Can An American Taxpayer Fight The IRS And Win? Is There A Law Stating You Must Pay Taxes?

IWB ^ | Pamela Williams

[morphing libertarian]

Here’s what our faithful IRS says:

https://www.irs.gov/uac/facts-fiction-of-frivolous-arguments-nonfiler-enforcement

[Alter Kaker]

Incorrect. The 16th Amendment was properly ratified. BS info from hucksters on the internet you're posting. For future reference there are lots of places where you can research the validity (or more accurately lack of validity) of arguments from tax protesters. For starters: Wikipedia has a nice little article.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I just made another contribution last week.

https://www.cosaction.com/

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Wikpedia is a reliable source? Seriously?

[morphing libertarian]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_Sixteenth_Amendment_arguments

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Wikipedia? Seriously?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

http://keywiki.org/Organizations_Funded_Directly_by_George_Soros_and_his_Open_Society_Institute

[morphing libertarian]

from wiki The Benson contention was comprehensively addressed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Thomas:[12] Thomas is a tax protester, and one of his arguments is that he did not need to file tax returns because the sixteenth amendment is not part of the constitution. It was not properly ratified, Thomas insists, repeating the argument of W. Benson & M. Beckman, The Law That Never Was (1985). Benson and Beckman review the documents concerning the states' ratification of the sixteenth amendment and conclude that only four states ratified the sixteenth amendment; they insist that the official promulgation of that amendment by Secretary of State Knox in 1913 is therefore void. Benson and Beckman did not discover anything; they rediscovered something that Secretary Knox considered in 1913. Thirty-eight states ratified the sixteenth amendment, and thirty-seven sent formal instruments of ratification to the Secretary of State. (Minnesota notified the Secretary orally, and additional states ratified later; we consider only those Secretary Knox considered.) Only four instruments repeat the language of the sixteenth amendment exactly as Congress approved it. The others contain errors of diction, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. The text Congress transmitted to the states was: "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." Many of the instruments neglected to capitalize "States", and some capitalized other words instead. The instrument from Illinois had "remuneration" in place of "enumeration"; the instrument from Missouri substituted "levy" for "lay"; the instrument from Washington had "income" not "incomes"; others made similar blunders. Thomas insists that because the states did not approve exactly the same text, the amendment did not go into effect. Secretary Knox considered this argument. The Solicitor of the Department of State drew up a list of the errors in the instruments and – taking into account both the triviality of the deviations and the treatment of earlier amendments that had experienced more substantial problems – advised the Secretary that he was authorized to declare the amendment adopted. The Secretary did so. Although Thomas urges us to take the view of several state courts that only agreement on the literal text may make a legal document effective, the Supreme Court follows the "enrolled bill rule". If a legislative document is authenticated in regular form by the appropriate officials, the court treats that document as properly adopted. Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, 36 L.Ed. 294, 12 S.Ct. 495 (1892). The principle is equally applicable to constitutional amendments. See Leser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130, 66 L.Ed. 505, 42 S.Ct. 217 (1922), which treats as conclusive the declaration of the Secretary of State that the nineteenth amendment had been adopted. In United States v. Foster, 789 F.2d. 457, 462-463, n.6 (7th Cir. 1986), we relied on Leser, as well as the inconsequential nature of the objections in the face of the 73-year acceptance of the effectiveness of the sixteenth amendment, to reject a claim similar to Thomas's. See also Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433, 83 L. Ed. 1385, 59 S. Ct. 972 (1939) (questions about ratification of amendments may be nonjusticiable). Secretary Knox declared that enough states had ratified the sixteenth amendment. The Secretary's decision is not transparently defective. We need not decide when, if ever, such a decision may be reviewed in order to know that Secretary Knox's decision is now beyond review. — United States v. Thomas The Court of Appeals also ruled that the government could obtain a ruling ordering Benson to turn his customer list over to the government.[21] Benson petitioned the United States Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court rejected his petition on November 30, 2009

[morphing libertarian]

and? does that negate the court decisions cited in the write up?

I am not a constitutional scholar, but I play one on the internet. The court cases stand as record unless you have proof they are false.

[morphing libertarian]

Seriously! does that negate the court decisions cited in the write up? Sorry i didn’t have time to go to the USSC website. Is that your argument against the court cases, that they are cited in wikipedia?

I am not a constitutional scholar, but I play one on the internet. The court cases stand as record unless you have proof they are false.

[BMATR003]

It gets even better!

Title 26 of US Law,(the tax code), was never made into Positive Law. It was never published in the Federal Register which is required for any law to become law.
The Supreme Court in Crysler vs IRS Comissioner, 1979, stated that if a law is not Positive Law you can ignore it!!
But, we now live in a lawless country so it does not matter!

VIVA La Revolution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[discostu]

Ask Wesley Snipes.

[upchuck]

Google is your friend.

[veracious]

DC personal _income_tax_ is the highest lie our fathers handed down to USA; along with its bastard child the _federal_reserve_. These acts enabled and created the state so deep, that USA may never recover from its decent into tyranny.

These un-Constitutional acts, took most power away from the states and the people and liberty from USA citizens.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

You discounted my source as questionable. I’ve proven you’re source is also questionable. Do you see the hypocrisy there?

[Taxman]

I believe that trying to fight the IRS is a losing proposition! That is why, since 1991, I have been an advocate of the National Retail Sales Tax.

Its present form, the FairTax Act of 2017 (H.R.25 & S.18), proposes to REPLACE the Income Tax with the FAIRtax and ABOLISH THE IRS!

What is not to like about that?

To find out more about the FAIRtax, you could read both pieces of legislation at https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/25/all-info and
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/18.

Or, you could go to https://www.fairtax.org.

The USA will NEVER be a FRee country so long as we have an income tax and an IRS!

To find out how to help us REPLACE the Income Tax with the FAIRtax and ABOLISH THE IRS, go to https://www.fairtax.org.

[morphing libertarian]

I’ve proven you’re source is also questionable.

Hypocrisy? LOL

I asked you to refute the court cases and you didn’t. That’s proof you don’t have a case. When you can explain why the USSC and the court of appeals rulings don’t apply, get back to me.

My posts with the court cases stands until you can say that’s not what the court said or meant.

As far as counter arguments to the courts I am not that guy. I said I wasn’t a constitutional scholar, but I can read, wikipedia and otherwise.

You lose so far.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Keep patronizing Soros front-groups. It will serve you well.

[morphing libertarian]

keep trying to disprove quoted court cases by blaming Soros because they are posted on a web site. look the cases up if you don’t believe wiki, they are cited in the write up. You can’t “soros” your way out of your weak ass argument.

[eastexsteve]

You bet the lowly taxpayer can win. I did! Back in 70’s, I did battle with the IRS and collected damages. But, be warned, that once you give them a pounding, they won’t forget about you. For many years after that, I was called in for questions and audits many times. I used to joke that they use me to break in all their new auditors.
This was back in the days before tax software, but there was Lotus spreadsheet. I used to sign in at the local IRS office, drop a box of paperwork on their desk and walk out, telling them to let me know if they found a problem. Some years they would ask me to send them a copy of the silliest things like MY part of a W-4. The last time I heard from them was about ten years ago when they questioned a deduction on my Schedule F over farm fuel. They ended up sending me a check for 9 bucks and change. After that, I haven’t heard from them since.

I always tell people that if they get a letter or call from the IRS, don’t automatically assume that they made a mistake. The IRS screws up their math regularly, and I can prove it!