IRS: The Shadow of Tyranny

Good day, citizens of the United States of America, as well as citizens of the world. Thank you for stopping by to read this story. If you are reading this, it is safe to assume that you are aware, or at least have some sort of idea, of the dishonesty and criminal behavior that of the Internal Revenue Service.

Let me be blunt here, I do not want to be the person that says this. I do not want to even be the person that spreads the word. I would honestly like for someone else to do so, and I would surely follow suit if I felt secure in the thought that my back would be covered by the rest of We The People.

I can tell you right now that I am fearing for my life and that of my family and loved ones by authoring this thread, because I know that once I do post this thread, I have crossed the proverbial line that the IRS does not want people to cross. I will have crossed the line that has brought about violence against innocent Americans, even non-American citizens, and criminal indictments and even convictions by the lower courts of the United States of America.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America has the say of what is law. They are to follow the law set forth by the United States Constitution, which is, truth be told, the law of the land. With that said, whatever the Supreme Court rules, that is how things are to be. We must follow that ruling, every single American, whether ordinary or elite. However, one group of people willingly disobey the ruling of the Supreme Court and deceit the American people into complying as if it were law. The IRS is this group of people.

If you watch this video you will witness investigations, by Aaron Russo, on the unlawful act of the Federal Income Tax. You will hear personal stories about unlawful raids on innocent Americans where IRS agents hold people at gun point and forcibly perform unlawful search and seizure to their property. You will also learn about personal stories of court cases against innocent Americans brought forth by the IRS.

One man named Irwin Schiff was on trial for fraud and tax evasion, if I am recalling properly, and he asked the court to show him the law set forth by the US Constitution that requires him to pay a Federal Income Tax. The judge, to the jury's disbelief, ruled that it was "irrelevant" and his request was denied. I do believe this same judge said that "the law will not stand in his courtroom" and that what he rules is law. This man was convicted and sentenced to 30 years in federal prison.

This utterly despicable ruling went against the ruling of the US Supreme Court in 1913, and in 1920, stating that no person is required to pay a federal income tax. They ruled that income is not what you receive as payment for labor, it is the profit of corporate actions and THAT is to be taxed.

The IRS refuses to answer any questions about this law, they just tell us that there is indeed a law; yet, they cannot bring forth. No one can bring it forth. There is a $50,000 reward for anyone that can find this law founded in 2000, I believe, and no one has been able to find it.

This is appalling and something needs to be done. More than $900 billion is gathered by the unlawful federal income tax, while the lawful corporate tax brings in little over $200 billion. And if you think this income tax pays for government services, as you would expect, you are wrong.

The highways are paid for by the Gasoline Tax, which is a legal indirect tax.Schools are funded by property taxes. Our defense comes from corporate as well as other taxes. So what does this income tax cover? Well good luck finding out. Trillions of dollars have gone missing, it is accountable. Your guess is as good as mine as to where that money is right now. You and I both know it isn't distributed amongst the people as the Constitution requires.

I have nothing more to say. The video will tell you everything you need to know.

I would like to thank s7ryk3r for showing me this video. I also would like to thank all of you for taking the time to read this.

It is time we open our collective eyes and do something about the injustices that are being committed against us. We started a revolution against the King of England because of unjust taxes. Though I hope we do not have to do that again, I fear it is inevitable lest we continue to live enslaved to the system that should serve us.

"...why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away? An elected legislature can trample a man's rights as easily as a king can."

-- Benjamin Martin (Mel Gibson), The Patriot

Thank you.

I am trying to spread the word through my friends and family, but no one listens. They feel like I am pushing this outragous idea on them and they don't want to listen.

Some even say that they know something is wrong, but they don't care that it is happening. How can this be!? Great, you don't care about what happens to you, but how DARE you bring the rest of us down with you?

It is not the ignorance that bothers me, it is the utter indifference when faced with a hard truth that really irks me to the core.

This is a subject of endless debate amongst those of us who know what is going on and those who live in the false reality the history books have created for them.

The previous taxation laws stated that Congress could not levy a direct tax "unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken." The Sixteenth Amendment granted Congress no new powers to collect income taxes because it never repealed the previous laws. Therefore, the Sixteenth Amendment is rendered invalid and illegal.

