Posted on 04/13/2005 10:45:43 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952
Austinite earned $2 million, said he owed zero, indictment says.
By Steven Kreytak
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Steven D. Shanklin of Austin earned $876,398 in 1998 and filed a tax return claiming he owed none of it to Uncle Sam, according to a federal indictment.
The Cisco Systems Sales and Services Inc. employee made $770,504 in 1999 and $681,955 in 2000 and didn't file a federal tax return in either year, the indictment says.
Shanklin, 48, wrote in a letter attached to his 1998 return that he knew of "no section of the Internal Revenue Code that . . . establishes an income tax 'liability,' " according to the indictment, handed up by a federal grand jury in Austin last week.
Internal Revenue Service agents and federal prosecutors disagreed, and Shanklin now faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each of three counts of tax evasion.
At his 3,000-square-foot home in Southwest Austin last week, Shanklin said he has "quite a story" to tell but can't do it until his case is resolved. He declined to comment further.
Shanklin is among the 300 or so people each year who fail to file tax returns or cite frivolous arguments in their returns and are subsequently prosecuted in federal court, according to the IRS. About 180 are convicted and sentenced to prison.
The IRS tries to draw attention to those cases to deter others from buying into bogus tax-avoidance techniques pitched in seminars, in books and on the Internet, said Harlan Carter, the special agent in charge of the San Antonio field office of the IRS criminal investigations division.
"Throughout the United States, there are constantly different types of claims that are being made" to avoid taxes, he said. "One thing that we can stress is the courts have consistently . . . held that there are no legal grounds for their failure to file and their failure to pay."
For example, some might argue that the income tax is unconstitutional or that protesters of specific government programs or actions may withhold taxes. Not true, officials say.
One argument that has circulated in Texas in recent years is that the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was not ratified properly, IRS officials said. It explicitly states that Congress may directly tax citizens and came in the late 19th century after the Supreme Court disallowed the federal income tax.
It is unclear what specific argument Shanklin cited.
The indictment says that after failing to file a return in 1999, he said in a letter to the IRS that "federal income tax laws do not exist." In 1999 and 2000, he gave his employer a tax form claiming he was exempt from withholding, the indictment says.
Shanklin is free on bail pending trial. After his arrest, he asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert Pitman to appoint a lawyer for him, a right reserved for indigent defendants. But Tuesday at a hearing, Shanklin arrived with his own lawyers.
Pitman asked the lawyers, "I assume you'll withdraw his motion for a court-appointed, taxpayer-funded attorney?"
They did.
No, it was a civil case to collect taxes owed under the Internal Revenue Code. The IRS can proceed civilly (to collect taxes, interest and civil penalties, but no jail time), and/or it can proceed criminally. To collect civilly, the IRS only has to show that, under the law, the tax is owed; to convict criminally, they must also prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant knew the law and intended to violate it.
Larken Rose, for example
Shanklin is about to get all the answers.
Proof please.
Let me describe to you what is going to happen. The Shanklin dude is going to call the goofball that sold him the package on tax evasion. This is the same guy who said he would defend Shanklin if the feds cam calling. The tax grifter, who already has his money, is going to deny everything and tell Shanklin that the package was merely for "entertainment purposes".
Shanklin's going to realize he was had and settle.
"One argument that has circulated in Texas in recent years is that the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was not ratified properly, IRS officials said. It explicitly states that Congress may directly tax citizens and came in the late 19th century after the Supreme Court disallowed the federal income tax. "
Well, if you go back and look at the history surrounding the ratification of the 16th Amendment, it sure seems like a lot of funny things went on behind the scenes.
Wonder why they aren't as tough on the hundreds of IRS employees who do not file income taxes? Or the black filers who applied for, and received, thousands of dollars from the IRS in bogus "slave reparations"?
I know a Ventura County firefighter who doesn't pay taxes. Hasn't since the 60's. IRS refuses to take him to court. I witness him telling two Agents to please take him to court.
This is the first I have heard of "slave reparations"
Please cite.
I know a Ventura County firefighter who doesn't pay taxes. Hasn't since the 60's. IRS refuses to take him to court. I witness him telling two Agents to please take him to court.Tell him that if he REALLY wants them to take him to court, send letters in to newspaper op/ed columns detailing how he gets away with it.
haha! That oughta do the trick. :)
So, if you have nothing for them to take...
Also, I just found out a few months ago that you can wipe out any tax debt over 3 years old with a chapter 7 bankruptcy.
It shocked the he!! out of me.
Oh hell, he read that stupid "There is no income tax" book, didn't he?
You can be a millionaire and never pay taxes.
First, go out and get a million dollars.
Then, when the IRS comes to your house and says 'you didn't pay taxes.' Just say two simple words, "I forgot."
See post 15
It sounds like she is paying. All she did was convince them she didn't intentionally set out to defraud. She didn't know or forgot.
If it were as cut and dried as you present it, why don't they answer simple questions? As for the Constitutionality issue, I'm not talking about the suspicious circumstances under which the 16th Amendment was ratified, but rather the "guilty until proven innocent" mentality that the tax courts take with respect to prosecution of tax cases - they seize your money first based on their claim of taxes owed, and then make you have to prove you don't owe it before they think about returning it.
This reminds me of the "common law citizens" who appear in court from time to time.
They constantly try to annoy judges with "but I don't understant" repetition that only gets them in deeper trouble.
Doubtful.
I have an a aquainence that is part of the Larkin Rose group. Hasn't filled out a return in over 12 years and makes really good six figure income. For them the key to protecting yourself is not entering into a contractual agreement with the irs - IOW do not sign a tax return.
The reason she's getting away with it is because she isn't filing a return. You can coast that way for a while, but sooner or later, there's good chance she'll get caught. Hope she likes federal prison and having all her wordly possessions seized.
Some tax charlatans convinced some black people that they could receive a tax credit for slave reparations and a few of them actually got in under the IRS's radar.
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.