The 16th Amendment to the US Constitution posted:

---

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

The 16th Amendment to the US Constitution posted:

---

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

---

---

imaloon1 posted:

---

Which was never ratified by the states fully and was ruled by the Supreme Court to give Congress NO NEW TAXATION POWERS.

---

bstulic posted:

---

Any law about it?

---

Tych2 posted:

---

You should challenge it Ill.

---

Tych2 posted:

---

Why? I think it is legal. I have nothing to challenge.

Plus I've seen first hand what happens when the evil IRS gets their mitts into you. I'll pass and choose to pay the least amount legally.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

So you've been terrorized into submission.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

You know the law? Ok, find me the law that requires the average citizen to pay an income tax.


You'll never find it but you may know something the IRS doesn't

---

Tych2 posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

You know the law? Ok, find me the law that requires the average citizen to pay an income tax.


You'll never find it but you may know something the IRS doesn't

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

---

illmyrin posted:

---

That's not a law. That's a constitutional amendment. Come now. You're surely familiar with laws, regulations and statutes.

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

It is a law.

The constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land - literally.

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

No, I'm relying on 100 years of jurisprudence and history, not random youtube videos produced by a bored college kid.

It is legal. Amendments are laws. The 16th Amendment makes income tax legal. It was ratified by the pre-requisite 3\4 of states in 1913.

End of story.

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

No, I'm relying on 100 years of jurisprudence and history, not random youtube videos produced by a bored college kid.

It is legal. Amendments are laws. The 16th Amendment makes income tax legal. It was ratified by the pre-requisite 3\4 of states in 1913.

End of story.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Was an individual income tax legal before the 16th amendment?

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Was an individual income tax legal before the 16th amendment?

---

Irrelevant.

Once it was ratified, it was the law of the land. What existed before is no longer material.

---

Tych2 posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

So you've been terrorized into submission.

---

Hell yeah. Actually it wasn't me since I know the law. It was another I got to see first hand with the hand of the IRS firmly up this person's ass for a few years and raped them repeatedly.

I'll pass. I think you should take up the torch.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

In what world do you get that from? We're on Earth. We have a Supreme Court who has twice ruled the 16th amendment gave congress No new powers of taxation and no new sources. So what things were before the 16th amendment are still in effect.

---

Scarne posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

In what world do you get that from? We're on Earth. We have a Supreme Court who has twice ruled the 16th amendment gave congress No new powers of taxation and no new sources. So what things were before the 16th amendment are still in effect.

---

I would assume that the "no new powers of taxation" doesn't mean what you think it means.

---

Kjarhall posted:

---

This is such a stupid topic.

What do you 'taxation is illegal' idiots think would happen if no one paid federal taxes?

*waits patiently for a few unrealistic answers that sound great on the surface but are actually built on stupid*

---

imaloon1 posted:

---

Which was never ratified by the states fully and was ruled by the Supreme Court to give Congress NO NEW TAXATION POWERS.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Kjarhall posted:

---

This is such a stupid topic.

What do you 'taxation is illegal' idiots think would happen if no one paid federal taxes?

*waits patiently for a few unrealistic answers that sound great on the surface but are actually built on stupid*

---

Nothing at all would happen. Federal taxes are 100% absorbed on our interest towards our federal reserve debt. Your question might seem common sense obvious but you're wrong in your assumption about what the federal income tax goes towards. Absent the income tax, our taxation system worked great for over 150 years. You do know that "state" taxes do stuff right?

---

Bonzoboy1 posted:

---

Ask Wesley Snipes what happened when he chose not to pay taxes.

---

NY Code - Section 240.35: Loitering

A person is guilty of loitering when he:
1. Loiters, remains or wanders about in a public place for the purpose
of begging; or
2. Loiters or remains in a public place for the purpose of gambling
with cards, dice or other gambling paraphernalia; or
3. Loiters or remains in a public place for the purpose of engaging,
or soliciting another person to engage, in oral sexual conduct, anal
sexual conduct or other sexual behavior of a deviate nature; or
4. Being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural
attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public
place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or
aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place;
except that such conduct is not unlawful when it occurs in connection
with a masquerade party or like entertainment if, when such
entertainment is held in a city which has promulgated regulations in
connection with such affairs, permission is first obtained from the
police or other appropriate authorities; or
5. Loiters or remains in or about school grounds, a college or
university building or grounds or a children's overnight camp as defined
in section one thousand three hundred ninety-two of the public health
law or a summer day camp as defined in section one thousand three
hundred ninety-two of the public health law, or loiters, remains in or
enters a school bus as defined in section one hundred forty-two of the
vehicle and traffic law, not having any reason or relationship involving
custody of or responsibility for a pupil or student, or any other
specific, legitimate reason for being there, and not having written
permission from anyone authorized to grant the same or loiters or
remains in or about such children's overnight camp or summer day camp in
violation of conspicuously posted rules or regulations governing entry
and use thereof; or
6. Loiters or remains in any transportation facility, unless
specifically authorized to do so, for the purpose of soliciting or
engaging in any business, trade or commercial transactions involving the
sale of merchandise or services, or for the purpose of entertaining
persons by singing, dancing or playing any musical instrument; or
7. Loiters or remains in any transportation facility, or is found
sleeping therein, and is unable to give a satisfactory explanation of
his presence.
Loitering is a violation.

illmyrin posted:

---

There is no law. Period. End of story. NO law.

