Tax Protester FAQ

[morganchaser]

http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html

What are all of your thoughts? Anything stand out as particularly false? Any that needed to be said?

I have yet to see anyone lawyer their way out of trouble in my experiences with the courts, so I'm pretty skeptical of most of these claims. Draw your line and defend it with force seems to be the only way to get anything done. You're on the bad side of home field advantage playing their court game.

[jman]

The bottom line is they hold all the cards and can take control of virtually everything financially attached to your life. From a moral standpoint government taxation for a private bank is wrong and imposes upon personal liberty. From a legal standpoint, whether your are correct or not is completely irrelevant in your argument. That doesn't mean you should not fight when attacked, it does mean you shouldn't taunt Goliath unless you are willing to sacrifice everything you have worked for.

In a free society you would have voluntary choice when to pay a tax (such as non-essential goods with a sales tax), what we have is not a free society where one mistake fixing your taxes can result in due cost+interest. Until the American people wake up and focus entirely their efforts to change monetary policy and government overspending, we will never have a real functioning Republic. War, Environment, no issue should be more important than ensuring "We the People" control the budget. He who has the gold makes the rules. Just my 2 cents, I would also recommend reading "How to Survive the IRS" by Michael Louis Minns. It paints a very serious picture of the tax court system and the draconic power of that organization. If I sound like a brow beat sheeple afraid of a government institution.....your half right. I don't buy the lie, but I don't fool myself into believing that principle and fact are enough to combat it. Those arguments would not hold up in court, and any evidence supporting them would not be admissible.

[modman]

Tommy Cryer!!
Precedent now set in Federal court, of course you won't find it on the public records website from the:
The United States Attorney's Office

Western District of Louisiana

Shreveport (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/law/contact/shreveport.html) | Lafayette (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/law/contact/lafayette.html) | Monroe (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/law/contact/monroe.html) | Alexandria (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/law/contact/alexandria.html) | Lake Charles (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/law/contact/lakecharles.html)

Link:

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/law/pressrel.html

Pryer to July 11 2007, Tom Cryer's case was all over the agenda, after he was judged not guilty by the jury, it magicaly disappeared. I know I saw it before and after. It
Here is a link to youtube from Cryer, just view these videos in the link:
YouTube - SEGMENT 1 -- FEDERAL INCOME TAX

[cigarlover]

I think whatyou have to realize is that this guy is in the business of trying to make the tax honesty movement seem like a bunch of kooks.

Unfortunately in order to truly understand this stuff you have to read a lot of Supreme court cases. For instance, Income is not really defined in the IRS codes (Title26) It is defined in Supreme court cases.
You also have to know that congress has custom definitions for Employee, employer and wages which are found in 3401 and apply to withholding in 3402. (Its freakin scary that I know this stuff off the top of my head now!! LOL)

There are also Supreme court decisions that would blow away this guys arguments but of course what American is going to spend 1000-2000 hours reserching this stuff for themselves? (Ok I have but most American have a life:))

The last thing is that the irs codes as they are written are constitutu=ional. However they are misapplied as Tommy cryer points out.

Heres another fact and one that is amazing to me..

On the IRS website you can see the history of taxation. It says how it all came to be and how at certain times there was an income tax and then in 1895 it was found to be unconstitutional in the Pollack decision. It then goes on to say that the 16 amendment gave congress to implement an unapportioned income tax.

However in (I think) Stanton V Baltic mining the Supeme court ruled that the 16th gave congress no new powers of taxation that they did not already possess.

So if congress recieved no new powers than why does the IRS say that the 16th gave congress the power to enact an income tax? Because most American will not call them on it. I would venture a guess that less than 1/2 of 1% of Americans actually know what income is!!

Income is a profit or gain.

Well I'm going to stop here or i will be typing for hours.. If anyone is really interested i can put together a lot of info with supporting supreme court decisions.. Tommy cryers memorandum has it all though so read it and read it again and keep reading it until you understand it completely!!!!

[Zeitgeist]

Support Sherry Peel Jackson: HERE!
America Freedom to Fascism


FAX# 1-404-581-6181

Northern District of Georgia

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/gan/press/2007/10-30-07.pdf

This was my FAX:

TO: The United States Attorney's Office
I have one simple Legal Question.

Please, explain which words in the U.S. Constitution,
Gives the Federal Reserve Bank System the power to issue Money
To our U.S. Treasury with an Interest Debt Charge attached?

