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.

 

Any way to legally avoid paying federal income tax?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:20 AM
link   
paynoincometax.com... and, of course, Freedom to Fascism.


I'm... It's just repulsive having myself fork over 40% of my personal income to the criminal government and watch how my very own money is used to enslave, destroy, bankrupt, kill, wage war, and satisfy the needs of the Global Elite.



Any legal way to NOT pay the criminal income tax to the federal government? Any "illegal" way one can easily get away with?




posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Bear in mind that I'm Canadian, but I have also looked at this.

IN the US, I think you can get away with it if you don't file.

It appears as though the ones that get caught are the ones that actually LIE or deliberately mis-state their income/deductions on their stated income tax forms. But I haven't found any cases where the IRS has won by taking someone who doesn't pay tax to court.

Don't file and don't lie.

And if they try to take you to court, while you're in court, demand to see where in the law does it specifically state that you MUST pay tax. If they can't produce it, then the judge has to throw it out of court.

But things may have changed over the last few years.

Sadly, it DOES state that Canadians must pay tax. We had to pay this temporary war tax (WWII) that was never repealed. Bastards.

(edit for clarification)


[edit on 2008/10/3 by juniperberry]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by juniperberry
Bear in mind that I'm Canadian, but I have also looked at this.

IN the US, I think you can get away with it if you don't file.

It appears as though the ones that get caught are the ones that actually LIE or deliberately mis-state their income/deductions on their stated income tax forms. But I haven't found any cases where the IRS has won by taking someone who doesn't pay tax to court.

Don't file and don't lie.

And if they try to take you to court, while you're in court, demand to see where in the law does it specifically state that you MUST pay tax. If they can't produce it, then the judge has to throw it out of court.

But things may have changed over the last few years.

Sadly, it DOES state that Canadians must pay tax. We had to pay this temporary war tax (WWII) that was never repealed. Bastards.

(edit for clarification)


[edit on 2008/10/3 by juniperberry]



And there has not been one defendant who won against the IRS; look at their lawyers.



If they can illegally ratify an Amendment (16th), then they can certainly win a case against a dissident...


On the other hand, what about moving to a "safe haven" and freelancing from there?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   
I thought it was voluntary. If its not, I'm in a lot of trouble !

There are places to get info on how to... not pay "their" taxes.
Many people fight this everyday. Some go to jail some don't.

Fedral income Tax ...Is suppose to be Voluntary !!!!!

I will see what I can find, to help you out.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Just a question: if I freelance (meaning don't have an official "job"), how difficult would it be for them to track me down? If my bank account is involved, it seems impossible to get away with...?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Yes.

You can legally avoid paying income tax by not earning any taxable income.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Yes.

You can legally avoid paying income tax by not earning any taxable income.



What is legally classified as "taxable income"?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Check out this site:

members.cox.net...

Here is a small excerpt from this site...

"Federal Income Tax - Mandatory or Voluntary?
If federal income tax laws were mandatory, they would violate all of the Constitution's three taxing clauses, as well as the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 13th and 16th Amendments. to the Constitution. So as not to be unconstitutional on these and other grounds, the payment of this "tax" was not made mandatory, which is why the IRS continually refers to the "voluntary compliance" nature of this tax.

So why do people go to jail for violating income tax laws that don't exist? Mostly because they try to avoid paying taxes by hiding their income or moving it into a secret offshore account, and end up breaking other laws. Certainly you cannot just stop paying taxes, once you've signed the IRS 1040 Form contract, but you can legally file several things in lieu of pay taxes, and legally claim your legal voluntary status to opt out of the tax program.

The Constitution, in numerous clauses, bars the government from collecting income taxes in the manner it now does. Let me count the ways."



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
One still can't help but feel intimidated legally resisting the federal mafia...

Just "stop paying taxes"? And get "shot" by the IRS "mafia"?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Here is alittle more important info from site....

the 16th Amendment did not amend the Constitution nor did it give the government any new taxing powers (such as the ability to impose a direct tax on income without apportionment). See Brushaber, supra and Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co, 240 U.S. 103.

Section 61 of the IRS Code does not define "Gross Income," since a word cannot be defined with itself. Therefore, what constitutes "income" is not defined in the IRS Code (see U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F2d 400,404).

In addition, Congress has no power to define the meaning of "income," since by doing so, it would be amending the Constitution by legislation alone (see Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189, 206). The Supreme Court defined income to mean a "gain or increase arising from corporate activities. (see Doyle v. Mitchell, 247 U.S. 179, and Merchant's Loan and Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509, 518,519).