The Sixteenth Amendment was not ratified by all states, yet the federal government has the power to tax the residents of these states. That is illegal.

One of the states to ratify the Sixteenth Amendment, Ohio, did so on January 19, 1911. It was not until August 7, 1953 that Ohio officially became a state. Although statehood was declared retroactively on this date to March 1, 1803, at the time of Ohio's ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, it was not officially a state. This too renders the Sixteenth Amendment invalid and illegal.

It is morally and legally wrong to tax a person's labor. Taxes should be applied to profits, not wages. The two are very different. Profits are income generated which is greater in value than that which was spent to produce it. Wages are income generated which is equal in value to that which was spent to produce it. Profits are what corporations generate when they produce a product at a cost and sell that product for a higher cost than it took to produce it. Wages are what employees generate when they are compensated a monetary amount that is equal in value to their labor as agreed by both they and their employer at the time of hire.

As implied in the original post, this country could operate financially stable without a personal income tax. The corporate tax, sales tax, property tax, gasoline tax, tobacco tax, alcohol tax, and programs such as the lottery generate more than enough revenue for the United States to operate.

Our problems financially as a nation are not solved by taxation of people's labor; they are solved by responsible spending. Investing nearly $1 trillion into our military every year is an utter waste and is clearly the result of intense lobbying and bribery on the part of the overlords of the military industrial complex.

The Internal Revenue Service - and it's brother in crime, the Federal Reserve - are by far the two largest and most dangerous criminal organizations operating in this country. They are essentially the governmental form of the Mafia. The creation of these two organizations and the many laws which have been passed in their favor are the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on the American people.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


I wish more people knew this.

I can't help but feel that things will not start moving until it is too late to do anything without armed conflict.

are there any court cases where someone won the argument that the income tax is illegal?

Pete Hendrickson has a great website and argument against the tax, he even got refunds and a lot of his followers , but unfortunately he is in prison now. He is a brave man to challenge them.

reply to post by christinaV


There are small cases where people won against it, but they were the ones that were sued. They only used it to defend their own rights, which is fine with me. I don't expect them to be on the frontlines to fight for everyone else, though someone has to be.

They never got media attention, though.

Originally posted by christinaV
are there any court cases where someone won the argument that the income tax is illegal?

Yes, although I don't recall any specific cases off the top of my head. But there have been "tax evaders" who have been found innocent of the alleged crimes because the IRS would not (or could not) show the law which stated that the alleged tax evader was guilty of any crime.

I enjoy these threads. Just a few posts and already many myths being espoused as facts or legal loop holes.

The IRS has one function and one function only. It is very simple, really too simple for some to understand. It is their job to interpret the tax law, all +30,000 pages passed by Congress and the House, and legally collect as much money as they can. They have the full weight of the Federal Government behind them AND follow any legal rulings issued by either the Federal Tax Court or Federal Circuit Courts.

reply to post by hinky


One simple question:

Where is the law?

The IRS can't seem to produce it when asked to. So if the ones interpreting the law cannot even locate the law they are supposed to be interpreting... well... ?

Think, folks. Common sense is your friend.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


I'll bite, which particular law?

You know there are literally thousands of them, not counting regulations.

Before you go and start citing chapter and verse, you should probably look here. This is the real deal kids. Argue all you want, even retell myths and tell us again why they are wrong, but this is the legal response, upheld in court, to every argument listed so far.

Try to think of something they didn't cover with their law. Good luck on this one, many people are in jail because they thought they had a legitimate tax dodge.

reply to post by hinky


All you need to look at is the 16th Amendment and you will see that the IRS is performing unlawful acts, namely with the Federal Income Tax.

