Posted on 02/20/2016 11:45:44 AM PST by kevcol
It is because the IRS itself finds for the educated Americans who apply the law. The court can only rule upon what is brought before it and if one does not bring the proper case so to receive relief, then that is the fault of the person injured and their ignorant lawyer.
My guess is you got a noob agent fishing, and would he mind respectfully checking with his boss on this, or I would get a tax attorney, and have them fight this on your behalf.
If you do then it is because you are ignorant as the actual benign nature of the ‘income’ excise tax. Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law and anyone who thinks that the IRS is there to educate you laws to the nature of their laws is simply naive.
That sounds very liberal of you. You are alone in loving the IRS.
I understand that splitting >$10K transactions as a pattern is considered circumvention of the requirement. One of those IRS red flags.
“If you do then it is because you are ignorant as the actual benign nature of the ‘income’ excise tax.”
Yes, because confiscating one’s life savings without due process is benign.
Here is what was happening: The estate tax is computed on the value of the estate PLUS gifts made during one's lifetime. So the tax is a current one. Gifts made during different time periods in the past are treated slightly differently, so identifying the 1960's is enough to identify which category of time period the gift was made.
If you're trying to say the IRS doesn't follow the law, you're wrong. The problem is that too few people understand how to read the law. And even that's no accident - learning to read law is hard, pretending that the government just makes stuff up is far easier. Now you're taking it to the next level - bragging about your ignorance and laziness. So to answer your question, yes, I read the law. Slowly, carefully, and sounding out the words with a legal dictionary in my hand, if necessary. Because that's what it takes to understand what's actually going on.
The income tax is benign when compared to what? End stage renal failure?
No, I’m trying to say that the 16th amendment was a liberty robbing power grab and is not consistent with the amendments that preceded it. The American people were sold a bill of goods and now half of our income is swallowed up by the leviathan and it we don’t pay up, we lose everything.
They make plenty of mistakes and they often choose not to apply the law and regulations fairly even though they know they will lose in court.
But for all those people who venerate every word of the Constitution as sacred scripture to be interpreted only in the manner they believe is wholly and fully consistent with the founders, IT IS THE CONSTITUTION.
The IRS hasn’t required me pay them one penny in ‘income’ tax for over 10 yrs even though I earn more than the amount the law says is not taxable, what’s not to like? And more importantly, why do they not consider the amounts I make that are over their threshold amounts as untaxable?
Are you referring to code section 861?
. I don't know what that amount was say in 1965, but if there was not a record (and outside record retention policy), how can it be enforced?
"The IRS seized this North Carolina man’s life savings."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponents Argument
The problem with the IRSs action is this imo. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention had decided not to give Congress the specific power to regulate INTRAstate banking. This is evidenced by the following excerpt from the writings of Thomas Jefferson.
”A proposition was made to them to authorize Congress to open canals, and an amendatory one to empower them to incorporate. But the whole was rejected, and one of the reasons for rejection urged in debate was, that then they would have a power to erect a bank, which would render the great cities, where there were prejudices and jealousies on the subject, adverse to the reception of the Constitution [emphasis added].” - Jeffersons Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791.
In fact, given that banks conduct business on the basis of contracts, not commerce (corrections welcome), a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congresss Commerce Clause powers do not extend to regulating contracts, regardless if the parties negotiating the contract are domiciled in different states.
” 4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract [emphases added] of indemnity against loss.” - Paul v. Virginia, 1869.
Another problem with IRSs actions concerning the citizens bank account is the IRS itself imo. More specifically, the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide these clauses from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected federal bureaucrats such as those running the EPA and IRS as examples.
In other words, Congress has a constitutional ”monopoly” on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not.
The problem is that by delegating banking powers to IRS, powers that Congress actually does not have, corrupt Congress is wrongly protecting such powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of the Constitutions Sections 1-3 referenced above.
And reason that Congress is wrongly letting federal officials outside the legislative branch steal legislative powers, including unique, 10th Amendment-protected state legislative powers to regulate banking in this case, is the following imo. Corrupt lawmakers are letting non-legislative branch federal officials steal legislative powers so that these officials can do Congresss dirty, unconstitutional legislative work for it. And by letting such officials do Congresss dirty work for it, lawmakers can keep their voting records clean.
And by keeping their voting records clean, lawmakers are able to fool low-information patriots, patriots that have never been taught about the federal governments constitutionally limited powers, into reelecting these scumbag lawmakers.
Remember in November !
When patriots elect Trump, Cruz, or whatever conservative they elect, they need to also elect a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its Section 8-limited powers to support the new president, but also protect the states from unconstitutional federal government overreach, unconstitutional IRS interference in intrastate banking in this example.
Also, consider that such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
I think the way it works is that if you deposit or withdraw $10K or more in cash, the bank must file a suspicious activities report.
If you divide those transactions into less than $10K in order to avoid the reporting requirement, it's a federal crime.
It's Drug War crap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.