It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

So how come the IRS doesn't just send a bill?

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


you lost me.


I was using sarcasm in pointing out the fallacy of claiming the "elites" aren't paying their share of taxes.




posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   
More than happy to tell you what I wrote,....


When the IRS sent me a statement that I owed back Federal taxes, and that penalties and interest was to be added as well, I HAD IT!! I ask them to send me the paper work in which they arrived at this conclusion, I also photo copied the section (that was 2000) (112)of Title 26 that said it was voluntary mandate, I never heard back... EVER! wierd huh!


Also the 5th amendment says you do not and can not be prosecuted or thrown in jail for self incrimination, what I put on a form (1040) or I say with words can not be used against me in a court of law,... I reminded them of that too.....

[edit on 8-2-2008 by KanehBosm]



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Oh boy am I going to enjoy this response. Blueraja first off the "elites" pat a hell of a lot lower of a tax rate than your normal working class person. Take any CEO and put it up against any normal working class person making 50 to 100k a year and you will see the average is about 15% for the elites where as the working class person will pay around 30%. The elites pay the majority of the taxes yes and the reason is because of the HUGE amount of money these guys are making. I tell you what blue I will trade positions with the CEO of Exxon Mobile any day me making a little over 300k a year and paying a 35% tax rate and make 6.4 Million last year and pay his 15% tax rate.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Originally posted by scientist
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


you lost me.


I was using sarcasm in pointing out the fallacy of claiming the "elites" aren't paying their share of taxes.


I understand the sarcastic approach, I just got lost in the logic that followed (or lack thereof). Mostly because of the percentages you were throwing around. They just don't make any sense, and certainly don't prove any points. next time, try a rational explanation instead of sarcasm - it just may get your message across more efficiently.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


The elites dont pay taxes.

They hide their money in blind trusts and nonprofit foundations.

Look at Rockefeller for example (i forget which one). He was up for nomination for Vice President after Watergate. Congress reviewed his financial records and learned that one of the richest men on the planet earned no income and paid no taxes.

The elite created the 16th amendment to fleece the people into paying the interest on the money they would be printing thanks to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. They know how to avoid paying it.

We have no need for a Federal taxes on income. One third of our goverment's total revenue comes from federal income taxes. One third of our total revenue goes toward paying the interest on the debt we owe to the Federal Reserve.

Seems simple, get rid of the Federal Reserve and we know longer need the federal income tax.

And if we want to get technical, I believe I read somewhere that our pay for our labor doesnt even count as "income" according to the Constitution and the supreme courts. Im pretty sure that income is defined as corporate gains. Our labor isnt a corporate gain and therefore exempt from taxes.

And then there is the issue of whether the 16th amendment was legally ratified.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by KanehBosm
 


Interesting.
Do you have a checking or savings account they can see?
Do you own a house?
My father was self employed and stopped sending his quarterly payments. They put a lien on his house and emptied his bank account every time he made a deposit until he was paid in full.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyknockers
 


Did he stop paying because he knew it was voluntary? Did he respond with this? He talk to a lawyer?



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by admriker444
 


George Soros is a prime example of an elite who doesnt pay a dime in taxes cause he keeps all his money in swiss accts. Yet he makes all his money over here. I love the kool aid drinkers who say the elite pay their share. I just tell people to do their research and they will fully understand that they are getting of quite easy. I think it was Warren Buffet who challenged any CEO said he would pay them 1 million dollars to go up against his seceratary and see who pays a higher % and if any CEO paid a higher % he would give them a million dollars. Needless to say to CEO has taken up the offer.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by KanehBosm
 


If I remember right (this was back in the late 80’s) he stopped paying quarterly but would pay at the end of the year and ignored the interest and penalties they applied because he only paid once a year. Not very wise on his part I understand and I am sure he had no idea on the whole voluntary issue.
I guess my point was that I know first hand that they can and do come right into your bank and take what they want. That is why I wondered if you have active bank accounts.

What you have done would be interesting to try but putting the family home and bank account up for grabs might not be a wise move.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Kaiser Sohse
 



You just have to have the strength to say NO thank you, I give elsewhere. The United Way has had major scandals and a lot of money ripped off; it does good works also.

You cannot blame the employer, who no doubt gets some reward, either monetarily or otherwise for high recruiting goals met and who gets a big pat on the back; it helps his career. I faced the same thing every year at Lowes, where I retired from. Constant deductions were always being offered for various things, and I said NO thanks and there was never anything said or done about it, and no one would do anything to you, either.