2nd.

reply to post by Modern Americana


This is a short response from my linky above:

The Law: The Sixteenth Amendment provides that Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration. U.S. Const. amend. XVI. The Sixteenth Amendment was ratified by forty states, including Ohio (which became a state in 1803; see Bowman v. United States, 920 F. Supp. 623 n.1 (E.D. Pa. 1995) (discussing the 1953 joint Congressional resolution that confirmed Ohio’s status as a state retroactive to 1803), and issued by proclamation in 1913. Shortly thereafter, two other states also ratified the Amendment. Under Article V of the Constitution, only three‑fourths of the states are needed to ratify an Amendment. There were enough states ratifying the Sixteenth Amendment even without Ohio to complete the number needed for ratification. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the income tax laws enacted subsequent to ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment in Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R., 240 U.S. 1 (1916). Since that time, the courts have consistently upheld the constitutionality of the federal income tax.

Similarly, Robert L. Schulz, along with his organizations, We the People Congress and We the People Foundation, marketed and distributed to customers a fraudulent “Tax Termination Package” supposedly providing a way for taxpayers to legally stop withholding and paying taxes. The scheme was based on a number of false premises, including the claim that the Sixteenth Amendment was not properly ratified. In August 2007, a federal court permanently enjoined Mr. Schulz and his organizations from promoting the scheme. See www.usdoj.gov... United States v. Schulz, 529 F.Supp.2d 341 (N.D.N.Y. 2007), aff'd 517 F.3d 606 (2nd Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 129 S.Ct. 435 (2008).

In March 2008, a federal court in California permanently barred Steven Hempfling from selling a tax fraud scheme that falsely claims to give customers a legal defense against criminal prosecutions for income tax evasion. The court found that Hempfling sold a “16th Amendment Reliance Program” that falsely promised customers that they could rely on the opinion of an Illinois tax defier, William Benson, to stop filing tax returns and to stop paying federal taxes and avoid being convicted of federal tax crimes. The court also barred Hempfling from selling “how-to” manuals that falsely tell customers that IRS tax liens and levies are invalid and that employers are not required to withhold federal income taxes from employees’ pay. See www.usdoj.gov...

William Benson wrote the book The Law That Never Was, in which he asserts that the Sixteenth Amendment was not properly ratified. On his website, Benson sold his book, accompanied with excepts from state legislative histories, records from the National Archives, court cases, and other materials, in what he titled a “Reliance Defense Package.” In January 2008, the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted a permanent injunction against Benson, barring him from promoting, organizing, or selling the “Reliance Defense Package” or the “16th Amendment Reliance Package” or any other tax shelter, plan, or arrangement. United States v. Benson, 2008 WL 267055 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 10, 2008). The district court, however, did not require Benson to turn over his customer list. In April 2009, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the permanent injunction but reversed and remanded regarding the customer list. 561 F.3d 718 (7th Cir. 2009).

The IRS issued Revenue Ruling 2005-19, 2005-1 C.B. 819, which discusses this frivolous argument in more detail, warning taxpayers of the consequences of attempting to pursue a claim on these grounds.
Relevant Case Law:

Socia v. Commissioner, 23 F.3d 941 (5th Cir. 1994), reh’g denied, 35 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1153 (1995) – the court held that defendant’s appeals which challenged Sixteenth Amendment income tax legislation were frivolous and warranted sanctions.

Miller v. United States, 868 F.2d 236, 241 (7th Cir. 1989) (per curiam) – the court stated, “We find it hard to understand why the long and unbroken line of cases upholding the constitutionality of the sixteenth amendment generally, Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company . . . and those specifically rejecting the argument advanced in The Law That Never Was, have not persuaded Miller and his compatriots to seek a more effective forum for airing their attack on the federal income tax structure.” The court imposed sanctions on them for having advanced a “patently frivolous” position.

United States v. Stahl, 792 F.2d 1438, 1441 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1036 (1987) – stating that “the Secretary of State’s certification under authority of Congress that the sixteenth amendment has been ratified by the requisite number of states and has become part of the Constitution is conclusive upon the courts,” the court upheld Stahl’s conviction for failure to file returns and for making a false statement.

United States v. Foster, 789 F.2d 457 (7th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 883 (1986) – the court affirmed Foster’s conviction for tax evasion, failing to file a return, and filing a false W-4 statement, rejecting his claim that the Sixteenth Amendment was never properly ratified.

