Do You Have To Pay Income Taxes?
- Thread starter badbob
- Start date
Swiss Shooter
New member
I think "have to" should be defined a little clearer. I don't think there's a doubt that the income tax is illegal - another smooth move of them greedy politicians just making economic use of WWII. On the other hand, again, if you don't pay, you usually get into major trouble. So there's a "have to" as in required by law. In that sense, no, you don't have to pay income tax. It's illegal.
Then there's a "have to" as required by routine and government. (Those must have been fine days when government and law were still in agreement!) And in that term, yes, you do have to.
Still, I think it would be interesting to see what D.C. would do if everybody who knew better about the IT suddenly refused to pay it. When there are only a few people who refuse, they can easily get picked out, punished, and branded as extremists.
Then there's a "have to" as required by routine and government. (Those must have been fine days when government and law were still in agreement!) And in that term, yes, you do have to.
Still, I think it would be interesting to see what D.C. would do if everybody who knew better about the IT suddenly refused to pay it. When there are only a few people who refuse, they can easily get picked out, punished, and branded as extremists.
Double Naught Spy
New member
It is funny how folks like Al Capone who had a battery of lawyers somehow still manage to be jailed for failure to report income and pay taxes.
FirstFreedom
Moderator
folks, read johnbt's post. In it is everything you need to know, and links to every proof you need that the whole "not-required-to-pay-or-file" thing is complete bunk.
These people are just trying to SELL you their book/system/whatever - they don't care if you cool your heels in prison after you buy their book. Follow the money.
Sure, the 16th Am was not ratified properly, and so the tax is in theory "illegal" - problem is, the courts have somehow reached the conclusion that it's NOT illegal, for better or worse. So you go against that case law at your own peril. Sure, there's a 1 in a thousand chance that if you are convicted of evasion, and if you spend tens of thousands on legal fees, that you might find a judge somewhere on appeal or at the trial level who agrees that the entire IRC is illegal, and find you not guilty as a matter of law. But then there's only a 1 in a million chance that such a judge wouldn't be overruled on appeal to a higher court such as the SCOTUS. Risky business. But hey, your rearend won't get pounded quite as much in federal prison, as in state prison, and you do get 3 squares, so.....
These people are just trying to SELL you their book/system/whatever - they don't care if you cool your heels in prison after you buy their book. Follow the money.
Sure, the 16th Am was not ratified properly, and so the tax is in theory "illegal" - problem is, the courts have somehow reached the conclusion that it's NOT illegal, for better or worse. So you go against that case law at your own peril. Sure, there's a 1 in a thousand chance that if you are convicted of evasion, and if you spend tens of thousands on legal fees, that you might find a judge somewhere on appeal or at the trial level who agrees that the entire IRC is illegal, and find you not guilty as a matter of law. But then there's only a 1 in a million chance that such a judge wouldn't be overruled on appeal to a higher court such as the SCOTUS. Risky business. But hey, your rearend won't get pounded quite as much in federal prison, as in state prison, and you do get 3 squares, so.....
Gary Conner
New member
Quoted from Ausse
Ausse, you are not correct regarding "recoding states" and an IRS lien. An IRS lien CAN supercede a first lien position mortgage, as does a lien placed by a State Attorney General's office, for unpaid Real Estate taxes. If you don't believe it, explain why (1) A mortgage lender will make certain by way of a Mortgagee policy on ALL funded loans, that NO IRS liens are present on a property previous to funding a loan for a either a buyer or a person refinancing an existing Homesteaded property.
A mortgage DOES NOT have to be paid prior to the taxes being paid, and in fact, the IRS, and the County Sheriff hold auctions on the courthouse steps for enforcing judgements. Buyers are almosty always the insured mortgagee, if a lien is placed and an auction held for a property secured by a deed of trust previous to a lien judgment being enforced, and the house sold. They buy the property by paying the taxes due, and turn it over to the Real Estate section for a short sale on the balance due of the mortgage.
And if you don't believe the IRS can have a local SWAT team do that, then you don't live in Hays County, San Marcos Texas, where the incident occurred during this year.
Yes, I am aware that the IRS has their own criminal division, as I am an aquaintance of two CID employees. However, that does not change the fact that an interdepartmental agreement can be made with a local sherrif office for assistance on serving a warrant. Because it happened in Hays County Texas. I know, because a lot of us in Hays County have have been joking about the IRS using a SWAT team to serve a warrant on an accountant, as it seems to be a little bit of overkill.
Anyway, an IRS lien or a local tax authority supercedes a mortgagee's deed of trust in Texas. And we in Texas record our deeds of trust.
