Can There Be An Obvious And Particular Law That Needs All-Americanis To Pay For A Federal Tax?

[Kylen]

I had been inspired to get enough time to see "Zeitgeist the Film," obtainable in complete on-line and launched in 7/07. "Zeitgeist is roughly how information is offered to us and as reality [approved]. The subjects of terrorism, faith and conflict are the main focus." No 1 topic is principal and there are 4 segments.I was captivated. It kept my interest for quite significantly 2 hours. The info regarding the fundamentals of planet religions is nothing a new comer to me. I've run into this information before, specifically the parallels amongst Horus, Jesus and Krishna but these contacts have been extended so I've began vetting that information. The parallels are precise and the concept of how and why they created seems well-thought out.However, one declare, that there's no law that you have to pay for taxes, may possibly not be acceptable. Can there be a conclusive regulation? I am buying reputable reference with particulars. I also request that every person answering steer clear of subjective claims. I am really thinking about sturdy information.

[artzai]

First of all, it ought to be obvious that the burden of proof is and should be SQUARELY on the IRS and the feds to simply reveal to us what their legal justification is.  This ought to be simple, but they won't do it.  Instead, they point to regulations and custom and practice as if these were legally binding in themselves. This very question has been tested in court more than once or twice.  Franklin Sanders, a man who I know personally and have had business dealings with, a man as honest and honorable as the day is long, was persecuted - oops! I should say prosecuted - by the IRS, and won his case when the IRS could not or would not cite the relevant law.  Capping a five year investigation, they indicted my wife, 24 of my customers, and me. And after a trial from February to July, we were every one ACQUITTED of conspiracy and willful failure to file. Our only defense was, "Show Us The Law," and we WON! Start reading about Franklin Sanders HERE.  There are at least five ex-IRS agents who have turned against the IRS,(at great personal cost) claiming that the IRS is "knowingly misapplying the federal income tax laws."  This is another way of saying that no, there is not a "clear and definite law" requiring the payment of the federal income tax.  The IRS refuses to clearly and definitely tell us what that law might be.  Instead, they just assert that such a law exists. As you might imagine, the exact legal status of the federal income tax is extremely murky.  The government position is essentially, "Everybody knows that they have to pay the income tax, and anybody who says different is an illegal tax protestor."  HERE is a good place to read more detailed comments about the questionable legal status of the IRS. Bill Benson researched the history of the "passage" of the 13th(Income Tax) Amendment to the US Constitution in all 50 states and concluded that the amendment had never even been legally ratified or adopted, hence null and void.  He ultimately wrote The Law That Never Was, volumes 1 and 2 detailing his research and findings.  He also took the case to court, where the judges declined to find in his favor, ruling that at this point, the legality of the ratification was a moot question and had become a political question that they would not rule on.  Translation: "They got away with it fair and square, and it's too late now to complain." Finally, I DO NOT recommend refusing to pay the income tax.  You will pay dearly.  Read what happened to Franklin Sanders before you decide, and he was  NOT a tax protestor.  I myself went down that road, but turned back when I got a conference call from the IRS case officer and the Tax Court judge, telling me what they would do to me if I dared even show up in Tax Court to plead my case.  Knowing a rigged game when I saw one, I bailed out.

[Peyton]

I'm not a lawyer or tax expert but I think that 26 USC 1 is pretty clear and definite, repeating the following phrase:There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of {...} a tax determined in accordance with the following table:This can be read in full at: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000001----000-.html Admittedly, Section 1 is wordy and jumps quickly into the complexity of tax rates for different groups. I always thought this could be more concise and just say:    "A tax is hereby imposed on the income of all citizens of the United States...." Perhaps this legally-unnecessary step would be useful for ending future arguments about the lack of a single clear and definite law. So while 26 USC 1 may be verbose, that doesn't make it unclear or indefinite. The rest of Title 26 goes on to explain in excruciating detail the tax laws passed by Congress over the years.    In a previous job I was working on a project to publish tax law including USC, CFR, legislative history, and decisions of the US Tax Court. I was amazed at how many cases involved citizens claiming the US Government had no legal standing to require citizens to pay taxes. There were several common arguments made. Of course, all of them were shot down by the court.    Some claimed that the Tax Code(26 USC) was a 'code' and citizens should only be required to obey 'law'  or 'statutues' but not 'code'. This argument shows ignorance of the relationship of the United States Code to the Statutes At Large --  both of which are the law. Some variants of this argument incorrectly claim that the tax code was written by the IRS and not by the legislative branch. This argument probably confuses federal regulations(CFR) with United States Code(26 USC).    The Constitution says: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;    and:Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law.    So the tax code is law. Some would say it's a needlessly complicated intertwined morass of laws but nonetheless it is the law.    I don't remember all of the arguments but I do remember being amazed at how much rationalization people were capable of. Also, there is apparently good money to be made selling books and seminars on not paying taxes. The 'too good to be true' test needs to be applied by buyers of this information. If the federal tax was truly voluntary wouldn't that news spread quickly through all media sources? http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/code.htm

[Boyd]

Title 26 of the US Code Title 26 of the US Code, Subtitle A, defines what income taxes are. The "have to pay" part is Title 26, Subtitle F, CHAPTER 75, Subchapter A, part I, § 7201:Any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.I suppose this means you don't have to, in the law of physics sense that you "have to" fall down due to gravity.  But if you don't you go to jail.  That's about as definitive a law as you can possibly hope for. People have tried various ways to deny that the 16th amendment, which gives them the right to pass this law, is valid, but the courts have rejected all of them. PamPerdue 77 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Orin]

Let me give you a brief walk through the relevant sections of the Code. I?m not going to cite every section because of space limitations, but, I?ll give you enough to answer your question.   Section one imposes the tax on individuals. http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-A-1-A-I-1.html   Section 61 defines in minute detail what gross income is, which is what is taxed, minus deductions. http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-A-1-B-I-61.html  Since deductions don?t have to be taken and aren?t always available, I?ll let you look them up. Obviously there are quite a few deductions available to some taxpayers.   Do you have to file and pay? There are a number of criminal sanctions attached to not paying.   Section 7201 is the general criminal section. http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-F-75-A-I-7201.html   Section 7202 deals with failure to remit. http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-F-75-A-I-7202.html   Section 7203 deals with failure to file a tax return. http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-F-75-A-I-7203.html   The general reference to the Code is:  http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/sections.html   So, there is a tax imposed on income as defined by the Code. If you don?t file and/or don?t pay, you can be prosecuted and if convicted, be fined and/or incarcerated.   Does that answer your question?   If you go to a library that has an annotated version of the IRC, you can see the innumerable cases interpreting these statutes.

[Itai]

Title 26 of the US Code, Subtitle A, defines what income taxes are. The "have to pay" part is Title 26, Subtitle F, CHAPTER 75, Subchapter A, part I, § 7201:Any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.I suppose this means you don't have to, in the law of physics sense that you "have to" fall down due to gravity.  But if you don't you go to jail.  That's about as definitive a law as you can possibly hope for. People have tried various ways to deny that the 16th amendment, which gives them the right to pass this law, is valid, but the courts have rejected all of them.