Prohibiting Alcohol required an Amendment and Ratified by 75% of all existing
States and again, just to abolish the original Amendment and restore our Liberty.

1919; the 18th Amendment and 1933; the 21st Amendment. In 1913 it didn’t work.

Yet, both Amendments abided by Article V; thus Supreme Law of the Land.

Since the power to issue Money affects all Individuals and all States,
The essence of Freedom; surely a Ratified Amendment is required.

The question; what is the Amendment number?

The Federal Reserve Act Amends nothing in the U.S. Constitution!

Lies have changed everything, created from “INTEREST”, over 95 Years ago.

Section 8. Powers Granted to Congress

Clause [1] The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States;

Clause [4] To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

Section 10. Powers Forbidden to the States

Clause [1] No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; Coin Money; Emit Bills of Credit; make Anything but GOLD and SILVER Coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or Grant any Title of Nobility.

The Federal Reserve Bank System is betrayal against the U.S. Constitution.

Thus, the I.R.S. and the 16th Amendment are Not Withstanding and No more
“Interest Tax Money” shall be collected and removed from Circulation for the
Federal Reserve Bank System…………..

Enforce the Legal Constitutional Law; Supreme Law of the Land.
This is what We pay you For.
When National Debt, 9 Trillion = Gross Domestics Product, 14 Trillion
Who will Pay for your Labor? In less than 4 years; they will EQUAL.


http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/gan/contact/index.html

[TonyG]

Heres another fact and one that is amazing to me..

On the IRS website you can see the history of taxation. It says how it all came to be and how at certain times there was an income tax and then in 1895 it was found to be unconstitutional in the Pollack decision. It then goes on to say that the 16 amendment gave congress to implement an unapportioned income tax.

However in (I think) Stanton V Baltic mining the Supeme court ruled that the 16th gave congress no new powers of taxation that they did not already possess.

So if congress recieved no new powers than why does the IRS say that the 16th gave congress the power to enact an income tax? Because most American will not call them on it. I would venture a guess that less than 1/2 of 1% of Americans actually know what income is!!

Income is a profit or gain.


Yes, Income is a profit or gain, but weather or not it is taxable is dependant upon for who or where it was gained or work was performed.

On the 16th amendment.
From the lost Horizons website:

The provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation . . ."

United States Supreme Court, Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916)



“The Sixteenth Amendment, although referred to in argument, has no real bearing and may be put out of view. As pointed out in recent decisions, it does not extend the taxing power to new or excepted subjects...”

United States Supreme Court, Peck v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 165 (1918)


"The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Chief Justice White, first noted that the Sixteenth Amendment did not authorize any new type of tax, nor did it repeal or revoke the tax clauses of Article I of the Constitution, quoted above. Direct taxes were, notwithstanding the advent of the Sixteenth Amendment, still subject to the rule of apportionment and indirect taxes were still subject to the rule of uniformity."

Howard M. Zaritsky, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division of the Library of Congress, Report No. 80-19A, entitled “Some Constitutional Questions Regarding The Federal Income Tax Laws”, page CRS-5 (1979)

"The legislative history merely shows... ...that the sole purpose of the Sixteenth Amendment was to remove the apportionment requirement for whichever incomes were otherwise taxable. 45 Cong. Rec. 2245-2246 (1910); id., at 2539; see also Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., 240 U.S. 1, 17 -18 (1916)."

United States Supreme Court, South Carolina v. Baker, 405 U.S. 505 (1988)

[TonyG]

http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html

What are all of your thoughts? Anything stand out as particularly false? Any that needed to be said?

I have yet to see anyone lawyer their way out of trouble in my experiences with the courts, so I'm pretty skeptical of most of these claims. Draw your line and defend it with force seems to be the only way to get anything done. You're on the bad side of home field advantage playing their court game.

Just a note: I think I read somewhere that the term "tax protester" was ruled to be excluded from federal agencies vocabulary in 1999?

[Wingmaster05]

Just a note: I think I read somewhere that the term "tax protester" was ruled to be excluded from federal agencies vocabulary in 1999?

What's the new phrase? Tax denier? :sarcasm:

btw, Thanks for the first post, it was enlightening.

[Zeitgeist]

The question; what is the Amendment number?

The Federal Reserve Act Amends nothing in the U.S. Constitution!

Lies have changed everything, created from “INTEREST”, over 95 Years ago.

Section 8. Powers Granted to Congress

Clause [1] The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States;

Clause [4] To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

Answer The Question!