Ausse, you are not correct regarding "recoding states" and an IRS lien. An IRS lien CAN supercede a first lien position mortgage, as does a lien placed by a State Attorney General's office, for unpaid Real Estate taxes. If you don't believe it, explain why (1) A mortgage lender will make certain by way of a Mortgagee policy on ALL funded loans, that NO IRS liens are present on a property previous to funding a loan for a either a buyer or a person refinancing an existing Homesteaded property.
A mortgage DOES NOT have to be paid prior to the taxes being paid, and in fact, the IRS, and the County Sheriff hold auctions on the courthouse steps for enforcing judgements. Buyers are almosty always the insured mortgagee, if a lien is placed and an auction held for a property secured by a deed of trust previous to a lien judgment being enforced, and the house sold. They buy the property by paying the taxes due, and turn it over to the Real Estate section for a short sale on the balance due of the mortgage.
And if you don't believe the IRS can have a local SWAT team do that, then you don't live in Hays County, San Marcos Texas, where the incident occurred during this year.
Yes, I am aware that the IRS has their own criminal division, as I am an aquaintance of two CID employees. However, that does not change the fact that an interdepartmental agreement can be made with a local sherrif office for assistance on serving a warrant. Because it happened in Hays County Texas. I know, because a lot of us in Hays County have have been joking about the IRS using a SWAT team to serve a warrant on an accountant, as it seems to be a little bit of overkill.
Anyway, an IRS lien or a local tax authority supercedes a mortgagee's deed of trust in Texas. And we in Texas record our deeds of trust.
mr kablammo
New member
What does the mouth of the horse have to say?
http://www.irs.gov/compliance/enforcement/article/0,,id=106377,00.html
http://www.irs.gov/compliance/enforcement/article/0,,id=106377,00.html
Double Naught Spy
New member
Oh come on, First Freedom, you don't want this to spin out of control into how the courts holding federal tax evasion hearings have no jurisdiction if they have gold fringed flags because such flags indicate the court is an Admiralty Court or a court of Martial Law?
How about the one that since the US never actually achieved independence from England, the US can't collect taxes from British citizens?
How about that since the Constitution says that the government can only coin money that printed money is not coined and hence no taxes applicable for the printed parchment? In short, printed Federal Reserve notes (dollar bills) are not money...is the argument.
Or how about that the courts rely on the prosecution of the ill informed and the well informed are not prosecuted?
Never mind that like all the other claims, no court has ever held up any of these excuses for not paying taxes!
This sort of all reminds me of the Republic of Texas guys back in 1997 who claimed Texas was its own nation and not subject to US law and declared themselves as leaders of the state as a country...the Republic of Texas. Law enforcement shot and killed one and 5 were indicted on various charges.
There are crazy people out there.
How about the one that since the US never actually achieved independence from England, the US can't collect taxes from British citizens?
How about that since the Constitution says that the government can only coin money that printed money is not coined and hence no taxes applicable for the printed parchment? In short, printed Federal Reserve notes (dollar bills) are not money...is the argument.
Or how about that the courts rely on the prosecution of the ill informed and the well informed are not prosecuted?
Never mind that like all the other claims, no court has ever held up any of these excuses for not paying taxes!
This sort of all reminds me of the Republic of Texas guys back in 1997 who claimed Texas was its own nation and not subject to US law and declared themselves as leaders of the state as a country...the Republic of Texas. Law enforcement shot and killed one and 5 were indicted on various charges.
There are crazy people out there.
Yes, you do. End of Discussion.
They're STILL out there!
Every now and then I run into one of those cretins, spouting off about how Texas "reserved the right" to again become an independent nation when it (re)joined the US; the fools babbling about how it is STILL a "republic" are even worse.
It WAS an independent nation - so what? Hawaii was first and for a lot longer period of time.
Texas was only briefly independent. It soon was admitted as a state, seceded to become a Confederate state and then rejoined the US. In short, it renounced its sovereignty on three different occasions. Doesn't sound too "independent" to me.
Every now and then I run into one of those cretins, spouting off about how Texas "reserved the right" to again become an independent nation when it (re)joined the US; the fools babbling about how it is STILL a "republic" are even worse.
It WAS an independent nation - so what? Hawaii was first and for a lot longer period of time.
Texas was only briefly independent. It soon was admitted as a state, seceded to become a Confederate state and then rejoined the US. In short, it renounced its sovereignty on three different occasions. Doesn't sound too "independent" to me.
Gary Conner
New member
The President of the Republic, President Clarendon is still officed over in Huntsville, along with his cabinet. So till he gets out, I guess we'll have to accept Austin as the Capitol of the State instead of the official Double Wide Trailer out in the Davis Mountains.
Wildalaska
Moderator
Ya think?
WildiammyownmilitiaAlaska