IRS vs. KUGLIN

The Sierra Times ^ | 10 August 2003 | Carl F. Worden

[sauropod]

Big news!

[bert]

ping for experts

[College Repub]

There's plenty in the tax code that requires you to pay it. I think the dispute is over whether or not the ammendment that makes income tax legal was really ratified properly. There's a guy that has been selling books on this issue for decades...

[Pest]

So all you have to do is not pay taxes, get pulled into court, get judged by 12 "peers" and you're home free? Sounds way too easy to me. </sarcasm>

[Labyrinthos]

There's plenty in the tax code that requires you to pay it. I think the dispute is over whether or not the ammendment that makes income tax legal was really ratified properly. There's a guy that has been selling books on this issue for decades...

I've never quite understood the "no pay tax" argument, since 26 USCS Sec. 1 clearly states that "[t]here is hereby imposed upon the taxable income of [married individuals, heads of household, single individuals, etc.] a tax determined in accordance with the following table..."

[babyface00]

I'm not familiar with this issue, but I believe it has something to do with the definition of "income" (as you would incur from operating a business, contrasted with a paycheck, which is what you get when you are employed).

In any event, I'm curious as to what the details are in this case.

[RGSpincich]

She still owes the money. The jury found her not guilty on the criminal charges of evasion, etc.

[Focault's Pendulum]

She still owes the money

What law states that, exactly? I'm not trying to slam you.but I've been reading the tax code and still can't find it.

[I got the rope]

Wages are not income...as defined by the IRS and the law you just mentioned.

[RGSpincich]

Excuse me, I'll be more clear. As far as the courts and the IRS are concerned, she still owes the money. Being acquitted on the criminal charges does not cancel the debt. If she prevails in tax court, THEN it's a big deal.

[TomServo]

Already posted here. First post didn't have original title.

[I got the rope]

I think it was here first

[Focault's Pendulum]

s far as the courts and the IRS are concerned, she still owes the money. Being acquitted on the criminal charges does not cancel the debt. If she prevails in tax court, THEN it's a big deal.

Okay I understand that.

Allow me to play the dummy for a bit.

Why did they file criminal charges.

And where exactly is the law written that she is obligated to pay.

[Labyrinthos]

Wages are not income...as defined by the IRS and the law you just mentioned.

That's why I'm confused because 26 USCS Sec. 61 broadly defines "gross income," which is the starting point in calculating the personal income tax as including "[c]ompensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items." Seems pretty clear to me that a person has to pay income tax on compensation received for services rendered. What am I missing?

[TomServo]

Totally different articles, authors and sources. But the theme and persons involved are the same.

[weaponeer]

Excuse me, I'll be more clear. As far as the courts and the IRS are concerned, she still owes the money. Being acquitted on the criminal charges does not cancel the debt. If she prevails in tax court, THEN it's a big deal.

What difference does it make? She may still owe the money (in the IRS's eyes) but if they can't threaten her with incarceration or fines, how are they going to make her pay? Maybe they can attach assets, but I hope she has been smart enough to unload them.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[justalurker]

Correct, but there is always tax exempt income.
Therefore, you must determine if the "source" of the income then excludes such income from taxation. I believe you will find that in Sec. 861.

[RGSpincich]

broadly defines "gross income,"

The word "income", as it is defined in relation to a business, is pounced upon by some as not being relevant to personal wages. It's clear this particular meaning is to be used only pertaining to a business. Many individuals have tried and failed to use this strategy to avoid personal income taxes.

Individual income is determined by the statute you posted, according to all the rulings I've seen. The courts still think wages are income inspite of the best efforts of many tax protestors.