It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is there an income tax law?

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 06:29 AM
America: Freedom to fascism

opinions wanted about this film

posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 07:44 AM
They say there is not a law.

But they got Al Capone... they will get you too if you don't pay.

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 03:04 PM
reply to post by armyof1

This is a very interesting documentary. I taped it and passed it on; after a month my friend still hasn't watched it. I'm going to reclaim it and pass it on to another. This is an example of the mindset that a government not run by the people has us in. ie., "It doesn't matter if it's right or not, or even if it's legal or not. It's the law. Shut up, & be a Good American or get squooshed by the Powers that be"....."
The parts of the documentary that stick in my mind are;
1) the quote of Trillions of dollars in a year that are "missing" (forget the deficit, this would cover a national health program!) Face it. "Missing" gov moneys & what we waste/spend on any number of frivoulous enterprises, like sports & entertainment, show just how FILTHY RICH Americans actually are!! Unimaginably RICH!
2) A jury of peers let one defendant go BECAUSE there's no law on the books. By, For, & Of.... there's hope after all!

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 03:14 PM
American citizen's obligation to pay federal income tax has been determined by 'countless' lawsuits, in what is called 'case-law'.

So yes, you are obligated to pay federal income tax if you are a united states citizen.

Although, if you are an expatriate (live and work outside the US for more than 330 days of the year), then you can exempt up to about 78,000$ USD.

That is as close to not paying taxes as you can get. However, you're still required to file a return.

[edit on 24-9-2007 by Choronzon]

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 07:03 PM
Choronzon made the best point about precedent setting case law. It is totally legal. Every argument has been brought forth and found to be false, in the eyes of the law and court system. I have heard about this for over 30 years and I do believe I have heard every argument both pro and con, first hand.

People don't file taxes all the time claiming this or that dodge. People go to jail all the time from filing false claims using this or that dodge. The IRS will find you and you will pay one way or another.

If you don't like the IRS or the tax system, there is a very easy fix. Vote for people who believe what you do. In this case, they are called Libertarians. OR, run for the House or Congress and try to get the law changed.

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 07:32 PM
reply to post by hinky

The way I understand it, Income tax is totally legal and yet completely unconstitutional. This is because historically the role of the supreme court has been to define the law through their judgments instead of interpret the constitutionality of law.

It is perhaps not generally understood that as the result of (Justice) Marshall's efforts, the Supreme Court became not only the highest law- interpreting body, but the highest law-making body as well; the precedents established by its decisions have the force of constitutional law. Since 1800, therefore, the actual mode of the State in America is normally that of a small and irresponsible oligarchy!

From:Our Enemy, the State. Part 5, Footnote 17.

The way it works is that "they" said income tax is constitutional and whether it is true or not it becomes pseudo-constitutional by power of judicial precedent.

Of all the legislative measures enacted to implement the new constitution, the one best calculated to ensure a rapid and steady progress in the centralization of political power was the judiciary Act of 1789. (...) One feature of the Act which for our purposes is most noteworthy is that it made the tenure of all these federal judgeships appointive, not elective, and for life; thus marking almost the farthest conceivable departure from the doctrine of popular sovereignty.

From:Our Enemy, the State. Part 5, Section 3.

Since we have no electoral process (by design) to remove the oligarchy of the powerful corrupted judges we simply must allow them to remove our rights and redefine the constitution at their whim.

WE the people have no recourse against their treasonous judgments other than the last option of revolution. It is your country; take it back.


posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 08:22 PM
Search for "tax protestor arguments" on wikipedia, I think wiki does an outstanding job of debunking all of them, except for the ones based off of personal convictions.

Personal convictions will not save your ass in court, however.

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 09:39 PM
I was going to quote Voxel (Jon) and go point by point. I decided not to do that. I don't like seeing others doing it. So I won't.

The lifetime appointment of Federal judges is a power bestowed on men, later with women added, for the very purpose that they would not have to curry favors or other enticements from voters for elected positions.

The Supreme Court decides cases, that it picks and chooses, for constitutional review. This is the only requirement they have in fulfilling their obligation to the Federal system. Court cases of national prominence can be directly filed with the Supreme Court, but these cases can also be rejected.

