Replies

They won't answer anything unless you take them to court.

Who doesn't answer?

Problem is Shulz isn't questioning Congress who is responsible for the tax mess that is the income and payroll tax system of this country. He insists on questioning the mininons and they have answered in no uncertain terms through the IRS, DOJ and the Courts.

As far a challenging the law per-se, its Congress, no other real choice exists.

It's Congress you have to go after and hold accountable.

Here's the IRS written positions and answers based on Congress' express intent:

FRIVOLOUS FILING POSITION BASED ON SECTION 861

NonFiler Enforcement Program

Here's the Department of Justice's written position on 16th amendment and other common tax protest positions:

DOJ CRIMINAL JUSTICE MANUAL, Section 40 TAX PROTESTORS

And a comprehensive FAQ compiled by a lawyer of all the Tax Protest arguments that have failed repeatedly and why:

THE TAX PROTESTER FAQ

And there are of course the many Court cases from the Article III Courts, (i.e. federal district, appellate, & Supreme Court) that support all the above.

The ultimate place to go for the answers, is Congress. They, afterall are the ones ultimately responsible for the condition of the Statutes, Regulations and Executive Orders. It is Congress in the end the enacts the enabling legislation and accepts or rejects the content of all Regulations and E.O.s.

The Courts have made it abundantly clear that the arguments presented in the above texts are failed and decided, and provide no relief to the defendant. Infact they have also made it very clear as to where to turn for relief from the very beginning as regards the income tax law.

Springer v. United States(1880), 102 U.S. 586

"If the laws here in question involved any wrong or unnecessary harshness, it was for Congress, or the people who make congresses, to see that the evil was corrected.
The remedy does not lie with the judicial branch of the government."

Champion v. Ames(1903), 186 U.S. 321

'But if what Congress does is within the limits of its power, and is simply unwise or injurious, the remedy is that suggested by Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden [21 US 1, 9 Wheat. 1, 6 L. ed. 23], when [195 U.S. 27, 56] he said: 'The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in all representative governments."

And the standard you must meet to have a successful court case as regards arguments of Tax Law constitutionality:

MCCRAY v. U S, 195 U.S. 27 (1904)

"Let us concede that if a case was presented where the abuse of the taxing power was so extreme as to be beyond the principles which we have previously stated, and where it was plain to the judicial mind that the power had been called into play, not for revenue, but solely for the purpose of destroying rights which could not be rightfully destroyed consistently with the principles of freedom and justice upon which the Constitution rests, that it would be the duty of the courts to say that such an arbitrary act was not merely an abuse of a delegated power, but was the exercise of an authority not conferred. "

And finally, for a blow by blow of the judgements of more current cases:

Quatloo's Tax Protestor Gallery

Study the losses, find out why they occurred then build a strategy around something new instead of repeating the same old tired and dead as a door nail tactics. Judges get bored too, and when a Judge gets bored he throws the argument out as frivolous (we heard it before and weren't impressed) and tacks on a few more $K (FRNs acceptable but they will take payment in gold if you insist) on top of whatever else has been laid on you.

Better yet, pound on Congress Critters, and get the law changed. A much more likely scenario than using the same old arguments that have failed hundreds of times.

But then there are those who insist on doing it the hard way:

If you don't like the answers, its time to take Congress to task, not the minions doing Congress Critter's dirtywork.

And you have the *GUTS* to call this "hype."

I certainly do. Not one argument that Schulz and folks offer has the least shred of validity in the courtroom. Any who rely on this garbage are in for one whale of a beating in the courtrooms where such thing will inevitable be decided.

A person stripped of wealth and liberty in a courtroom because he is using failed and totally useless arguments sold to him by some TP guru scam artist, is rendered completely ineffective in any real fight to get rid of the income tax or in any way do anything to change this countries law.

I for one choose to let the diver know about the empty pool. Looks more like some around here are more interested in watching the bloody splat when the poor guy hits the concrete.

United States v. Sloan, 939 F.2d 499 (7th Cir. 1991)
Argued that there is no law imposing a tax on income, that "freeborn" state citizens are exempt from income tax, and that an individual is not a "person" under the tax code.

KANNE, Circuit Judge.

Like moths to a flame, some people find themselves irresistibly drawn to the tax protestor movement's illusory claim that there is no legal requirement to pay federal income tax. And, like the moths, these people sometimes get burned. Lorin G. Sloan believed these claims and because he acted upon them now faces four months in a federal prison; there can be little doubt that he has been burned.

The real tragedy of this case is the unconscionable waste of Mr. Sloan's time, resources, and emotion in continuing to pursue these wholly defective and unsuccessful arguments about the validity of the income tax laws of the United States. Despite our rejection of Mr. Sloan's legal analysis of the tax laws, we are not unmindful of the sincerity of his beliefs. On the other hand, we are less sure of the sincerity of the professional tax protestors who promote their views in literature and meetings to persons like Mr. Sloan, yet are unlikely ever to face the type of penalties incurred by him. It may be that our decision will not alter Mr. Sloan's views regarding the tax laws of this country, for he has stated that if we affirm his conviction without applying the law as he understands it, our decision will be "a sham to which I WILL NOT SUBMIT." It may also be that serving his sentence in prison will not alter Mr. Sloan's view. We hope this pessimistic assessment is incorrect.

We AFFIRM the conviction of Lorin G. Sloan on all counts.

By the way, New American, the house publication of the John Birch Society sees things pretty much as I do.

Patriot Beware!
by Thomas R. Eddlem

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1997/vo13no04/vo13no04_patriot.htm