The criminals have arrested another one of us - Charles Conces

[coffeeseven]

MICHIGAN TAX SCAM PROMOTER ARRESTED FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TAX
THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 2007
WWW.USDOJ.GOV

MICHIGAN TAX SCAM PROMOTER ARRESTED FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT

Self-Styled "Lawman" Surrenders to the U.S. Marshals

WASHINGTON - U.S. Marshals arrested Charles Conces of Battle Creek,
Mich., earlier today, the Justice Department has announced. The
arrest resulted from a federal judge's order on the Feb. 23, 2007,
finding Conces in civil contempt of court for failing to obey a court
order entered on February 8.

The February 8 order compelled Conces to disclose to the government
the identities of certain persons for whom he drafted or provided
advice regarding federal income taxes, the identities of the persons
who are responsible for his Web site, and all documents that he
drafted or assisted in drafting for these persons no later than
February 16. Conces refused to disclose the identities and documents
as ordered by the court.

On February 23, the court held Conces in civil contempt and ordered
him to report to the U.S. Marshal no later than noon on March 1,
2007. Conces reported to the U.S. Marshals today, and was taken into
custody. According to the court's February 23 order, Mr. Conces will
remain in the custody of the U.S. Marshals until he complies with the
order to disclose these identities and documents.

In April 2006, the court permanently enjoined Conces and his
organization, the National Lawman Committee for the Public Interest,
from preparing tax returns for others and promoting several tax fraud
schemes. The court had concluded that Conces promoted "tax evasion < /SPAN>
by creating and selling materials designed to obstruct the
administration of the income tax laws." A copy of the April
injunction order entered against Conces is available at
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv06243.htm.

"The Justice Department is not only committed to shutting
down the tax scams that cheat the federal treasury and the taxpayers
who pay into it, but also ensuring that such tax scams do not
resurface later," said Eileen J. O'Connor, Assistant Attorney General
f or the Justice Department's Tax Division. "Tax scam promoters who
disobey court orders and refuse to comply with established court
procedures risk severe consequences."
< BR>The Justice Department has obtained injunctions against more
than 225 tax fraud promoters and tax preparers since 2001. More
information about the Justice Department's efforts against tax scam
promoters can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/taxpress2006.htm.
Information about the Justice Department's Tax Division can be found
at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax.

[cyberdoo78]

You the interesting thing about these so called 'tax scams' is the number of them. Why would so many people try to get out of paying their fair share of taxes?

Here's a thought, perhaps stealing 50 percent of an individuals labor has made people decide they don't want to pay for government anymore. Perhaps people are tired of government over stepping their legal bounds. Perhaps if the government returned to its rightful place as the servants of the people and stopped trying to be their masters, people would more then happily pay their fair share of taxes.

However until the government returns to its rightful place as servant to all the people, the people will eventually stop paying the government, forcing it to either return to its place or take from the people by force.

Probably the latter.

[LordBaltimore]

Here's a thought, perhaps stealing 50 percent of an individuals labor has made people decide they don't want to pay for government anymore.

The max tax bracket is 35%.  Considering it used to be a higher, you can't really say that people have hit their breaking point because taxes have gotten progressively bigger.  Top tax bracket in various years:

1918  77%
1936  79%
1945  94%
1963  91%
1980  70%
2000  39.6%
2007  35%

But no one actually pays the top tax rate on all of their income. The average federal income tax paid in the US is 9.7%.  Even if you add together all income taxes, social security taxes, corporate and excise taxes together, the average taxpayers loses 20% to all of these taxes.

Most people who buy into the tax scam garbage are in the lower income range and pay an average of 11% - 15% in combined taxes or less.  They aren't mad at the combined rates being too high.  Most are financially struggling and their protest is out of desperation. 

[d_goddard]

I would say the Federal Government has arrested an individual who has probably not directly harming anyone.
I don't see enough information in the article to judge whether Mr. Conces had intentionally enacted any fraud on his customers.

I see no reason why they should give a fuck who his webmaster is -- do they want to know whether he goes to Staples or a local print shop for his letterhead, too? That's the bit that makes me smell a rat.

[maineiac]

Here's a thought, perhaps stealing 50 percent of an individuals labor has made people decide they don't want to pay for government anymore.

The max tax bracket is 35%.  Considering it used to be a higher, you can't really say that people have hit their breaking point because taxes have gotten progressively bigger.  Top tax bracket in various years:

1918  77%
1936  79%
1945  94%
1963  91%
1980  70%
2000  39.6%
2007  35%

But no one actually pays the top tax rate on all of their income. The average federal income tax paid in the US is 9.7%.  Even if you add together all income taxes, social security taxes, corporate and excise taxes together, the average taxpayers loses 20% to all of these taxes.