---

1. Contention: The filing of a tax return is voluntary.

Some taxpayers assert that they are not required to file federal tax returns because the filing of a tax return is voluntary. Proponents of this contention point to the fact that the IRS itself tells taxpayers in the Form 1040 instruction book that the tax system is voluntary. Additionally, these taxpayers frequently quote Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 176 (1960), for the proposition that "[o]ur system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint."

The Law: The word “voluntary,” as used in Flora and in IRS publications, refers to our system of allowing taxpayers initially to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate returns, rather than have the government determine tax for them from the outset. The requirement to file an income tax return is not voluntary and is clearly set forth in sections 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. See also Treas. Reg. § 1.6011-1(a).

Any taxpayer who has received more than a statutorily determined amount of gross income is obligated to file a return. Failure to file a tax return could subject the non-complying individual to criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment, as well as civil penalties. “[A]lthough Treasury regulations establish voluntary compliance as the general method of income tax collection, Congress gave the Secretary of the Treasury the power to enforce the income tax laws through involuntary collection . . . . The IRS’ efforts to obtain compliance with the tax laws are entirely proper.” United States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540, 542 (10th Cir. 1986). The IRS warned taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument. Rev. Rul. 2007-20, 2007-1 C.B. 863.
Relevant Case Law:

Helvering v. Mitchell, 303 U.S. 391, 399 (1938) – the Supreme Court stated that “[i]n assessing income taxes, the Government relies primarily upon the disclosure by the taxpayer of the relevant facts . . . in his annual return. To ensure full and honest disclosure, to discourage fraudulent attempts to evade the tax, Congress imposes [either criminal or civil] sanctions.”

United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255, 1256 (8th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1193 (1994) – the court held that “[a]ny assertion that the payment of income taxes is voluntary is without merit.”

United States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540, 542 (10th Cir. 1986) – the court upheld a conviction for willfully failing to file a return, stating that the premise “that the tax system is somehow ‘voluntary’ . . . is incorrect.”

United States v. Richards, 723 F.2d 646, 648 (8th Cir. 1983) – the court upheld conviction and fines imposed for willfully failing to file tax returns, stating that the claim that filing a tax return is voluntary “was rejected in

Woods v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 88, 90 (1988) – the court rejected the claim that reporting income taxes is strictly voluntary, referring to it as a “‘tax protester’ type” argument, and found Woods liable for the penalty for failure to file a return.
Other Cases:

United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, Jameson v. United States, 464 U.S. 642 (1983); United States v. Schulz, 529 F.Supp.2d 341 (N.D.N.Y. 2007), aff’d, 517 F.3d 606 (2d Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 555 U.S. 946 (2008); Johnson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-312, 78 T.C.M. (CCH) 468, 471 (1999), aff’d, 242 F.3d 382 (9th Cir. 2000).

DemonicXH posted:

---

So the U.S. constitution and all the court rulings since are not law?

---

IRS FRAUD – Proven By Quotes From IRS Officials

“In a recent conversation with an official at the Internal Revenue Service, I was amazed when he told me that ‘If the taxpayers of this country ever discover that the IRS operates on 90% bluff the entire system will collapse’ “.
- Henry Bellmon, Senator (1969)

“… the key question is: can we define ‘income’ in a fair and reasonably straightforward manner? Unfortunately we have not yet succeeded in doing so”.
-Shirley Peterson, former IRS Commissioner, April 1993

“I don’t like the income tax. Every time we talk about these taxes we get around to the idea of ‘from each according to his capacity and to each according to his needs’. That’s socialism. It’s written into the Communist Manifesto. Maybe we ought to see that every person who gets a tax return receives a copy of the Communist Manifesto with it so he can see what’s happening to him”.
-T. Coleman Andrews, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, May 25, 1956 in US. News & World Report

“Our federal tax system is, in short, utterly impossible, utterly unjust and completely counterproductive [it] reeks with injustice and is fundamentally un-American… it has earned a rebellion and it’s time we rebelled”.-President Ronald Reagan, May 1983, Williamsburg, VA

“If no information or return is filed, [the] Internal Revenue Service cannot assess you”.
- Gary Makovski, Special IRS Agent, testifying under oath in US. v. Lloyd

