The income tax is a direct and un-apportioned tax and is and always has been, unconstitutional. The compensation that you receive from your labor is not a gain and therefore, not income by definition. In fact, income is the profit one receives from being a government employee or from profits from corporate activity. If a man pays you in watermelons for mowing his lawn, are the watermelons considered taxable income?
The fruits of one's labor are the product of one's time and talent and this is not the same thing as income. Whether your compensation comes in the form of watermelons or dollars, it really doesn't matter. Neither the watermelons nor the dollars that you receive as a result of your labor, are income.
For further evidence to support this I direct you to other articles such as;
Comments? Questions? Replies? Links?
Yes, I decline to volunteer to participate in this scheme since I have absolutely no obligation to join in the festivities.
Zeke Layman said:
You are correct. However, no one receives watermelons or dollars for compensation for labor or otherwise. Federal reserve notes and forms 1099's are not income! (They are also NOT dollars) No Income means no requirement to file. People need to stop volunteering.
The federal income tax is laid and collected as both a direct and an indirect tax, and yes it is unapportioned. It is a direct tax on citizens and residents of the United States who are subject to its jurisdiction, and it is an indirect tax on nonresident aliens. Is the income tax unconstitutional? If we put aside any argument as to the legitimacy of the 16th amendment, then no, it is not unconstitutional. Why is it not unconstitutional? Because it is not an article 1, section 8, clause 1 tax. What tax deniers, objecters, or patriots, etc., fail to comprehend is that article 4, section 3, clause 2 provides authority for congress to act as a state legislature over its territory or other property and congress can pass any laws in said areas that are not repugnant to the Constitution. The federal income tax is a federal state income tax and applies to citizens of the United States, wherever resident, who are subject its jurisdiction.
Point well made! Bravo. Couldn't 'o' put it better myself.
There are a couple of excellent books out relative to this discussion:
1) "Constitutional Income: Do You Have Any?" by Phil Hart. This is one of the most heavily researched works I've ever seen on the subject of American taxation. What we have today is, most definitely, an unconstitutional direct tax on wages and salaries. And
2)"The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin. This book explains how and why the Federal Reserve came into being, what it really is and how the IRS was created to feed it.
All of this came about in the year 1913... one hundred years ago this year. And all of it is the product of the money trust;
Rothschild, J. P. Morgan, Rockefeller, to name just a few... and their illicit, greedy, deceitful affair with those who people the American government. It still goes on today. Really, nothing has changed since 1913.
What we're experiencing today is simply the latest in a long progression of irresponsible, self-dealing, unconscionable, immoral, amoral politicians who pander to the current generation of the wealthy, the elite; the money trust.
I agree with Ellen T. above, not to volunteer and Timothy M. about what he said about U.S. Citizens, Resident and Non-Resident Aliens, (NRA's) except that not all NRA's have taxable activity.
Aside from the fact that I've read, over the many years of study on this subject, sites such as famguardian.org, sedm.org, nontaxpayer.net, etc., I've discovered a website called www.weissparis.com by a guy named Adele Weiss and his team. He has several services of which the most popular is under the Revoke Election tab.
Under 26 USC section 6013, we 'elected', through the help of the lame-stream media, 99% of CPA's, etc., to file an IRS Form 1040 as Non-Resident Aliens at some point in time which we were not required to file.
The law must provide a remedy and that remedy is, IMHO, section 6013 (g)(6), in particular. My CPA, who has been a CPA for about 48 years now, said that since CPA's are not trained or licensed to provide remedy for 'The Sheeple' (his words, not mine) that he never knew of this particular code section! He has now looked at it and will be contacting Adele and his team to learn more.
There is also a well known Tax Attorney from Huntsville, Alabama, whose name will go unmentioned, who is also looking at this. Once you, as a Non-Resident Alien, have sent in his Affidavit of Revocation of Election, ROE, you Do NOT have any further requirement to file a Form 1040!
A very few Non-Resident Aliens did this and then tried to send in a Form 1040 with a payment and the IRS sent the untouched package back to the person who mailed in the Form 1040 and check. This does not relieve you, if you are 'liable' for filing/paying for previous years.
I sent my ROE about 2 1/2 weeks ago to the 3 locations that he recommends plus IRS Chief Legal Counsel, William Wilkins, and the Treasury Inspector for Tax Administration, J. Russell George.
Anyway, just wanted to pass this new and exciting information along to any who are interested. If anyone wants to contact me after going to www.weissparis.com website, then feel free to email me at email@example.com.
A defense of duress can be made against the claim that you voluntarily participate in using the FRN. You do not, as government has conspired against and created a the situation where competition with the FRN is against the law. Literally leave the people no other option but to use the FRN. Your use of the FRN is involuntary and under coercion from the government.
This is completely untrue George,
I just paid for my fruit at the fruit market with silver coins. They were happy to give me spot value for them and were very pleased to know more about silver now than they did before I walked in. Let's not get too discouraged by the unfounded assumption that this will,
"leave the people no other option but to use the FRN."
No duress can occur without your permission George.
Morton, the fact that you can find an occasional vendor who will take silver coins (my son was dealing in those for awhile), as a rule you will have a hard time passing them off. Try passing those silver coins at a toll booth, at your county clerk for filing fees, Yes I used some locally at places where I am known, corner gas station, but you're not going to pass them at Walmart, Macy's, etc. In other words the places where you're not going to use them far far exceed the places where you might be able to.
Duress is a perfectly good defense, it is a condition imposed by coercion and in which you acquiesced out of fear. The fact that you acquiesced is not a sign of volunteerism. You make that acquiescence clear by the use of the reservation of rights found in UCC 1-308. A reservation I have had more than one concrete example of being effective in stopping legal action.
Morton and George,
All can use silver or gold coins to transact business and commerce - you must use the numismatic value and not the metal value. You will be compliant as to free barter goods for goods.
I use what they call Spot Price when transacting in heavy, (precious), metals. My coins are much too old and worn to have any Numismatic value. Not only that but a lot of my silver is in Sunshines, Buffalos, Eagles, etc. 1.1 ounce minted, stamped pieces.
I simply tell the vendor the value and receive my change in U.S. minted coins and FRN's. The value in spot price changes daily. Thanks for the input.
I owned a silver western manufacturing company so I am used to spot prices. The tax issue is with coinage when valued at face value. All can trade metal for goods - I used to have a few thousand ounces per month and many Gold and silver coins for buckles.
Even old coins can be valued by numismatic value if buyer and seller agree on a value. Trading is not prohibited.
Morton, If you receive your change in FRNs what advantage have you gained over-all? By taking the change in FRNs, you are now back in the same crab pot you were in before. You're going to have to pass those FRNs off, which the use of, was what you were trying to avoid.