Democrats TALK Taxes, Don't PAY Them

Here's the article on the 2,000 Obama staffers and others, overhwelmingly Democrats, who have been dodging their personal income taxes:

cnbc.com/id/40215318

Reminds me of John Kerry, docking his new $7,000,000 yacht in Rhode Island so he can avoid Massachusetts taxes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well it appears your name is a bit of a misnomer, because it is clear by this post that you are not in any way a renaissance man.

How do you know all of those tax deliquent government workers are Democrats? Per the article you reference, retired US military constitutes the largest group of tax deliquents.

"The biggest group, though, is retired military personnel. That group owed more than $1.5 billion dollars." - Eamon Jeavers, CNBC

And the US military is hardly a bastion of liberalism. The bottom line is that this has nothing to do with President Obama and the Democrats. This is an issue that transends political party.

How many government workers under George II were deliquent? My bet is that you would find a similar number of tax deliquent federal workers no matter what party controls the presidency or congress.

Additionally, taxes are now lower than they have been in 60 years. When President Obama and Democrats took control of government last year, they passed on an additional 300 billion in tax cuts....more than even under George II and his merry band of Republicans.

So mr. Renassianceman, you need to get your facts straight and tell the truth...the whole truth and just not mimic stuff you hear on fox news or from limbaugh, levin, et al.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wow, imagine all the taxes corporations are avoiding with all their lawyers to help them.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As has been pointed out, the article does not say anywhere these are Democrats.

Of course, it's possible to argue a majority of people that work at places like the Post Office are Democrats, but their ideology is hardly the key factor in their failure to pay up. We do have several recent high-profile appointees who were Dems and didn't pay (Daschle's nomination was derailed for such an event) And of course, the whole Rangle issue that is unfolding. But again, this is an issue of privilege, I believe. When I covered my legislature, I tracked down how many owed taxes. Both parties had plenty of members.

 

The actual fact that this thread should say to anyone is that GOVERNMENT workers don't pay taxes. They know that the IRS isn't going to come after them. They also are privy to the secret that paying Income taxes is VOLUNTARY, and have the resources and connections should they ever have to prove this in a court of law. But it is moot, because the IRS KNOW that they are well informed and are privy to this secret, and so don't usually bother them. The only time they will pay, is if the spot light is shined on them. They will pay if they fear that press will be given to them and the ire of the public will be raised and it will affect their career. Otherwise, the IRS doesn't even see section "A" in their handbook. lol
Ex IRS agent tells it like it is
Ex IRS agent tells it like it is part2
Aaron Russo talks with IRS Commissioner Sheldon Cohen
Since these videos have been made, Aaron Russon has been killed in the same manner that Jack Ruby died, and Sherry Jackson has now grown seriously ill in prison. Though she was perfectly healthy and only sentenced to a four year sentence, one has doubts she will come out of prison alive.

 

Paying taxes is not voluntary.

 

How do you know that the percentage of people deliquent in paying taxes is higher in government occupations? I have not seen any evidence to support that contention.

I would expect to see similar tax deliquencies in government and non government employees. And I have yet to see any evidence to the contrary. Before we go out on a witch hunt, let's make sure we have a witch problem.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Show me the law. . . .

 

That is a valid point. I stand corrected. Perhaps it just seems as though this is the case since the light of public scrutiny is so often pointed in their direction. So often I have wanted data on such things, but, you know, it is often difficult to obtain such things.

I guess a more accurate comparison would be made to say. . . other celebrities; for instance, movie stars, musicians, and sports stars. It does seem to me that the instances of tax evasion for politicians are MUCH higher than for other figures in the public eye. Does this not seem to you to be the case? And for this, then, it is my hypothesis, that they shrink from volunteering their fair share, because they not only know the nature of the law, but also know they have inside connections to the enforcement mechanisms of the IRS. They know that the only way the heavy hand of the IRS is going to come down upon them (at least at the federal level) is if they are exposed by the press or make the wrong enemy.

 

I have long held everyone should pay their taxes. But people should not live in fear of the tax man either. Our tax code is too complex. It should be much more simple. But then, what would all the tax accountants and tax lawyers do for a living?

