The Alleged Law Requiring Payment of Income Tax

[Zenman]

Don't know if this has been covered here, but, below, allegedly, is the law that requires US citizens to pay federal income tax (according to a poster on my forum):

Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, when a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice and demand from the Secretary, pay such tax to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed, and shall pay such tax at the time and place fixed for filing the return (determined without regard to any extension of time for filing the return).
United States Code, Title 26; Section 6151

He adds these reinforcements:

There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every individual (other than a surviving spouse as defined in section 2 (a) or the head of a household as defined in section 2 (b)) who is not a married individual (as defined in section 7703) a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
United States Code: TITLE 26 Subtitle A CHAPTER 1 Subchapter A PART I § 1 (C)

There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every married individual (as defined in section 7703) who does not make a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013, a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
United States Code: TITLE 26 Subtitle A CHAPTER 1 Subchapter A PART I § 1 (d)

And, finally, these, which he says apply more specifically to Ed Brown's situation:

Impose: to lay on or set as something to be borne, endured, obeyed, fulfilled, paid, etc.: to impose taxes.
impose. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. dictionary.reference.com/browse/impose (accessed: August 04, 2007).

Impose: To establish or apply as compulsory; levy: impose a tax.
impose. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. dictionary.reference.com/browse/impose (accessed: August 04, 2007).

In discussing section 6151, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals stated "when a tax return is required to be filed, the person so required 'shall' pay such taxes to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed at the fixed time and place. The sections of the Internal Revenue Code imposed a duty on Drefke to file tax returns and pay the . . . tax, a duty which he chose to ignore."
United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8 th Cir. 1983).

My eyeballs tend to cross when I start reading this type of stuff, but it does sound like it pertains to tax on "income", and it does suggest that it's not "voluntary".

Comments?

[penguins4me]

My eyeballs tend to cross when I start reading this type of stuff, but it does sound like it pertains to tax on "income", and it does suggest that it's not "voluntary".

You could just cut to the chase and realize that taxation is theft upon threat of death. I object to my stolen money being used for:

* subsidizing offices where babies are murdered (the "choice" was made when intercourse was had)
* paying people not to work and/or for single mothers to make babies
* mandating a state religion: atheism
* using "federal funding" to encourage "Peace Officers" to become thugs who terrorize peaceable folk over non-crimes
* funding gov't departments whose sole job is to harrass and imprison minorities (of both racial and vocational types)

... among other things. I also object to it being stolen from me in the first place.

[Jim Johnson]

Don't know if this has been covered here, but, below, allegedly, is the law that requires US citizens to pay federal income tax (according to a poster on my forum):

Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, when a return of tax is required under this title or regulations, the person required to make such return shall, without assessment or notice and demand from the Secretary, pay such tax to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed, and shall pay such tax at the time and place fixed for filing the return (determined without regard to any extension of time for filing the return).
United States Code, Title 26; Section 6151

He adds these reinforcements:

There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every individual (other than a surviving spouse as defined in section 2 (a) or the head of a household as defined in section 2 (b)) who is not a married individual (as defined in section 7703) a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
United States Code: TITLE 26 Subtitle A CHAPTER 1 Subchapter A PART I § 1 (C)

There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every married individual (as defined in section 7703) who does not make a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013, a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
United States Code: TITLE 26 Subtitle A CHAPTER 1 Subchapter A PART I § 1 (d)

And, finally, these, which he says apply more specifically to Ed Brown's situation:

Impose: to lay on or set as something to be borne, endured, obeyed, fulfilled, paid, etc.: to impose taxes.
impose. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. dictionary.reference.com/browse/impose (accessed: August 04, 2007).

Impose: To establish or apply as compulsory; levy: impose a tax.
impose. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. dictionary.reference.com/browse/impose (accessed: August 04, 2007).

In discussing section 6151, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals stated "when a tax return is required to be filed, the person so required 'shall' pay such taxes to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed at the fixed time and place. The sections of the Internal Revenue Code imposed a duty on Drefke to file tax returns and pay the . . . tax, a duty which he chose to ignore."
United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8 th Cir. 1983).