Most people who buy into the tax scam garbage are in the lower income range and pay an average of 11% - 15% in combined taxes or less.  They aren't mad at the combined rates being too high.  Most are financially struggling and their protest is out of desperation. 

What motivates these types of government apologists? Are they mercenary disinformationists or merely puerile trolls?

Whatever the case, richie's pitifully erroneous attempt to mininimalize the extent of confiscatory government in no way refutes the fact that coercive collectivism remains nothing more than "officially" sanctioned theft.

I do find solace in the notion that eternity holds an especially warm place for the plague on humanity whom are the control freaks. 

[KBCraig]

Here's a thought, perhaps stealing 50 percent of an individuals labor has made people decide they don't want to pay for government anymore.

The max tax bracket is 35%.  Considering it used to be a higher, you can't really say that people have hit their breaking point because taxes have gotten progressively bigger.

You can't use the tax rate to compare the percentage of income that is actually paid. There are many other factors, such as deductions, exemptions and exclusions, which also changed when the rates were changed.

Just as was predicted by the Laffer Curve, cutting the rate increased the revenue collected. People whose tax rate had been 70% during the Carter years, paid considerably more taxes after the Reagan tax "cuts" that lowered the tax rates.

And don't forget, income tax is not the only federal tax. There are gasoline taxes, excise taxes on various goods, import tariffs, corporate taxes that are passed on to consumers, artificial prices due to federal subsidies and protectionism, etc.

To calculate "true taxes", you have to get into hidden effects of taxation, and estimate how people's bottom line is affected by the taxes they pay, plus the extra amount they pay due to meddling in the marketplace.

[Pat McCotter]

Just as was predicted by the Laffer Curve, cutting the rate increased the revenue collected. People whose tax rate had been 70% during the Carter years, paid considerably more taxes after the Reagan tax "cuts" that lowered the tax rates.

Reagan's "tax cuts" did not increase revenues - the advent of the personal computer had a big effect on business productivity.

And the advent of the internet helped revenues during Clinton's presidency.

[LordBaltimore]

What motivates these types of government apologists? Are they mercenary disinformationists or merely puerile trolls?

Whatever the case, richie's pitifully erroneous attempt to mininimalize the extent of confiscatory government in no way refutes the fact that coercive collectivism remains nothing more than "officially" sanctioned theft.

I do find solace in the notion that eternity holds an especially warm place for the plague on humanity whom are the control freaks. 

Are you incapable of holding an adult conversation without resorting to childish name calling?

I think it's important to fight real battles, not mythical shadows.  Posting erroneous information about tax rates and the motivation behind who chooses to fight and who doesn't, just makes it easier for the media and the pundits to discredit and belittle the point being made.

There are many reasons for the proliferation of tax scams in recent years:

1) The internet makes it easier to mass market in recent years;

2) the availability of online searchable tax codes makes it easier for lawyer wannabes to "search" laws, rather than read and understand them in contex;

3) There's a lot of money to be made by paytriots who sell useless junk;

4) Tax shelters being used by the super-rich are getting a lot of press, which pisses off the not-super-rich who want to buy a nice shelter too;

5) Up until five years ago or so, the IRS was completely ignoring the scammers; and

6) People are pissed at the government for a variety of reasons (war in Iraq, the economy, rampant corruption stories out of DC, loss of civil liberties following 911) and the only ways they can see to lash out are by voting (which is why the Democrats had such a good year) and by stopping the money that feeds the beast.

If people would simply stop paying taxes without all the silly "show me the law" excuses, then things might change.  As long as they buy scams instead, the only change that will occur is that a number of the louder mouths will end up in prison.

[Dreepa]

Just as was predicted by the Laffer Curve, cutting the rate increased the revenue collected. People whose tax rate had been 70% during the Carter years, paid considerably more taxes after the Reagan tax "cuts" that lowered the tax rates.

Reagan's "tax cuts" did not increase revenues - the advent of the personal computer had a big effect on business productivity.

And the advent of the internet helped revenues during Clinton's presidency.

Pat... you didn't give credit to Al Gore when you mentioned the internet!...

[maineiac]

What motivates these types of government apologists? Are they mercenary disinformationists or merely puerile trolls?

Whatever the case, richie's pitifully erroneous attempt to mininimalize the extent of confiscatory government in no way refutes the fact that coercive collectivism remains nothing more than "officially" sanctioned theft.

I do find solace in the notion that eternity holds an especially warm place for the plague on humanity whom are the control freaks. 