 

I looked this up once, and I found the law after about half an hour. Basically, Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code clearly contains language setting up the tax and its rates. Section 6012 requires that all individuals named in Section 1 file returns. Section 6151 of the Code specifically requires those who file returns to send payment with those tax returns and provides a basis for criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment, if taxes are not paid.

6012(a)(1) says, in part:

6151(a) says:

The courts have historically upheld these legal requirements, as evidenced by hundreds of reported cases involving tax protestors, for example,

United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978 (1983)
United States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540 (1986)
United States v. Richards, 723 F.2d 646 (1983)

At the very least, you have to admit, if it is voluntary, it's the kind of "volunteering" where those who fail to volunteer are, in effect, "volunteering" to go to prison if caught.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

All of those are lower court verdicts. None of them speak to the constitution. Where in the constitution does it give the federal government the right to levy a direct apportioned tax upon a persons earned income?

 

Use taxes, exercise taxes, capitol gains taxes, tariffs, sales tax, etc. Sure, I have no problem paying the taxes that the Constitution authorizes. Do you have ANY idea how many other types of taxes there are besides the income tax? The income tax is a form of class warfare waged by the ruling elites upon the lower, middle, and upper classes. . . and the REALLY pathetic thing? Most of the University educated upper middle class and upper class shills defend it. It's unconstitutional, and not even to their advantage. It's tearing this nation apart. So why? :shrug:

There was a study done during the Reagan administration that determined that income tax was not necessary for the operation of the government. In effect in only keeps afloat the criminal mafia that "loans" the government money that the constitution says by right, the "people" (the Treasury Department) should be issuing themselves.

 

26 U.S.C. § 1
There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every individual . . . who is not a married individual a tax determined in accordance with the following table:

...

 

Lastly, you looked it up in the IRS code. And the code is only effective against those who file? One thing that is sure, it IS voluntary only to file, maybe not to pay, but to file. This has been so ruled, time and time again. The fifth amendment clearly states, no one needs to admit any evidence that incriminates themselves. So you need only pay SOMETHING. That is all. If the government has evidence that it is not enough, it is THEIR burden of proof to take you to court to prove it, but YOU are not required to file. THAT is the nasty little secret they don't want anyone to know. And that sirs, IS a fact.

 

Income taxes are not apportioned, which means evenly divided among the States or people. To the extent Congress lacked the power the tax incomes based on the Constitution's permitting only direct, apportioned taxes, the 16th amendment changed that:

If nothing else, that seems pretty clear. However "direct" taxes may be defined for constitutional purposes, and whatever the rule is for other sorts of direct taxes, Congress can now impose an income tax without apportionment among the states.

The cases I cited were all appellate courts. They were only "lower" courts in relation to the Supreme Court itself, but they are the first rung below that, and you can find them for every circuit in the U.S. What you can't find is any federal court agreeing that the taxes are voluntary.

Meanwhile, it's clear why the Supreme Court would never weigh in on this issue. You are right that the Supreme court has never handled a case like this, because there is no split—no contention—among the circuits. The Supreme Court tends to address issues where the lower courts disagree, to solve "splits" among the circuits. Here, every court agrees on the law, so the Supreme Court doesn't need to address this issue simply to say "yes, all you thousands of judges are right in your unanimous agreement."

What tax protesters get wrong is that the IRS says it relies on "voluntary compliance", but they don't mean by that that it is legal to refuse to pay. What they mean is that they do not (currently) track it, so if you stop paying, they would not know unless they find a reason to audit you or otherwise investigate. The duty to pay exists, but the method they use to get your payment is, in the first instance, your choosing to comply with the law. You can choose not to comply and you might get away with it, but if cause you cannot use that as a legal defense.

"Voluntary compliance" is also used to mean that they rely on you to be accurate in your return, and again they'd never know unless they find a reason to audit you or otherwise investigate. The word "voluntary" has bee spun out of its context.