Therefore, no American can have any income subject to an income tax, since the word income, for tax purposes, means a corporate profit. If anything, we have a Profits Tax, not an income tax. In addition, if the income tax were mandatory, it would have to be declared "void for vagueness" by any legitimate court, since no one can understand our income tax laws.

All IRS seizures in payment of income tax are illegal, and not provided by law.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Please go to the site in my second post....very important info on your Rights

[edit on 3-10-2008 by azureskys]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by azureskys
Here is alittle more important info from site....

the 16th Amendment did not amend the Constitution nor did it give the government any new taxing powers (such as the ability to impose a direct tax on income without apportionment). See Brushaber, supra and Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co, 240 U.S. 103.

Section 61 of the IRS Code does not define "Gross Income," since a word cannot be defined with itself. Therefore, what constitutes "income" is not defined in the IRS Code (see U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F2d 400,404).

In addition, Congress has no power to define the meaning of "income," since by doing so, it would be amending the Constitution by legislation alone (see Eisner v. Macomber 252 U.S. 189, 206). The Supreme Court defined income to mean a "gain or increase arising from corporate activities. (see Doyle v. Mitchell, 247 U.S. 179, and Merchant's Loan and Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509, 518,519).

Therefore, no American can have any income subject to an income tax, since the word income, for tax purposes, means a corporate profit. If anything, we have a Profits Tax, not an income tax. In addition, if the income tax were mandatory, it would have to be declared "void for vagueness" by any legitimate court, since no one can understand our income tax laws.

All IRS seizures in payment of income tax are illegal, and not provided by law.


And how can one protect himself from illegal seizures?



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by azureskys

Therefore, no American can have any income subject to an income tax, since the word income, for tax purposes, means a corporate profit. If anything, we have a Profits Tax, not an income tax.


Yes, however they've gotten around that by somehow coming up with the idea that, depending on how you've acknowledged your name on paperwork, they can declare you as a corporation.

It's in here somewhere. I know it's a Canadian site but it applies to all countries that fall under what I think is called the 'Admiralty Act'.

www.natural-person.ca...

Here's reference to the lack of producing a statute in court
www.natural-person.ca...



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:21 AM
link   
This web site is here to tell you that this is exactly what happened! We are here to tell you and the rest of the nation that YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO FOR GENERATIONS!

www.voluntarytax.info...

There are many deceptions that have worked themselves into our modern age that are vistages of a bygone era. These include the following:

The word 'Income' has been redefined. At the time that our tax law was passed, it meant 'profit,' the proceeds of a corporation after deducting expenses. Now that definition has come to include 'wages,' the proceeds of a single individual selling his labor. We know this to be true by reviewing the congressional record of conversations on the floor preceding the vote.
The 16th Amendment was never truly ratified. It was forced fed to an unsuspecting public in an era when morse code was the main means of communications. This is the Amendment our modern day legal system says justifies the income tax. Even accepting the 16th as legal, many court cases have declared that this amendment bestows no new taxing power, which renders the current Income Tax unconstitutional!
Our current lawmakers are vaguely aware that the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional. When pressed, they admit in closed circles that the Income Tax is voluntary, thus it is legal!
Thus our lawmakers have the best of both worlds. They themselves are not obligated to pay income taxes while the rest of the nation is herded into compliance!



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by thetruth777
 


Taxable income is net income less allowable deductions.

Net income is wages (less exempt withheld amounts such as 401k contributions),net profit from a business, investments, capital gains, earned interest, and some other stuff.

Allowable deductions include mortgage interest, capital loses, certain other taxes, and some other stuff.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by Phage]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   
As a matter of fact, some people have successfully argued and won their case against the IRS. Most are not so lucky. If my memory serves me, one of the victories resulted in the jury siding with the accused and the judge stormed out of the courtroom in a rage.

One of the main arguments included the representatives of the IRS to simply show the accused the law that required him to pay taxes. They could not show the exact law that required him to pay, so he won.

Aaron Russo has made a movie about this, it's on you tube. I can't remember the name, but you'll see his movie if you look him up.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:51 AM
link   
"Sixty Income Tax Realities"
...www.voluntarytax.info...
There are different statutes for different taxes. That is why it is important to read the statutes, to understand them, to know what they say, and learn how the IRS interprets law that needs no interpretation.

The federal income tax as it is applied is unconstitutional because it is being applied as a "direct tax" which must be apportioned among the states in accordance with the census.

