VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 11:59:08 06/27/03 Fri
Author: Mike Widner
Subject: Tax book banned
In reply to: "Vince From Villanova" (Settin' it straight.) 's message, "I've done some research on this topic, and once interviewed one of these "You don't have to pay income tax" guys on my old radio show on WMEL. Click here if you're interested." on 03:28:23 06/27/03 Fri

I read the judges order that bans the sale of The Federal Mafia, and I listened to audio transcripts of the hearings. Nowhere in any of it did the govt attorney or the judge mention the section and paragraph of the IRC that Mr. Schiff violated. Mr. Schiff was not given the opportunity to testify under oath, nor was he allowed to cross-examine any government witness. Mr. Schiff's attorney was told she would be sanctioned if she attempted to argue any points of the law.

When I first listened to the audio transcript, I thought the judge was the govt attorney arguing his case to the bench. It took me awhile to figure out that it was actually the judge arguing the govt's case for them, FROM the bench. Again, no mention of the law being broke.

I read and hear a lot of discussion and debate about income tax law, and those who believe the tax is legally imposed and collected will point out sections of the IRC to back up their points of view. But in this case, the govt would only cite sections of law that allowed them to punish and sanction, but did not cite the law that was broken by Mr. Schiff. When Mr. Schiff asked the judge what law he had broken, the judge told him he could not direct legal questions to the bench.

I have called and written to the IRS asking for the exact passage of the law that makes me liable for the tax. Once I was told they were not able to cite it. Once I was told they didn't have to cite it. Once I was told to seek competent legal advice, and once I was referred to my congressman. My elected representatives have all referred me to the IRS, claiming that IRS knowledge of the law is greater than that of congress, even if the law was written in congress.

I have asked tax preparers what the precise text of the law is, and was told that, "We can't help you." I have asked IRS revenue officers and agents to give proof of their authority by showing me their badges or pocket commissions, and they have all refused. Even though the Internal Revenue Manual states that the purpose of such a credential is to show to the public that they are acting within their legal authority. The real reason they refuse to show their badges or commissions, is because the commission for collectors of Subtitle A taxes (Income) is non-enforcement. Only collectors of Subtitle E taxes (ATF) have enforcement authority.

This is the first time in U.S. history that the govt has banned the sale of a book, allegedly because it gives instruction on how to commit "unlawful activities", with no mention of the law that is actually being broken. There are books that give instruction on how to build bombs to destroy property and kill people, how to manufacture illegal drugs, and how to molest children, none of which are banned for sale by the govt.

As for IRC section 61, it lists sources of income. If the income tax is a tax on income, then it is not a tax on sources of income. Also, corporations pay income taxes ONLY on their profits. Whatever your belief about the definition of income, it is certainly not defined one way for corporations and another way for individuals.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> Hell, I'd like to hear it. I find the whole arguement both fascinating and pointless at the same time. The "No Income Tax" guys were big here in Philly in the early 80s. I even decided to go to one of the seminars just for laughs, lots of words, nothing usable. In the end he expected the poor folk to take on the IRS alone just to back him up. -- Surf, 14:19:17 06/28/03 Sat


[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> Which guys -- Mike Powers, 19:37:40 06/28/03 Sat

Which guys, do you remember the name? Of course your right about the poor folk the gummit takes their money and if they file the proper forms they might get help from the gummit too. If they could just keep thier money then they could help themselves. What a novel idea!

"Give me liberty or give me death", "I have not yet begun to fight" isn't a part of your thinking is it. More like here is the leash now lead me. Pant pant bark.

Mike Powers


[ Edit | View ]


[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.