“Our tax system is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint”.- United States Supreme Court, in Flora v. United States

“Our tax system is based on individual self-assessment and voluntary compliance”.
-Mortimer Caplin, Internal Revenue Audit Manual (1975)

“The United States has a system of taxation by confession”.
-Hugo Black, Supreme Court Justice, in U.S.A. Kahriger

“Only the rare taxpayer would be likely to know that he could refuse to produce his records to IRS agents… Who would believe the ironic truth that the cooperative taxpayer fares much worse than the individual who relies upon his constitutional rights”.-Judge Cummings, U.S. Federal Judge, in US. v. Dickerson (7th Circuit 1969)

“Let me point this out now. Your income tax is 100 percent voluntary tax, and your liquor tax is 100 percent enforced tax. Now, the situation is as different as night and day. Consequently, your same rules just will not apply…”.
-Dwight E. Avis, former head of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division of the IRS, testifying before a House Ways and Means subcommittee in 1953

“The purpose of the IRS is to collect the proper amount of tax revenues at the least cost to the public, and in a manner that warrants the highest degree of public confidence in our integrity, efficiency and fairness. To achieve that purpose, we will encourage and achieve the highest possible degree of voluntary compliance in accordance with the tax laws and regulations…”.-Internal Revenue Manual, Chapter 1100, section 1111.1

“Fear is the key element for the IRS in achieving its mission. Without fear, the IRS would have a difficult time maintaining our so-called system of voluntary compliance …”. “Given the opportunity, the IRS will take the easy way out and grab whatever it can… the IRS does not really care about you and what your future……. may be”.
-Santo Presti, former IRS Criminal Investigation Agent and author of “IRS In Action”

“The IRS is an extraordinary example of the end justifying the means. The means of this agency is growth. It is interesting that the revenue officers within the IRS refer to taxpayers as ‘inventory’. The IRS embodies the political realities of the selfish human desire to dominate others. Thus the end of this gigantic pretense of officialdom is power, pure and simple. The meek may inherit the earth, but they will never receive a promotion in an agency where efficiency is measured by the number of seizures of taxpayers’ property and by the number of citizens and businesses driven into bankruptcy”.- George Hansen, Congressman and author of “To Harass Our People”

“I have sat on many a promotion panel where the first question of panel members was ‘How many seizures have you made?”‘.-Joseph R. Smith, eighteen-year IRS agent, testifying before Congress

“The agency that is so strict on the way Americans keep their books cannot even pass a financial audit”.
-Ted Stevens, Republican Senator from Alaska

“Eight decades of amendments… to [the] code have produced a virtually impenetrable maze… The rules are unintelligible to most citizens… The rules are equally mysterious to many government employees who are charged with administering and enforcing the law”.
- Shirley Peterson, Former IRS Commissioner, April14, 1993 at Southern Methodist University

“some techniques can be used only in connection with a full-scale program due to the nature of the tax situation and the need to avoid unnecessary taxpayer reaction. An example would be income tax returns compliance efforts aimed at the non-business taxpayer”.
-Internal Revenue Service Manual, section 5221 “Returns Compliance Programs”

“This [audit] was made extremely difficult because [IRS] existing Systems were not designed to provide reliable financial information… on their operations”.-Comptroller Bowsher, Government Accounting Office, on the first-ever audit of the IRS in 1993.

“Considering that senior officials at the Internal Revenue Service are fully aware of the fact that there is no law currently in existence making a U.S. citizen liable for or required to pay either the income tax or the social security employment tax, only a truly generous citizen would, upon discovering this, continue to voluntarily donate these taxes to the government by allowing them to be withheld from his paycheck on a 100% voluntary W-4 withholding agreement. But, then again, the IRS would be dead in the water without the “voluntary (and docile) compliance” of employers and employees and has said so all along.” — William Cash, IRS Senior Manager, http://www.irs.faithweb.com

Eager_Igraine posted:

---

The great thing about Illy is his ability to completely ignore those things which prove his positions false and/or untenable, but only ignore them in fantasy world. We can be sure he pays his taxes like a good boy in reality.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

There is no law. Period. End of story. NO law.

---

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Koneg posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

There is no law. Period. End of story. NO law.

---

Since you clearly need to have this explained to you... again.

The 16th Amendment gives Congress the authority to levy taxes. This is not in dispute.

Article 1 of the Constitution also states that Congress has the authority to lay and collect taxes...

Article 1 also states:

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

So Congress gets to pass the laws necessary for carrying out the Powers granted to it by the Constitution. One of those Powers granted to it is the authority to lay and collect taxes. See how all this kind flows naturally once you take off the tinfoil?

So in 1862 they decided an income tax was needed to pay for the Civil War.

