that pay for those government actions that are provided for...by law. The military is a legitimate constitutionally established responsibility of the government. I object paying for the Dept of Education and literally thousands of other government programs that violate the Constitution. People like you who just allow the government to do what they want remind me of the Jews in WWII...just get in line, do what they say.



So you don't drive on public roads? You were privately educated? Never took any antibiotics or use other gov't funded/created stuff, like the Internet?

Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:47:34 PM EDT
"Right" and "Legal" are not always synonymous.

There was a group a few years back that tried to use a Constitutional argument to defend against (open) failure to pay income taxes. I don't remember the court's reasoning, but the net result was, you have to pay. Now, if you wanted to try to (go to law school, learn what you're talking about, and) file a suit, I would recommend paying the taxes, then suing for damages (the taxes paid), rather than breaking the law first, which always looks bad.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 3:01:19 PM EDT
I thought most people were worried about how big a refund they were getting.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 3:06:35 PM EDT
Postal roads are provided for in the Constitution. Interstate highways were part of DOD. Education is a STATE issue. I pay about $10,000 a year in property taxes of which about $8,000 are to my local school board to support State schools. Yes, I was privately educated as a kid and my dad still had to pay school taxes. The internet is not a government agency, although they want to make it one. It is a spin off from DOD, but it is not a government agency. There is no provision in the Constitution for the government to fund drug studies, or provide free drugs to our grannies.
You just don't get it! Nothing is stopping your state from building roads. Nothing is stopping you from having state operated schools, run by local school boards, paid for by local school taxes. Nothing is stopping Glaxo from inventing new drugs. None of this is the business of the FEDERAL government. You probably went to your local public school and you never learned about the Constitution, other than "it is a living document". It is not a living document, it is the law.
Yes, we all enjoy the roads, school, drugs, internet, etc. The point is that most of these are not the business of Federalism.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 3:07:24 PM EDT
Just move here.

Link Posted: 1/24/2006 3:07:26 PM EDT
Defense for not paying federal income tax?

"Please! Please don't send me to prison, Please!!"

Actually that isn't a "defense" it's more like pleading.

A good defense is more like... like... um...


GM
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 3:19:26 PM EDT
By the way, I pay my taxes, my fair share. I'm not thinking about not paying my taxes...too many assets that the government would just take away.
I'm just pissed off about paying for "katrina whores " sitting on cruise ships, funding a Federal Dept of Education, bridges to nowhere, etc, etc...
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 4:24:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EDDIECRUM:
Postal roads are provided for in the Constitution. Interstate highways were part of DOD.



Fine, so you only drive on postal roads or interstates? I seriously doubt it.



The internet is not a government agency, although they want to make it one. It is a spin off from DOD, but it is not a government agency.



The Internet was created through government funding, period. Who the hell said anything about 'agency' this or that?



There is no provision in the Constitution for the government to fund drug studies, or provide free drugs to our grannies.



Do you have polio? No, because of publicaly funded research. How is your smallpox doing? Oh ya, publicaly funded research took care of that one as well.



Yes, we all enjoy the roads, school, drugs, internet, etc. The point is that most of these are not the business of Federalism.



I happen to enjoy good roads and no smallpox. Sure, the .gov wastes a lot of money, and their are programs I do not agree with, but I'm not going to claim the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional or some goofy crap because of it.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 4:44:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By EDDIECRUM:
Postal roads are provided for in the Constitution. Interstate highways were part of DOD.



Fine, so you only drive on postal roads or interstates? I seriously doubt it.

Well, considering the Post Office uses basically every road/highway that exists to deliver mail to businesses and residents along them...I am guesing the answer is yes.



The internet is not a government agency, although they want to make it one. It is a spin off from DOD, but it is not a government agency.



The Internet was created through government funding, period. Who the hell said anything about 'agency' this or that?

Yes, it was funded through .gov, the point is it should not have been. people/investors/entrepreneurs would have been more than willing to put money into development of the internet. But because the .gov was there to do it for them, there was no incentive to develop it privately. Which, I am sure, would have been done more efficiently and for a lot few dollars.



There is no provision in the Constitution for the government to fund drug studies, or provide free drugs to our grannies.



Do you have polio? No, because of publicaly funded research. How is your smallpox doing? Oh ya, publicaly funded research took care of that one as well.

Again, see above. If the government had not done it, private enterprise would have.



Yes, we all enjoy the roads, school, drugs, internet, etc. The point is that most of these are not the business of Federalism.



I happen to enjoy good roads and no smallpox. Sure, the .gov wastes a lot of money, and their are programs I do not agree with, but I'm not going to claim the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional or some goofy crap because of it.