If you are a good employee, no boss will harrass or fire you for not volunteering to give your money away to any charity or none at all that suits them. Too bad . I bet that if you took a stand and said NO you would feel a lot better and save some money too. Intimidation and bluff are best left at the poker table and not taken to work, bosses should know better than to pressure anyone past their confort level. In a worst case scenario, a letter to the editor can make a lot of difference.

Be prepared to take some heat if it goes that far tho..but it won't.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
reply to post by Kaiser Sohse
 


payroll is withheld on the spot and the taxes are generally paid either once a quarter, once a month or semi-weekly, depending on the size of the payroll/taxes reported. If the taxes accumulated hit $100,000 in any deposit period, they are due the next business day. The money might sit in the company account for a short period of time, thereby earning them a bit of interest.


Thanks Crakeur,

So does this accout exceeding 100K completely empty? Or does it continue to revolve at 99,999? Keeping in mind that this an extremely large company, the 100K threshold is probably achieved on a weekly basis.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


Yeah, I know 86, thanks. I don't have to pay if I really don't want to, but they make you feel awfully damn guilty.

I give about $100 a year to a good cause, ARF (Animal Rescue Foundation). Makes me feel pretty good about it when I get a "Thank you" letter from them once a year.




posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by KanehBosm
When the IRS sent me a statement that I owed back Federal taxes, and that penalties and interest was to be added as well, I HAD IT!! I ask them to send me the paper work in which they arrived at this conclusion, I also photo copied the section (that was 2000) (112)of Title 26 that said it was voluntary mandate, I never heard back... EVER! wierd huh!


Also the 5th amendment says you do not and can not be prosecuted or thrown in jail for self incrimination, what I put on a form (1040) or I say with words can not be used against me in a court of law,... I reminded them of that too.....

[edit on 8-2-2008 by KanehBosm]


Now let me tell you what I wrote in response to a thread similar to this...


I am not in the collections division of my agency, and as I have stated previously, I generally do not handle Personal Income Tax cases, although I've "Been There, and Done That" in the past. To my knowledge, however, once an account has gone into collections as a result of an unpaid debt, a levy, lien, or wage garnishment may be emplaced without any involvement of the court system, federal or otherwise.


Now let's make sure we understand some terms here:


Voluntary, in this sense simply means that the tax is imposed (calculated) and paid at a specified time, removed from the actual moment of the taxable transaction: Your personal income tax is due on April 15th, not when you recieve each paycheck.

Do not confuse withholding for income taxes as payment of income taxes.


An Involuntary system of taxation would be analogous to a national Sales Tax system, wherein you would be paying the tax owed at the time of the taxable transaction, as an integral part of the transaction.



Weird that the IRS didn't respond to your "request"?

Maybe, maybe not. If thier notice of deficiency was based on a review of your tax return, as submitted (ie. you made an error in calculating your taxes), you already had the "paperwork" in your possession.

It was up to you to review your work and verify its accuracy.

It's called "personal responsibility".


If the notification was the result of an audit, wherein information was supplied to the IRS regarding your income (which was not copied to you by the issueing source, or was information you either over-looked or forgot to include), you would/should have received a notification of proposed tax change, or audit.

You would have been advised by the agency of the 'apparent' deficiency, and given a specific timeframe in which to dispute the IRS's finding.

Failure to respond within the allowed time-frame would have been taken for acceptance of the agency's assessment. You then would receive your bill.


As to your alleged violation of you 5th amendment rights...

I am as staunch a supporter and defender of my Constitutional rights as anyone. I've even gone so far as to file an official complaint with my state Public Utilities Commission against AT&T to protest their participation in the current Administration's unwarranted telecom surrveilence activities.

But I'm afraid that you haven't a leg to stand on here.

When you signed your tax return, did you happen to read that brief paragraph just above the signature line that has you state under penalty of Prejury that by signing the form your were declaring the information entered on the return as being true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?

The IRS won't prosecute you for what you put on the return.

If they prosecute you, They'll be prosecuting you for what you DIDN'T put on the return!

And since that "stuff" you left off the return would be considered "the Truth", They might also follow up with a charge of Perjury.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   
You are SO right, when you file, you are on the hook,... I choose not to file, that's the voluntary part my friend. On your employee yearly deduction statement, read it very very close, they give you an option their as well, if you have the balls, to claim your exemtion from taxes. Your statement is all based on the idea that I filed a 1040, therefore you are correct.