I'm not going to quote the text verbatim, you can read it here: http://www.nytimes.com/1862/03/10/news/national-tax-bill-provisions-measure-now-before-congress-machinery-for.html

In short, it creates the IRS.

Congress passed this law, the President signed it, and within it very specifically granted to the IRS Commissioner the power to write the regulations needed to collect the taxes he was being given authority over.

There is your law. It even has its very own term: A statutory grant of authority.

This is of course the process whereby all regulatory agencies have been created. The IRS, the EPA, Federal Trade Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, The Federal Aviation Administration etc etc ad nauseum. Congress can't do everything, so shockingly enough they delegate portions of their own authority to specific agencies.

Those agencies then get to write, and enforce, their own regulations. Those regulations have the force of Federal law because Congress gives them that authority in the statute they pass which creates them.

Since agency regulations have the force of law they are subject to judicial review, just like any law is. This is why we have the US Tax Court, where IRS regulations get challenged.

So when you claim there is "NO LAW" you are, as always, hopelessly wrong.

Any IRS regulation currently on the books is law. Period. End of story.

---

Tych2 posted:

---

I am curious, do you pay your income taxes illmyrin?

---

June 28, 2005

Joe Banister:

He Challenged The Income Tax
And Withholding Laws -- And He Won

Make no mistake: Joe Banister was indicted specifically because he took overt and very public actions that directly challenged the income tax and withholding laws.

In October of 2000, Joe Banister spoke to the employees of CENCAL, a company founded and controlled by Al Thompson. Banister told Thompson's workers that there was no legal authority that established that ordinary Americans, such as them, had to pay federal income taxes on the wages they made at CENCAL. During the meeting, Banister presented sufficient documentary evidence in support of his conclusions. Beginning in July of 2000, Thompson had stopped withholding the taxes from the compensation paid to the employees of CENCAL.

As detailed in one of the criminal counts against Banister, in 2000, Banister also prepared an amended 1998 individual income tax return for Thompson, representing that, per U.S. law, Thompson’s adjusted gross income and taxable income were “0,” (zero) not $66,192 and $42,251 as originally reported.

The government convinced a grand jury to indict Banister, setting the stage for a jury trial to determine whether Banister violated certain laws governing conspiracy and aiding and assisting in the filing of false tax returns. The government did not allow Banister to appear or present any exculpatory evidence to the grand jury.

Banister had, by his words and acts, directly challenged the legality of the operation and enforcement of the federal income tax system.

He was acquitted in large part because the government chose not to confront or attempt to rebut Banister's plain assertions that there is NO law that requires most Americans to pay a tax on their wages and that most companies are NOT required to withhold taxes on wages and turn it over to the IRS.

illmyrin posted:

---

Eager_Igraine posted:

---

The great thing about Illy is his ability to completely ignore those things which prove his positions false and/or untenable, but only ignore them in fantasy world. We can be sure he pays his taxes like a good boy in reality.

---

Yet I posted a video with the head of the IRS unable to produce any law requiring you and I to file federal income taxes. It's a big lie. Of course it's protected. You can find 1000 quotes to support yourself and still be absolutely wrong. I spent years on this topic. Studied up down side to side from every angle. You can't tell me anything new on the topic and I've already concluded what my efforts lead me to understand about the subject. Glad to entertain.

---

Former IRS CID Special Agent Joseph Banister Acquitted of Tax Fraud And Conspiracy

Government Unable To Prove U.S. Law
Requires Income Tax Withholding or Filing

illmyrin posted:

---

Tych2 posted:

---

I am curious, do you pay your income taxes illmyrin?

---

I don't know.

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Former IRS CID Special Agent Joseph Banister Acquitted of Tax Fraud And Conspiracy

Government Unable To Prove U.S. Law
Requires Income Tax Withholding or Filing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1UT2Ms5E2k&feature=related

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Was an individual income tax legal before the 16th amendment?

---

Irrelevant.

Once it was ratified, it was the law of the land. What existed before is no longer material.

---

bstulic posted:

---

Any law about it?

---

Brother_Tempus posted:

---

the better question is, is the tax moral?

---

imaloon1 posted:

---

It was successfully challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court which ruled ONCE AGAIN THAT THE 16TH AMENDMENT DID NOT DO A GODDAMN THING TO GIVE CONGRESS MORE POWER THAN IT HAD BEFORE...

---

Koneg posted:

---

imaloon1 posted:

---

It was successfully challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court which ruled ONCE AGAIN THAT THE 16TH AMENDMENT DID NOT DO A GODDAMN THING TO GIVE CONGRESS MORE POWER THAN IT HAD BEFORE...

---

Article 1 of the original un-amended Constitution gave Congress the authority to levy and collect taxes...

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes

The 16th didn't give them any new "Power" as the Constitution defines it... so I guess this boils down to: What's your point?

---

illmyrin posted:

---

Did they have any restrictions Koneg?

---