The income tax cannot apply to individual citizens directly, because that would be a "direct tax" prohibited by the Constitution. And the income tax does NOT apply to individual citizens directly; it does so indirectly making the tax an excise tax.

The income tax can apply to wages, because that would be a "excise tax" which must be Uniform in accordance with the Constitution. But nowhere in the law are wages specifically included in gross income as defined by 26USC §61A, nor is it clear which wages are and which wages are not, as the term wages is defined to mean several different things in several different sections of the law, for several different taxes.

Wages can be taxed because the receipt of wages is the result of exercising a government granted privilege, or participating in a privileged occupation. Working for a living is not a privileged occupation.

Our labor is our property, and so a tax on labor would be a tax on property and a "direct tax" within the meaning of the Constitution.

The laborer does not receive labor from another source, he is the source. If you picked up a rock and sold it for $5 then you would have income of $5, as you had a cost of $0 for the rock. You can not separate the laborer from the labor. Labor is not something which the laborer picks up, it is of the laborer.
The idea that a person has zero cost in the labor they sell is a flawed idea embraced by the IRS. For a person to have zero cost in the labor they sell, there has to be capital that can accrue and grow. There is no capital involved in selling ones own labor, as the labor is the capital.

The exercise of a fundamental right cannot be taxed and the right to work is a fundamental right reserved to the citizens of the United States by the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. However, working for the government is not a fundamental right, nor is working in the USA by a foreigner or a foreign corporation, a fundamental right and both can be taxed - and they are; see 26USC Subtitle A, Chapter 3, §1461.

The power to tax income is not the 16th amendment; it is Article 1, section 8, clause 1.

Congress may have the power to tax all incomes, however, it has NOT done so.

Income cannot be taxed unless the source of the income is first determined because congress has not taxed all income! Determining the source is critical and there are several Federal cases that prove this. Most recent, is US v Murphy.

According to the IRS, every penny you recieve, is income. According to the US Supreme court, the IRS definition of income is irrelevant as they the USSC, have decided what the definition of income is.

The 16th Amendment is ineffective because it does not expressly repeal any provision of Article I Section 8, Clause 1, of the Constitution. True, but not complete. The 16th didn't change Article 1, section 8, clause 1 nor did it change any of the other taxing power limitations. This is why the Supreme court at the time of its adoption, called it the "do nothing amendment.

The 16th Amendment gave Congress no new power to tax - absolutely TRUE.

The 16th Amendment was not properly ratified - maybe, and maybe not, but does it matter, in light of the above 2 paragraphs?

The 16th Amendment does not define the word "income", and thus it is impossible to know what it refers to, without looking at the US Supreme court cases dealing with such matters. This alone, should be grounds to have the law declared void for vagueness.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by azureskys]



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   
The income tax cannot unilaterally apply to all people outside of the District of Columbia , the territories of the United States , and the forts and military bases of the United States , because the federal government has extremely limited jurisdiction outside of those "federal areas."

The income tax cannot apply to natural-born "sovereign state citizens" at the time of their birth, because they are not involved in an excise taxable activity. Living as a man or woman, is not a taxable event; however, if that person becomes involved in an activity that is subject to an excise tax, no matter where they are, the tax can apply.

The federal income tax as it its currently administered by the IRS, amounts to a deprivation of property without due process and without just compensation, which is contrary to the 5th Amendment to the constitution, WHEN the administration of the law, is done without checks and balances, and when citizens do not have the right to seek judicial review BEFOR their property (their pay) is taken from them without their consent.

The federal income tax does not apply to all wages, only one that I am aware of and that is the wages as defined in Chapter 2, of Subtitle A.

Withholding of income tax from wages is authorized by Only 1 (one) section of law, found in Title 26. And that is Subtitle A, Chapter 2, self employment tax. There are income taxes (all income taxes are excise taxes) found in Subtitle A, and Employment taxes, another type of excise tax, found in Subtitle C. Withholding for income tax, from subtitle C wages, is not allowed by any statute found in Subtitle C.

There are NO constitutional exemptions for the IRS. This is a fact we must hammer into every congressional representative, every member of the Judiciary.

The collection of income taxes without any court order, After the assessment is challenged and the IRS continues forward without proving liability via statute, is a deprivation of property without due process contrary to the 5th Amendment to the Constitution.

You cannot be required to file THEIR oath as a condition to filing an income tax return because a tax return is a form of testimony and the 5th Amendment guarantees that you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself. In other words you can modify their "under penalties of perjury" clause to protect your rights.

No law can compel you to take an oath, as a condition to being in compliance with the law.