Case law is built from the bottom up. A person is involved in a tax evasion case and it is carried over to a federal court. It can go to the three judge Appeal Board, then to the full District Court of Appeals, then up to the Supreme Court. At this point, the very basis of the appeal and the point of law that convicted the person will be constitutionally defined. This is very technical definitions within the law, or the actual interpretation of the applied law, that are being addressed; not the innocence or guilt of a person.

The tax law is driven from the top down. Congress enacts the Tax Code as law. The Supreme Court can review the "new" law for constitutionality. In this particular case of taxes, the 16th Amendment was added to the Constitution for this purpose. You need a certain number of states to enact an amendment. A question of the proper number of states required for this purpose has been discussed over the years with various groups. The case was resolved within 5 years of the amendment passage in 1913. This amendment has also been determined that the Tax Code can be updated or changed as needed.

I do not know of your source of information, but without a doubt, is somewhat biased. I base this on the title.

A Federal Judge can be removed from office by impeachment. This is defined as a treason, high crime, or misdemeanor. It has been done before.

The system of our government is not perfect. I consider it better than most other forms of current governments. The checks and balances within the system work most of the time. People argue about this and I find that great, our form of government allows for public dissent within the system. More importantly, I'll defend your right to be as wrong as you want. This is what makes America great!

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 10:35 PM
I think that Mr. Russo did an excellent job of presenting his arguements, as well as several others' points of view.
I was especially glad to see Ron Paul, who is running for president, and I knew nothing about.
The movie, taken as a whole, scared the hell out of me.

I had already known that there was no tax law written by congress. We all give them "permission" to tax us whenever we begin a job. We even tell them what rate we expect them to tax us at: We provide a W-2 form.
I had been told also that you could refuse to sign one, or note "under duress" under your signature if your employer requires you to sign as a condition of employment.
I'm sure the IRS would still take the taxes out, so what is the point of not filing a 1040? I mean, if they took too much and I'm due a refund, I want that, don't I? It really burns me that they don't pay me interest on that refund though... They would charge me interest if I owed...
Stupid Feds.

posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 07:50 AM
By filing a w-2, it could be considered a violation of your constitutional rights (5th amendment) of self incrimination.

posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 07:52 PM
Laws can only be passed on this issue one way and it has not been done yet. The way the Constitution says it has to be done. Just because some judges think its legal it doesn't even come close.
It is very illegal what the government has done with the IRS and the Federal Reserve.
Till our corrupt government gets cut off by us taxpayers all at one time our country will keep going down the crapper.
Show me the law that has been ratified by the states and I will show you a pink elephant dancing on George Bush's head.

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 07:06 AM
so can Choronzon or hinky kindly tell us where is the law? (like a link to the relevant section)

That is the whole point of the movie linked in the OP. No one in the movie was able to clearly show Mr. Russo where the law was stated. No one in this thread has shown us either.

simple: Show us the law!

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 07:17 AM

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
so can Choronzon or hinky kindly tell us where is the law?

simple: Show us the law!

Well, they basically did.

What you're looking for doesn't exist. It's a matter of "Case Law", and "Precedent". Feel free to follow the links to help increase your understanding of the subject.

[edit on 9/28/07 by redmage]

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 08:04 AM
Straight from the horse's *ss:,00.html

I know people will now say, but this is a government web site. Of course it will be full of dis-information, propaganda, hidden truths, lies formulated to keep us ignorant, or any number or reason not to believe that this is the absolute truth of the matter.

This is very simple, you either believe in the law and how it is applied, OR you believe in a movement that has a history of sending people to jail for tax evasion. Making a video and posting it on the web or writing a book about it does not keep a person out of jail. Unless you die, tax laws will catch up with you, but then taxes will be applied to your estate. The old adage that nothing is certain but death and taxes is very true.

P.S. In previewing this post, I found the link does not work the way it should. Probably another conspiracy could be started about this a a disgruntled web master. Use the search feature at the IRS site for "frivolous" then go to the top site listed within the IRS site.

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by hinky

here's the link Hinky was attempting to post. (BTW Hinky, this is one way to post long url)

I'm afraid all this is a bit above my head redmage, but I will give it a try.