Knoblauch v. Commissioner, 749 F.2d 200, 201 (5th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 830 (1986) – the court rejected the contention that the Sixteenth Amendment was not constitutionally adopted as “totally without merit” and imposed monetary sanctions against Knoblauch based on the frivolousness of his appeal. “Every court that has considered this argument has rejected it,” the court observed.

Stearman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-39, 89 T.C.M. (CCH) 823 (2005), aff’d, 436 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 547 U.S. 1207 (2006). – the court imposed sanctions totaling $25,000 against the taxpayer for advancing arguments characteristic of tax-protester rhetoric that have been universally rejected by the courts, including arguments regarding the Sixteenth Amendment. In affirming the Tax Court’s holding, the Fifth Circuit granted the government’s request for further sanctions of $6,000 against the taxpayer for maintaining frivolous arguments on appeal, and the Fifth Circuit imposed an additional $6,000 sanctions on its own, for total additional sanctions of $12,000.

reply to post by hinky


Yes, income. Your labor earnings does not equate to the definition of income set forth by the Supreme Court.

Watch the video posted in the OP. It will explain the fraud the IRS commits in better detail than I ever could.

reply to post by Modern Americana


You're kidding right???

This one is a no brainer and easiest to bust. You have any idea how many people try this one?

Let's try this, because this is just target practice. Go to the link I've listed twice and come up with an argument not listed there. It will require reading and thinking, but maybe you'll stay out of jail for tax evasion.

Many smart guys have tried many dodges and schemes for tax evasion. Virtually all of them ended up in court, some went to jail, many just got huge fines and paid back taxes. There is only one dodge I know of that is legal, but it is far too early to discuss that. You guys are just starting your tax education.

reply to post by hinky


So you want me to go to the IRS website to try to prove my point that they are doing something illegal? That is like asking a child if they stole from the cookie jar. You will get nowhere.

Watch the video. The IRS will NOT answer any question directly about the laws that require a federal income tax, yet they raid your home or place of business if you don't pay it. It is nothing more than a mafia complex.

Just watch it, and if after you watch you still feel that your arguments are just, I will read your IRS website jargon. However, if you will not take the time to watch the video proving everything, then I wont bother reading anything.

See, you believe someone's propaganda. Based on a presumption that he is right. I've heard this clown and many others just like him over the last 40 years.

Tax law is that. It's law. It's not opinion's, not arguments, but law. You have to play in their field, in court, to change the law. No amount of whining, arguing, complaining, or convoluted logic will change the law. Facts and facts only, in court, change the law.

The IRS site is not propaganda, regardless of opinion, it is based on current federal law. You need to know your enemy to fight them effectively.

BTW: to answer your very first question, it's Title 26 of the US Code. It's a law with thousands of enforceable regulation, about five feet thick in several books. This is the legal basis for most income tax law. There is a sprinkling of regulations in different Titles, but the bulk is in Title 26.

Originally posted by hinky
Tax law is that. It's law. It's not opinion's, not arguments, but law.

The IRS site is not propaganda, regardless of opinion, it is based on current federal law.

The US Consitution is the law of the land. It gives power to the Supreme Court to have the final word on interpretation of the US Consitution. The Supreme Court ruled that the 16th Amendment did NOT require American citizens to pay a federal income tax. THAT is the law. The IRS knows this, so they don't allow it to be taken to the Supreme Court.

However, if you want to throw that argument out, explain this: 10.40A is a document that everyone MUST file according to the IRS. If you don't, or if you document something that is invalid, you will go to prison. Don't you think that is infringing upon our 5th Amendment right?

Originally posted by hinky
See, you believe someone's propaganda.

As do you. That your propaganda comes from the federal level does not change the fact that it is propaganda.

The reason this issue has not been exposed on a national level is not because it lacks merit, but because the masses have swallowed the official explanation unconditionally.

You are correct. This is not about anyone's opinion. Law is law. But where we differ - and where your argument falls short - is the FACT that there is NO law that requires you or I to pay an income tax.

Sorry. There isn't. You can't produce one. The IRS can't produce one. No amount of denial will change that.