As a matter of Standard Operational Procedures, the IRS subornates perjury.

No one can compel you to commit a felony as a requirement to being in compliance with a law. 26USC 7206 makes it a FELONY crime, for you to file any document that is signed under penalties of perjury that you do not believe to be true to the best of your knowledge. When the IRS rejects your forms, and then imposes a fine on you without charging you with a crime, they are obstructing your right to justice.

The IRS cannot require anyone to file an income tax return because the IRS is not congress, and they have no such authority. It is congress, via the law, that requires people or "persons" to file an income tax return.

Congress can only tax the exercise of "privileges" or the income from "revenue taxable activities" such as the sale of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms, or from interstate commerce, directly from us, as excise taxes. They can still impose a direct tax, via apportionment, which the individual states collect, not the IRS.

Under the 1st Amendment, there is a right to withhold taxes from the government until the government has answered a "petition for the redress of grievances." The courts are out on this one. This original text was posted in 2003, right after Bob Shultz filed his petition. And that right to stop paying until the government answers the petition is now in the appeals court.

There are no constitutional exemptions for the IRS. Even the IRS must obey the law, although it does not. It is the lack of accountability, of the IRS, that irritates most people.

The Internal Revenue Code does not define "income." It defines several TYPES of income, but not income itself.



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:57 AM
link   
The Internal Revenue Code cannot define "income" because it is a term used in the Constitution and Congress cannot modify the Constitution by statute. Absolutely true, as stated by the US Supreme court.

The Income tax, is one of over 80 taxes imposed via the taxing power, Article 1, section 8, clause 1.

The income tax is a specific tax. While other taxes might be classified as an income tax, they are not 'the income tax" which is imposed by 26USC Subtitle A.

The terms Employee, Employer, and wages have many different definitions, as found in Title 26, and those definitions can change depending on what one of the over 80 different taxes is being discussed at the time.

The term "employee" has no real common law definition.

The term "employer" has no real common law definition and was not used in every day language until after the passage of the 16th amendment.

Wages are not income. No where in the title 26, will you find where it clearly says that wages are income. While a wage may be a type of income, the wage tax is a separate tax than that of the income tax, which different type of excise tax, than that of the wage taxes.

Most people do not receive wages for working for a living, however, the companies we work for, report our pay (equal compensation) as a wage, which is then subject to an excise tax, usually under Subtitle C, chapter 24. They do so out of willful ignorance, because they follow the information put out by the IRS, which according to the Government accounting office, is wrong over 65 percent of the time.

Wages are taxable as they are the result of exercising or participating in an excise taxable event.

There are 4 different wage taxes imposed by Title 26, and not one is connected with any other.

Most of the Internal Revenue Code does not make an ordinary citizen liable for the income tax.

The income tax is voluntary for most people, however it is mandatory for those involved in privileged occupations, or who are exercising a government granted privilege IF congress has imposed an excise tax on those activities - and it has not passed one for every such activity.

You might not be a "person" within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code, depending on your specific status.

The Internal Revenue Code is not a law. Code is not law, its prima facia evidence of existing law.

The tax laws only apply to "taxpayers" and "withholding agents", you are not required to file returns or pay taxes if you are not a "taxpayer" or a "withholding agent".

Social security is totally 100 percent voluntary for natural born Americans. However the current system of



posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:58 AM
link   
fraud, compels most people to participate in the ponzi scam.

Social Security does not have a trust fund.

Social security does not create any contract of any kind.

Full disclosure is never made, when applying for a SS number, via the SSA 5 form.

The IRS uses a form of "Perfected Administrative claim", to justify its claim that you owe income taxes.

The IRS uses misinformation, obtained from 3rd parties, to create their "administrative claim".

That Administrative claim, stands as factual evidence of a debt owing, until such time as it is refuted or rebutted.

The IRS cannot show most Americans what section of law, created the liability for income tax, which the IRS is claiming that the American citizen owes.

For most people, the businesses they work for are the ones who erroneously report the wrong information to the IRS, thus helping the IRS to create a "perfected administrative claim".

Most businesses rely on information from the IRS, even though time after time, the GAO (government accounting office) as reported that the information the IRS gives out is faulty over 70 percent of the time.

In 2003, the GAO reported the IRS failed to follow the law and its own guidelines in over 75 percent of the tax liens it filed against American Citizens and Businesses.

Most Americans are forced to give the government an interest free loan for nearly a year, due to the improper administration of the Tax laws, by the IRS. Such is in reality, several violations of our national charter.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join