[edit on 9-2-2008 by KanehBosm]



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by KanehBosm
You are SO right, when you file, you are on the hook,... I choose not to file, that's the voluntary part my friend. On your employee yearly deduction statement, read it very very close, they give you an option their as well, if you have the balls, to claim your exemtion from taxes. Your statement is all based on the idea that I filed a 1040, therefore you are correct.

[edit on 9-2-2008 by KanehBosm]



I certainly hope you know how to walk on water, because if the actions you claim to have taken (or not) taken are true, you are risking a dunking in some very hot legal waters.


By refusing to have your employer withhold from your wages for the eventual payment of your taxes, you were NOT "excercising your 'voluntary option' to not pay income taxes".

You were merely agreeing to take that burden upon yourself by making the appropriate quarterly estimate payments directly to the IRS.

Or, perhaps you were attempting to evade your responsiblity under the law by erroneously claiming that you did not owe any taxes in the prior year, and did not expect, based on your income for the current year, to have a filing requirement, and were therefore exempt from being required to withhold for taxes to be paid when due.



As I said before,

Do not confuse Withholding for taxes (or payment of estimates for taxes) with the payment of taxes.

Likewise, do not misconstrue the "Voluntary" aspect of the tax law as pertaining to having a choice between paying or not paying.

In regards to the law, the "voluntary" aspect of our taxes pertains to When when the taxpayers agree to pay the taxes we owe, NOT whether we agree to pay them.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Originally posted by scientist
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


you lost me.


I was using sarcasm in pointing out the fallacy of claiming the "elites" aren't paying their share of taxes.


I understand the sarcastic approach, I just got lost in the logic that followed (or lack thereof). Mostly because of the percentages you were throwing around. They just don't make any sense, and certainly don't prove any points. next time, try a rational explanation instead of sarcasm - it just may get your message across more efficiently.


What didn't you understand? I'll can try to explain it in simpler terms if that was an issue for you.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Oh boy am I going to enjoy this response. Blueraja first off the "elites" pat a hell of a lot lower of a tax rate than your normal working class person. Take any CEO and put it up against any normal working class person making 50 to 100k a year and you will see the average is about 15% for the elites where as the working class person will pay around 30%. The elites pay the majority of the taxes yes and the reason is because of the HUGE amount of money these guys are making. I tell you what blue I will trade positions with the CEO of Exxon Mobile any day me making a little over 300k a year and paying a 35% tax rate and make 6.4 Million last year and pay his 15% tax rate.



Would you care to share where you arrived at this 15% figure? Here's the tax bracket for various income levels, and I didn't notice anywhere that the rate started going back down at any point above $300k/yr.

www.moneychimp.com...

As for salary levels- I don't think too many people wouldn't want a higher salary, but does the fact that someone makes a higher salary mean that they should be punished for it? They are already paying a disproportionate amount of the tax revenues, so how much more class envy/warfare is warranted in your estimation?



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


So are we limiting our discussion/definition of elites to CEOs, or just those that make an income of X amounts? The numbers don't lie with regards to who is paying the most. It certainly isn't those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder(many of which don't pay taxes at all, because they don't make enough).



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by admriker444
The elites dont pay taxes.

They hide their money in blind trusts and nonprofit foundations.


The poor don't pay taxes.

They hid their potential earnings behind a life of underachieving, no drive, and laziness.


If we went to a flat tax then the IRS could just send a bill, but then the 100,000 that work for the IRS would not be needed anymore.



[edit on 9-2-2008 by Xtrozero]



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Bhadhidar wrote:

"Or, perhaps you were attempting to evade your responsiblity under the law by erroneously claiming that you did not owe any taxes in the prior year, and did not expect, based on your income for the current year, to have a filing requirement, and were therefore exempt from being required to withhold for taxes to be paid when due."

You are missing the point here mate! He is not EVADING or trying to WITHHOLD anything! Taxing 40% on your earnings is ILLEGAL in USA and many other states but we assume that it has to be paid because THEY said so.
If you see who tried to put that Draconian law through Congress and failed, do little search.
Everything you buy or rent is already taxed. That costs you roughly 50% of your earnings. On top of that you are supposed to pay 40% income tax which was meant as a corporate gain tax not tax on a miserable income.
So he is not avoiding and hiding anything just refusing to pay something he doesn't have to by LAW.
IRS is ILLEGAL. Income tax is ILLEGAL.
Take a tax code and a book in your hands and scan for everyone here to see
where is that particular sentence that states you or anyone else has to pay extra tax on earnings.
If you find it of course.

[edit on 9-2-2008 by Apolon]




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join