Thanks for sharing this man! It is a common misconception and I think Aaron Russo explains it all quite well. He even brings some important figures into the video to prove the point. I am glad you found it as useful as I did and hope the word continues to spread!

Its too bad Mr. Russo is not with us today, I think he could have become a very powerful figure.

It seems like there will always be naysayers which will fight and scream and do everything in their power to deny the simple, honest truth. I have realized people like this will generally result in a waste of energy and time trying to convince as they simply will not accept what you tell them no matter what it is. Thats fine because they likely will not do any good in the end. Just continue spreading the information and if someones mind is ready, they will listen.

Something I think you all will find interesting is if you look at Germany right before Hitler was elected. Look at the laws passed; the situation and how the people were eventually convinced. It is strikingly similar to America right now. Names and places may be different but the effect and plan is the same.

We dont have much time left as our leaders already have a list of Executive Orders ready to be executed and as soon as they are put in effect; any chance of freedom will be lost.

Keep your eyes opened and your senses sharpened; together we will get through this.

Originally posted by Modern Americana

The US Consitution is the law of the land. It gives power to the Supreme Court to have the final word on interpretation of the US Consitution. The Supreme Court ruled that the 16th Amendment did NOT require American citizens to pay a federal income tax. THAT is the law. The IRS knows this, so they don't allow it to be taken to the Supreme Court.

This argument has been to the supreme court, several times; and regardless of how it is looked at; Ohio really is a State and Ohio did join the Union in 1803. See the post several messages above this post, you will find the actual cases cited for this particular argument.

Originally posted by Modern Americana

However, if you want to throw that argument out, explain this: 10.40A is a document that everyone MUST file according to the IRS. If you don't, or if you document something that is invalid, you will go to prison. Don't you think that is infringing upon our 5th Amendment right?

The fifth amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

We can deal with the form 1040 later. But lets talk fifth amendment, your argument is self incrimination. This "self protection" only applies to criminal charges. It is clearly written within the wording.

Now the argument, "I incriminate myself by filing taxes or not filing taxes.". In United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259, 264 (1927), the U.S. Supreme Court stated that the taxpayer “could not draw a conjurer’s circle around the whole matter by his own declaration that to write any word upon the government blank would bring him into danger of the law.” The failure to comply with the filing and reporting requirements of the federal tax laws will not be excused based upon blanket assertions of the constitutional privilege against compelled self‑incrimination under the Fifth Amendment.

Here are the cases used to build this defense:

Sochia v. Commissioner, 23 F.3d 941 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1153 (1995) – the court affirmed tax assessments and penalties for failure to file returns, failure to pay taxes, and filing a frivolous return. The court also imposed sanctions for pursuing a frivolous case. The taxpayers had failed to provide any information on their tax return about income and expenses, instead claiming a Fifth Amendment privilege on each line calling for financial information.

United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1241 (9th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925 (1980) – the court affirmed a failure to file conviction, noting that the taxpayer “did not show that his response to the tax form questions would have been self-incriminating. He cannot, therefore, prevail on his Fifth Amendment claim.”

United States v. Schiff, 612 F.2d 73, 83 (2d Cir. 1979) – the court said that “the Fifth Amendment privilege does not immunize all witnesses from testifying. Only those who assert as to each particular question that the answer to that question would tend to incriminate them are protected . . . . [T]he questions in the income tax return are neutral on their face . . . [h]ence privilege may not be claimed against all disclosure on an income tax return.”

United States v. Brown, 600 F.2d 248, 252 (10th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 917 (1979) – noting that the Supreme Court had established “that the self-incrimination privilege can be employed to protect the taxpayer from revealing the information as to an illegal source of income, but does not protect him from disclosing the amount of his income,” the court said Brown made “an illegal effort to stretch the Fifth Amendment to include a taxpayer who wishes to avoid filing a return.”

United States v. Daly, 481 F.2d 28, 30 (8th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1064 (1973) – the court affirmed a failure to file conviction, rejecting the taxpayer’s Fifth Amendment claim because of his “error in . . . his blanket refusal to answer any questions on the returns relating to his income or expenses.”

The short answer is using either of these arguments, in court, will result in a bad day for the defendant.