My eyeballs tend to cross when I start reading this type of stuff, but it does sound like it pertains to tax on "income", and it does suggest that it's not "voluntary".

Comments?

Look what you just said, "sound like", "suggest", "when a tax return is required"...where is the "you must"?   

[Zenman]

You could just cut to the chase and realize that taxation is theft upon threat of death.

I do realize that.

I was looking for some ideas to counter the argument and citations presented. Actually, I was hoping there was in fact no law that could be presented requiring payment of income taxes. It would be a nice basis, for example, for a massive boycott.

[Zenman]

Look what you just said, "sound like", "suggest", "when a tax return is required"...where is the "you must"

Good point. Thank you.

[error]

Next, go find out what the "law" defines "taxable income" as. After all, that's what individuals must pay tax on, according to 26 USC 1. Good luck.

Personally I'm not terribly interested in whether you find it or not. The income tax is still immoral and wrong. It amounts to little more than institutionalized slavery. You can see the masters wearing their Armani suits, smoking their Cuban cigars and globetrotting on a whim to attend their own private gatherings. You can see their overseers, who walk among you and ask you to choose every few years to be overseen by them instead of some other guy who wants to be the overseer. And you can see the slave drivers wearing their Kevlar vests, 5.11 pants and pistols in tactical holsters strapped to their thighs.

I am a free man and will never return willingly to the yoke, no matter how many words the masters and their overseers write down, or how many times the slave-drivers shoot their shotguns, their pistols and their Tasers.

[LordBaltimore]

Next, go find out what the "law" defines "taxable income" as. After all, that's what individuals must pay tax on, according to 26 USC 1. Good luck.

Sections 63 and 61.

Arguing morality rather than "there is no law" is the only way to go.  Civil disobedience has power, the Ed Brown "just show me the law and I'll cut the IRS a check today" does not.

[EthanAllen]

Next, go find out what the "law" defines "taxable income" as. After all, that's what individuals must pay tax on, according to 26 USC 1. Good luck.

Sections 63 and 61.

Arguing morality rather than "there is no law" is the only way to go.  Civil disobedience has power, the Ed Brown "just show me the law and I'll cut the IRS a check today" does not.

That is the difference between a tax protester (it is immoral) and a tax denier (there is no law but if there were I would pay).

[Zenman]

Good info. Thanks.

I also possess the libertarian defect so I of course believe that taxation is theft whether or not a law exists. Still, it would be nice to find out conclusively at some point that income taxation is not only immoral, but illegal as well. 

[mackler]

It seems to me, if you're looking for a way to win in court, it would make sense to use the strategy that Tommy Cryer used.  He was charged with willful failure to file.  The question of "what is the law" did not even come up.  The judge told the jury what the law is, and you know what that is.

The only issue for the jury is his case was the defendant's intent.  Did he really believe that the law does not require him to file.  In court, he never said "the law does not require me to file an income tax return."  He said "after much research, I do not believe the law requires me to file." 

That said, I agree that taxation is immoral, and finding the law that makes us all liable wouldn't change that.

[Jim Johnson]

Can we now sue all of our former employers for moneys they withweld from us with out proper justification.
If any random person presented my employer with a bill for moneys due, is my employer required to withhold from my pay that amount of money and then present that money to the random person?

[mackler]

Can we now sue all of our former employers for moneys they withheld from us with out proper justification.

Did you fill out a W-4 manifesting your assent to your employer withholding?

[penguins4me]

Can we now sue all of our former employers for moneys they withheld from us with out proper justification.

Did you fill out a W-4 manifesting your assent to your employer withholding?

How about fraud, for maintaining something to be mandatory which is not? :P

[mackler]

Can we now sue all of our former employers for moneys they withheld from us with out proper justification.

Did you fill out a W-4 manifesting your assent to your employer withholding?

How about fraud, for maintaining something to be mandatory which is not?

"You must work here!  It's mandatory!"  Courts tend not to be sympathetic to people who are so dumb as to not realize they have a choice of employers.

[LordBaltimore]

Signing a W-4 isn't mandatory.  But if you don't do it, the employer has to withhold taxes from your check at the maximum possible rate...