The, 16th amendment, by definition is not unconstitutional. It is an amendment to the actual constitution. Now you can argue if it was appropriately ratified, but that is a different topic. The main point to it, however, is that the Founders never intended for an income tax to be installed.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:12:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Yossarian:
Well, considering the Post Office uses basically every road/highway that exists to deliver mail to businesses and residents along them...I am guesing the answer is yes.



Right, and those are paid for by....?



Yes, it was funded through .gov, the point is it should not have been. people/investors/entrepreneurs would have been more than willing to put money into development of the internet. But because the .gov was there to do it for them, there was no incentive to develop it privately. Which, I am sure, would have been done more efficiently and for a lot few dollars.



Right. So why didn't they? The USPS exists, yet private companies went off and created Fedex and UPS and whatnot, because it was worth it for financial reasons. Why didn't private companies decide to start ARPANET-like work back in the 60's?



Again, see above. If the government had not done it, private enterprise would have.



Really? Why? How much money is there in handing out vaccines to folks that make dozens of dollars a year? None, of course. There are valid public health reasons, on the other hand, for eradicating diseases.



The main point to it, however, is that the Founders never intended for an income tax to be installed.



*Shrug* But they did include the mechanism we need to change the Constitution to allow for it. Brilliant folks, those Founding Fathers.

I agree with the notion that our .gov spends too much, and maybe on the wrong things, but the .gov does spend money wisely and in a widely-beneficial manner every now and again.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:24:59 PM EDT

Can the Feds successfully prosecute you ...?


I know a guy who screwed himself over financially by not paying taxes. All the stuff from "noincometax.com" and the like didn't hold water in court. He owed something like $25,000 in taxes.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:27:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By Yossarian:
Well, considering the Post Office uses basically every road/highway that exists to deliver mail to businesses and residents along them...I am guesing the answer is yes.



Right, and those are paid for by....?



Yes, it was funded through .gov, the point is it should not have been. people/investors/entrepreneurs would have been more than willing to put money into development of the internet. But because the .gov was there to do it for them, there was no incentive to develop it privately. Which, I am sure, would have been done more efficiently and for a lot few dollars.



Right. So why didn't they? The USPS exists, yet private companies went off and created Fedex and UPS and whatnot, because it was worth it for financial reasons. Why didn't private companies decide to start ARPANET-like work back in the 60's?



Again, see above. If the government had not done it, private enterprise would have.



Really? Why? How much money is there in handing out vaccines to folks that make dozens of dollars a year? None, of course. There are valid public health reasons, on the other hand, for eradicating diseases.



The main point to it, however, is that the Founders never intended for an income tax to be installed.



*Shrug* But they did include the mechanism we need to change the Constitution to allow for it. Brilliant folks, those Founding Fathers.

I agree with the notion that our .gov spends too much, and maybe on the wrong things, but the .gov does spend money wisely and in a widely-beneficial manner every now and again.




I just thought I'd point out that around here there is a little sticker right on the gas pumps that say for every gallon of gas there is .46 cents in taxes; some of that is state and local taxes, and some of it is federal.

The point is almost 25% of the cost of one gallon is a tax, and this is how roads are to be paid for, along with registration and taxing of vehicles.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:30:09 PM EDT
I would argue that the internet and its predecessor, DARPANET, was a legitimate federally-funded military project within the bounds of federal powers.

DARPANET was funded so researchers could collaborate on military projects and further expanded to provide a redundant communication network and to decentralize C3 functions in case of catastrophic loss of military and communication facilties.

Tired of DARPA and the .mil's sensitivity to this network and security around DARPANET, the NSF decided to use the experience with the "network" and expand it's use to connect regional universities and colleges to a number of central "hubs" with data to be shared among the schools.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:49:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By EDDIECRUM:
I am not advocating not paying my taxes...I'm happy to pay taxes that pay for those government actions that are provided for...by law. The military is a legitimate constitutionally established responsibility of the government. I object paying for the Dept of Education and literally thousands of other government programs that violate the Constitution. People like you who just allow the government to do what they want remind me of the Jews in WWII...just get in line, do what they say.



So you don't drive on public roads? You were privately educated? Never took any antibiotics or use other gov't funded/created stuff, like the Internet?





Did you read the title of this thread? WTF are you talking about?

Roads are paid for by fuel tax not federal income tax.

Education is provided by local governments that get their money thru such things as property tax and sales tax.

The internet...........well I wont even go their because you most likely think Al Gore invented it.

Small pox was cured by private reaserch. The vaccine could have been distributed by other means than Gov agencies.



Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:08:12 PM EDT
Well, fight it in court and let me know how it turns out....

