Let us only suppose for a moment that there is no law that requires us to pay tax. My point is, that you will never ever see a tax court saying there is no law. For it is a tax court. It is not interested in the truth. It is interested in taxes.

Of course. If you entirely ignore everything under USC 26 ironically labeled IRS Tax Codes. Hint: Anything under USC is law. Hate to break it to you.

By the way: contrary to the anti tax schemers out there, USC 26 was not written by the IRS. All of USC was written by Congress. The IRS is merely the enforcement agency of the government. If you want to blame anybody for your tax rates, the blame goes solely on Congress.

Not yet. To be a legitimate law, it needs to be properly made into law. Properly, is the key here. In some banana republic, you'd be right. If some dude with a suit full of brass writes it into a law, then it is a law, and you'd be right, hating to break it to me. But in this country, there is a process that supposed to be followed, in order for a piece of legislation to actually become a law.

The allegation in case of tax law, is that it was never properly ratified. And, there are no excuses about it. Until it is properly ratified 100 clean, it is not a law, even though it may appear in books, as when happy tax bureaucrats insert it into the code.

It was. Doesn't matter if you don't like how it was done. Several bills were written by Congress and passed resulting in the entire US Codes we have today. USC 26 is only a small part of that legislation.



Yeah. Good luck with that. That line of argument has worked so well for so many people already.

I don't understand what is your point then. You're acknowledging that even if it was improperly ratified:

a) there are bunch of illegal laws written based on the amendment

.. the idea is that we should keep illegal laws because they have "already" been written?..

b) you return to saying that people had no luck with asserting the improper ratification in us tax court

.. meaning that one "can't sue the city hall".. ?


Do you ever care for what's right?

there are lot of people in prison for refusing to pay taxes

Nonsense. It's your contention that the 16th was not properly ratified. Not mine.



It's clear you have no comprehension of how the process works. The tax courts don't collect anything. They are merely there to settle disputes. Since the tax courts can back up their decisions with a mantra of US laws and supreme court decisions versus your "well the 16th was never properly ratified..." (according to who? ) it's no doubt they easily come to a conclusion not to your liking.

http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/04/12/29/greenslade.htm

If anybody cares. Someone who was convicted by the tax laws and researched the issue afterward and still found no evidence that the 16th amendment not being properly ratified is even a valid argument to avoid being liable for income taxes anyway.

This was already addressed, but its both the 16th Amendment AND in the USC (Unites States Code) which makes it law, period.

But here's a novel idea which I don't hear too often: Why don't we work to REPEAL the 16th Amendment? (with a new 28th Amendment of course) Not only would you get rid of the Federal income tax, but you'd also nullify the USC sections that deal with it?

Actually the 16th amendment doesn't grant the government power to collect income taxes. For those who are saying it is unconstitutional, you need look no further than Article I, Section 8:



Notice it does not say that taxes shall also be uniform throughout the United States. And this argument about apportionment is silly, considering the Federal income tax is an indirect tax anyway.



Because they simply won't do it. And the people talking about getting a flat tax instead -- if you think they are going to implement the flat tax and then repeal the 16th you are gravely mistaken. Get the 16th repealed first and then push for a flat tax if you want. Government never met a tax they didn't like.

This would be a very American thing to do. But, I doubt many will be for it. It has been a multi-year propaganda that the taxes are collected to bring in some fairness.

for wiley,

a) I said: "even if". But, I'll let you off. I am tired of trying to focus your ever-wandering attention.

b) It is clear to me that you are suffering from the very same you are accusing me of. This isn't a tax dispute. This is about an illegitimacy of the whole damn thing. A point was made that this illegitimacy is not acknowledged by us tax court. I have clearly stated my deepest distrust, in that if there was in fact an illegitimacy of 16th amendment, I would not expect it to be acknowledged by a tax court - not less not more. I would not expect it to be acknowledged by a supreme court either.

I know what you said. You were again relying on your contention that the 16th wasn't properly ratified. And as I said, it wouldn't matter anyway, since the power to collect taxes isn't derived from the 16th amendment anyway.



So claiming that the whole income tax system is illegitimate is not disputing it? Whatever you say...



Or perhaps the tax court doesn't care about the 16th amendment at all since the main power to levy the income tax doesn't come from that anyway. But hey, what do I know? They're the ones constantly dealing with tax evaders claiming they aren't liable. Not me.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=AMERICA.Freedom+To+Fascism.Aaron+Russo+Interview.&emb=0&aq=-1&oq=#

An interview with Aaron Russo on this issue

It's clear you have no comprehension of how the process works.

NOooooooooo,,
Say it aint so... LMAO

Why don't you go claim the $50,000 reward then?

look up in the black's law dictionary the meaning of "income" you'll see that no matter what was ratified, you don't have to pay income taxes unless you actually have some sort of gain from working for the government. they can ratify that all they want. just like they can ratify an ammendment that says cats have to pay taxes, i'm not a cat and i don't derive gains from working for the government. thats where you guys get caught up in the wrong details. don't believe me? check it out yourself!! makes no never mind to me.

Because you can't trust a guy who says you don't have to file income taxes because it is unconstitutional because of the fifth amendment and then turns around and says he isn't suggesting anybody should not file their income taxes for any reason whatsoever. Kinds of smacks of no credibility whatsoever. Who'da thunk it?

BTW, the former IRS agent you were cut and pasting about earlier... guess where she is?

do tell wiley and please post your sources that told you where she is.

Prison. Where all good tax protesters eventually end up. But don't take my word for it. Google is your friend.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/gan/press/2008/04-11-08.pdf

then that means that it isnt against the law to not pay income taxes, but it is against the law to not file them. that seems to be the loophole that they are using. paying them and filing them are two different things. the IRS is fully aware of what black's law dictionary defines income as.... the gains from working for the government. so income isn't really your wages unless you are working for the government. It's the filing of your wage statements that they find illegal. she was convicted of not FILINIG her tax returns.