There is a curious criminal law distinction that favors your side: that in order to be subject to criminal penalties the IRS does generally have to show that you knew you were breaking the law. In some rare cases, courts have acquitted when the IRS failed to do that, but that doesn't prove your side right...If I kill someone thinking he's a vampire and I am defending myself, I will be acquitted for killing in self-defense, but that doesn't make my victim a vampire. What it does show is that I must have believed that he was, and that my life was in danger. At the same time, even when the IRS loses the criminal trial, they still always win the civil trial (where that "good faith belief" rule does not apply) at which they force you to pay the taxes and impose civil penalties for late payment.

So best case the protester wins (though usually not) the criminal case, but the IRS still takes a large portion of everything he owns. (see http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/belief.htm) So you still have to pay them, they just may not slap you in jail , maybe, if the jury likes you at your criminal trial.

Your chance to realistically challenge the income tax came when the 16th amendment was being ratified, and that argument failed back then. You re free to petition for a repeal of the amendment, but until then it's irresponsible to tell people taxes are voluntary, because the courts and the government disagree.

 

Look again, as your facts are wrong. The code in Section 6012(a), quoted in part above, says that everyone who has an income covered in subtitle A (including Section 1 of the tax code) *shall* file (meaning "is required to file"). They do have the burden of proving your return is wrong, but not every document you produce is privileged under the 5th amendment. What they can't do is compel you to stand up in court and testify against yourself. Arguably, they cannot force you to report illegaly sourced income (and yet gangsters go to jail for that all the time), but it is not incriminating for you to report your actual income accurately. The fifth amendment doesn't cover accurate returns at all (which the government can compel) and it certainly doesn't immunize you from filing false documents or from having them used against you. That's a fact.

The Supreme Court even weighed in on that one a long time ago in U.S. v. Sullivan (discussed by the IRS here: http://www.irs.gov/taxpros/article/0,,id=159932,00.html#_Toc224375596), saying that a taxpayer “could not draw a conjurer’s circle around the whole matter by his own declaration that to write any word upon the government blank would bring him into danger of the law.”

I know the law is complex, but imagine that your side were right...Congress agrees with me, surely, so why would they not amend the Code to do what I am showing you it already does? To maintain some fiction that they never overstepped their powers? So that, if the tax protesters were ever proven right, they could say "we knew that the whole time which is why the code makes it voluntary?"

Why even bother with the 16th amendment? Everyone knew what it was for, and who even needs it if come taxes are voluntary? Congress can ask for any kind of voluntary contribution it likes.

I know you are not susceptible of being convinced, but tax protester arguments are not legally very strong imo. (And in the opinion of courts everywhere.)

Edit: We are officially way off topic, and in my opinion tax protesters are never likely to be convinced of the wrongness of their arguments, so let me refer you here:

http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/IncomeTax.htm

and take my leave. From that site:

 

I thought employees would pay their taxes via withholding in their pay checks. I guess it is part time employees with self employment income or employees and pensioners with significant investment income that account for the numbers.

From the article:
The US Postal Service, where hundreds of thousands of employees owed a total of more than $283 million, said the report.

Also high on the list is the Department of Veterans Affairs, where employees had more than $156 million in back taxes.

The biggest group, though, is retired military personnel. That group owed more than $1.5 billion dollars.

 

It could be that they are married and their spouses engaged in businesses that failed. So they could wind up ownig payroll taxes, etc for their employees. The article did not specify exactly what kind of tax was owed.

 

That is a very useful point of view, and I do agree with it fully. The reality of our corrupt system is after all, a reality. One must not deny what is going to happen if one does not in fact act in accordance with what one believes is the truth. But, then again, if one KNOWS what the truth is, and refuses to submit to the criminal elites. . . if one finds a way to circumvent their criminality, and not feed the system which has corrupted and fed the deaths of millions. . . one can be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

My friend stated just recently. . . "No slave in their right mind trusts their overseers."
Just a few FACTS to digest.

In essence, what this all means, is that when the original legislators first past the 16th amendment, the only thing that was meant to be taxed was the amount of money a family brought in that was not necessary to the running of the household. Any amount of money that was a gain over the exchange in the amount of labor a person did, or the time that they expended on their trade was liable to taxation. Once expenses and all other sundries were covered, gains as it were, these were what was meant to be taxed.
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/33/130/The_Power_to_Impose_Income_Taxes.html