These guys do a pretty good job:

[edit on 28/9/07 by ConspiracyNut23]

posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 08:00 PM
reply to post by Choronzon
Wrong! There is no law that says you have to file a return and the real definition of income is profit gains of a corporation which seems to get all the tax breaks and more if they move overseas. There is no law that says you have to pay a tax on your wages which is an agreement between you the labor or skill and the person paying you for that skill. That's bartering. For the IRS to say they have a right to your wages is nothing less than slavery. We are already taxed apportionately in many ways already but the income tax is not apportioned in accordance with the constitutional constraints, therefore is an illegal tax. It is not an obligation of US citizens to pay a wage tax period.

posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 08:11 PM
Just to add to the last post I have heard recently of 7 cases of acquittals in Idaho by a judge and jury willing to do the right thing.

What the people of juries have to remember is they have the given right to interpret the law as they see fit and as a jury of someone peers but the judge will not tell you this.
Never let a judge dictate your verdict.

When a jury is confronted with a case of no law to violate in order to prosecute than they have the obligation to come back with an acquittal.

posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 08:19 PM

Originally posted by hinky

If you don't like the IRS or the tax system, there is a very easy fix. Vote for people who believe what you do. In this case, they are called Libertarians. OR, run for the House or Congress and try to get the law changed.

and we all know who to vote for on this one. Ron Paul for president! he was in the video America: Freedom to fascism talking about the income tax
Ending the IRS

I have long been an advocate of ending the income tax and eliminating the IRS. People tell me that this is a laudable goal, but they don't see how it would be possible. The question that I am often asked is, "How would the government pay for the services they provide, or pay their employees, if there were no income tax?"

Between 1787 and 1913, we had no permanent income tax system, and America prospered! The Sixteenth Amendment was ratified to prevent the Supreme Court from ruling the income tax unconstitutional, as it had done in 1895.

The income tax isn't necessary to pay for government services. Few people know that every penny of the income tax is used to service federal debt, a large percentage of which is held by foreign investors and governments. Our government is borrowing nearly three billion dollars a day in order to perpetuate the welfare state and an international war-making empire. The fruits of your labor are going directly to Saudi millionaires and Chinese communist officials.

If we stop incurring this debt, we can quickly end the IRS.

Only about 42 percent of government revenue is collected through the personal income tax. During the course of the Bush presidency, government spending has increased by about 75 percent. Cutting spending to the same level it was at seven years ago would make it possible to render the personal income tax unnecessary.

If we further reduced spending to the 1992 level, we could quickly pay off our foreign debt, return our nation to solvency, and make April 15th a normal day.

Would you be comfortable with the government providing the services they did just fifteen years ago if it meant never paying income taxes again?

Ron Paul

[edit on 30-9-2007 by Funkydung]

posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 08:27 PM
If you can find a judge willing to allow the constitution into evidence, you can prove income tax on an individual is illegal and the amendment authorizing said personal income tax was never ratified, though a temporary tax, long since expired, was.
Better be extremely wealthy with your money offshore, and current on your taxes before trying it though.
And have a decade or so to dally about courtrooms, as precedent rules, irregardless of the real laws.

posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Choronzon
American citizen's obligation to pay federal income tax has been determined by 'countless' lawsuits, in what is called 'case-law'.

So yes, you are obligated to pay federal income tax if you are a united states citizen.

Although, if you are an expatriate (live and work outside the US for more than 330 days of the year), then you can exempt up to about 78,000$ USD.

That is as close to not paying taxes as you can get. However, you're still required to file a return.

[edit on 24-9-2007 by Choronzon]

The constitution forbids direct taxation. Allows taxes to be gathered from corporate exchanges and tariffs. The federal reserve was created on jekyl island by unknowns who send our congressman masons to go back and in a christmas session, give birth to the one thing that robbed our country of real sovereignty, the federal reserve. Since then it has murdered the lives of innocent resistors, in a criminal attempt to maintain authority by use of of fear and oppression. They are the mark of hitler, and socialist elitism, and use mob tactics to make you pay. They are criminal. period.

p.s i heard it said that "to rule from the bench" means "to rule from the bank" in latin..

[edit on 11-10-2007 by mastermind77]

new topics

top topics


log in