....Oh, and don't drop the soap around Bubba....
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:29:41 PM EDT
I knew someone who didn't fill out his federal income tax forms for years. He thought that since it was being taken out of his paycheck that he didn't need to file a "tax return". After he talked with a bunch of people during tax time and how he might be in trouble with the government for not filing, he was really shaking. I don't know what happened though.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:42:32 PM EDT
just be a good American and lie on your taxes. Or you can do what one guy I know did. He sent money to those starving kids in africa. He then claimed them as a dependant because he was supporting them. Good idea but it didnt work. He got audited.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:43:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tripledouble:
I knew someone who didn't fill out his federal income tax forms for years. He thought that since it was being taken out of his paycheck that he didn't need to file a "tax return". After he talked with a bunch of people during tax time and how he might be in trouble with the government for not filing, he was really shaking. I don't know what happened though.



probably nothing if they owed him money. Now if they owed him money then well that different story.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:52:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By krpind:
Let us know how it goes, if you decide to try it.



Well, I didn't have to go far to find my +1.

You could just move to Mexico, becomes a Mexican citizen, then come back as an illegal and you have all the rights of an American citizen without being taxed or having to worry about paying for health care or car insurance. Best of both worlds.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:58:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By rasanders22:
just be a good American and lie on your taxes. Or you can do what one guy I know did. He sent money to those starving kids in africa. He then claimed them as a dependant because he was supporting them. Good idea but it didnt work. He got audited.



IRS must be a bunch of racists!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 6:58:42 PM EDT
Class action lawsuits.


Now I ain't an attorney but we surely have enough of the blood sucking parasites around here.

Okay, okay, I'm kidding....sort of...

Point is we could finance several class action suits, taking a few pages from the socialist playbook.

'68 GCA
'86 MG ban
Other gov't intrusions, incl Dept of Education, maybe even the income tax, refusal to protect the border.
Take them all the way up the line.
We could scrounge up enough money from everyone here easily. One suit at a time.

Why not? Socialists have been doing this kind of shit for decades and it has sure paid off for them.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:01:31 PM EDT
Get a couple of cases of KY.

This is settled law like it or not,
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:33:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FatCobra:
Did you read the title of this thread?



Reading comprehension is not your strong suite, eh? Hint: You need to read all of the words in a post, including those that I was responding to, if you want to understand the complete context of my posts.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:39:09 PM EDT
Once you get done paying legal fees and lawyers you'll realize it was cheaper to pay your taxes.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:49:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 7:49:55 PM EDT by Mdripley]
pay your taxes. Buy weapons and ammo while you still can and wait for the train to wreck, because the driver of our train is surely heading for a wreck in the not too distant future.
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 5:37:29 AM EDT

Defense for not paying federal income tax?


Read this:

Link to IRS search for "tax protesters"
Link Posted: 1/25/2006 5:53:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By goodmedicine:
Defense for not paying federal income tax?

"Please! Please don't send me to prison, Please!!"

Actually that isn't a "defense" it's more like pleading.

A good defense is more like... like... um...


GM




More like....if you go back and pull the history of the vote on the 16th amendment you'll find that it was brought up for vote during the Christmas recess and that it did not have the required number of votes to pass and certain senators that were not present were put down as voting "yay" and so forth and so forth and so forth. The courts will never touch it because on it's face I believe that the facts stated above can be proven through historical documents.

Same thing happened with the "Federal Reserve".

Anyone know what branch of the .gov the "federal reserve" belongs too?.......


Trick question, it doesn't. It's a private bank run by foriegn investors. Yes folks, foriegners have run our economy for quite some time now. Thank the NWO for that.

Link Posted: 1/25/2006 7:02:14 AM EDT
Janice Klug

A "federal jury Friday found FedEx pilot Vernice Kuglin not guilty of evading income taxes on $920,000," reported Shirley Downing of the daily Memphis Commercial Appeal on Aug. 9.

"Kuglin, a pilot for FedEx since 1985, said she had paid taxes like anyone else for most of her life," the Commercial Appeal reported. "But about 10 or 11 years ago, she began to question the federal tax system. She began to read court documents, legal opinions and the federal tax code.

"She said she found what she felt were contradictions. She wanted to know where in the federal tax code it said she was liable for taxes. Kuglin wrote the Internal Revenue Service twice in 1995 with questions but said she didn't get a response."

Ms. Kuglin had asked the IRS in writing whether the payment of taxes was "voluntary" or by "voluntary compliance." The IRS refused to answer her letters.

Link Posted: 1/25/2006 8:01:08 AM EDT
The main point to it, however, is that the Founders never intended for an income tax to be installed.


Yeah they wanted the .gov to be run on customs, excises and tariffs. Nice idea then, but in practical terms the way the world economy has evolved it would never work.

That pilot won on a technicality in that they never responded to her requests. That the tax was legal or illegal was not at point, just they never responded to her questions. To use that defense now you need to ask the right questions and not get answered. Wanna bet they answer the question now?
Top Top