Are you incapable of holding an adult conversation without resorting to childish name calling?

I think it's important to fight real battles, not mythical shadows.  Posting erroneous information about tax rates and the motivation behind who chooses to fight and who doesn't, just makes it easier for the media and the pundits to discredit and belittle the point being made.

There are many reasons for the proliferation of tax scams in recent years:

1) The internet makes it easier to mass market in recent years;

2) the availability of online searchable tax codes makes it easier for lawyer wannabes to "search" laws, rather than read and understand them in contex;

3) There's a lot of money to be made by paytriots who sell useless junk;

4) Tax shelters being used by the super-rich are getting a lot of press, which pisses off the not-super-rich who want to buy a nice shelter too;

5) Up until five years ago or so, the IRS was completely ignoring the scammers; and

6) People are pissed at the government for a variety of reasons (war in Iraq, the economy, rampant corruption stories out of DC, loss of civil liberties following 911) and the only ways they can see to lash out are by voting (which is why the Democrats had such a good year) and by stopping the money that feeds the beast.

If people would simply stop paying taxes without all the silly "show me the law" excuses, then things might change.  As long as they buy scams instead, the only change that will occur is that a number of the louder mouths will end up in prison.

OK. I'm convinced. You're a mercenary disinformationist.

[LordBaltimore]

OK. I'm convinced. You're a mercenary disinformationist.

Look out.  My black helicopters are over your home right now...

[Atlas]

OK. I'm convinced. You're a mercenary disinformationist.

Look out.  My black helicopters are over your home right now...

So, where do you stand?

[LordBaltimore]

So, where do you stand?

The income tax is an immoral law thaht should be eliminated asap.  To do that, there has to be critical mass.  As long as paytriot promoters keep selling junk that is easily defeated in court, there will be no critical mass of people who just say no.

[Atlas]

That's why the FSP is the only hope for a better America

[KurtDaBear]

Here's a thought, perhaps stealing 50 percent of an individuals labor has made people decide they don't want to pay for government anymore.

The max tax bracket is 35%.  Considering it used to be a higher, you can't really say that people have hit their breaking point because taxes have gotten progressively bigger.  Top tax bracket in various years:

1918  77%
1936  79%
1945  94%
1963  91%
1980  70%
2000  39.6%
2007  35%

But no one actually pays the top tax rate on all of their income. The average federal income tax paid in the US is 9.7%.  Even if you add together all income taxes, social security taxes, corporate and excise taxes together, the average taxpayers loses 20% to all of these taxes.

Percentages do not tell the whole story of a tax, particularly the federal income tax.  When originally passed (if indeed it truly was), the tax was another of those fabled "tax-the-rich" schemes.  It only applied to persons making more than $10,000 a year, who were very few then.

In the 1970's, an elderly proofreader who worked for a paper I managed told me that when he began working in the 1920's, not a single deduction was taken from his check because he made less than $10,000 and Socialist Security had not started yet.  Even in the 1930's, he only had 1 per cent taken from his check for SS, as that was the starting rate for that little Ponzi scheme, Medicare hadn't been invented yet, and Michigan didn't have a state income tax then.

But income tax brackets lacked an inflation adjustment, so "bracket creep" eventually  made the entire working population of the country eligible for the privilege of paying this tax.  (It wouldn't be till Ronald Reagan that tax brackets were finally made adjustable for inflation.)

Also, don't lose track of the fact that the tax rate at the margin is what affects participation, so in a system where the more you make, the more they take, there is a chilling effect on work, as you progress from keeping nearly 90 per cent of your first dollar to keeping 50 per cent or less of your last dollar.

In Calif., the upper state income tax rate is 11 per cent.  Add to that the upper fed rate of 35 per cent, plus 8.65 for social security and medicare, plus 1.6 per cent state disability tax, and you have a top tax rate of more than 55% which applies to any check that triggers the upper deduction limits regardless of your average weekly income or annual earnings.  (You might get some back later, but they have it for now.)

Then with the 44 per cent of your check that you managed to make it home with, you have the privilege of buying merchandise that carries an average sales tax rate of 8.25 per cent--but don't spend it all because even with tight limits on property tax rates, you still need to pay 1 per cent of your home's value in property taxes each year.  Our city also has a 2 per cent utility tax.  Let's not forget $4 per trip tolls on area bridges and 57-cent a gallon gasoline taxes.

But I'm a grouchy old curmudgeon and tightwad.  I once was a cheerful young person such as yourself who paid his taxes with a smile, knowing it was all going for good causes.  Of course, that's when I was 14 years old , mowed lawns for a "living," and was paid in cash on the spot.