Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

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

Posted on 08/11/2003 12:41:21 PM PDT by CodeWeasel

Forget the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and our excellent adventure in Liberia. Forget about Kobe, Arnold, Arriana, Scott and Laci. The biggest news of the entire week is that on August 8, 2003, the IRS was unable to convince a jury in Memphis, Tennessee that the Federal Tax Code requires the citizens to pay individual income taxes. I kid you not.

I watched as many Sunday news programs as I could possibly stand, and I didn’t hear a single mention of the IRS’ debacle in Memphis. If you ever had doubts about the mainstream media being controlled by the federal government, doubt no more.

For those not already aware, FedEx Pilot Vernice Kuglin began studying the IRS Code some years ago, and was simply unable to find anywhere in the code that she was required to pay federal income taxes.

And here’s the most remarkable part: Back in 1995, Kuglin wrote letters in good faith to the IRS, asking them to show her where the Tax Code requires individual citizens to pay federal income taxes. Incredibly, the IRS never answered a single one of her letters!

As she studied the facts, laws and related documents more, Kuglin became convinced that, regardless of the IRS’ failure to respond one way or the other, she was exempt from paying federal income taxes. So, Kuglin filled out W-4 forms showing 99 exemptions, and turned them in to her employer. Doing that meant Kuglin got to take home almost all of her paycheck each payday, instead of what was left after the feds ravaged it.

The IRS went after Kuglin for six counts of tax evasion on $920,000.00 income, and for filing “false” W-4 forms, charges that could have put the 58 year-old Kuglin in federal prison for up to 30 years and cost her 1.5 million in fines.

Apparently, things didn’t go quite the slam-dunk way federal prosecutor Joe Murphy thought they would. My money says the IRS wishes they had never gone after Kuglin at all. In fact, after the jury returned not guilty verdicts on all counts, Murphy is reported to have demanded that the judge order Kuglin to file her forms, pay her taxes and “obey the law”. The judge reportedly replied, “Sir, I don’t work for the IRS.”

Now pinch yourself and review this astonishing turn of events: A highly trained and educated federal prosecutor in Memphis was unable to convince 12 American citizens that Vernice Kuglin was required to pay federal income taxes. He was clearly unable to produce a single section of the Tax Code to that end, and the jury was unanimous in clearing Kuglin of all charges against her. If the foregoing was not so, Kuglin would have been convicted.

Jurors tend not to be very sympathetic with tax scofflaws, since each one of them is also a taxpayer and they understandably feel resentment towards anyone not paying “their fair share”. So in order for this federal jury to completely vindicate Kuglin, the government’s failure to prove their case against her had to have been clear and unequivocal!

I haven’t read the trial transcript yet, but I must assume the federal prosecutor at least tried to twist some vague and ambiguous section of the Tax Code to make it look like it applied to Kuglin. I don’t know that, but I’ll bet he tried. What else could he use to prosecute her with?

Thanks to the IRS’ arrogance and stupidity, and Kuglin’s refusal to plead to lesser charges, Kuglin accomplished what Bob Schultz and the other “tax protesters” had been denied all along: To force the IRS into a public debate and to answer the question of whether or not the Tax Code requires an individual to pay personal income taxes. Kuglin and her two attorneys, Larry Becraft and Robert Bernhoft, have unequivocally forced the IRS to show its hand, and 12 judges hearing that debate ruled the answer to be “NO”.

I think it’s time for everyone reading this to send a very polite letter to the IRS, telling them they read about the case in Memphis, and is it true that there is no section in the U.S. Tax Code that requires an individual citizen to pay federal income taxes?

Don’t be threatening in any way, or announce that you plan to stop paying federal income taxes. This request is for your personal edification, and you just simply want to know the truth.

Like Kuglin, you probably won’t get an answer back, but just to prove you sent the letter and that they received it, be certain to send the letter via certified U.S. Mail, with a return receipt requested. When you get that receipt back, staple it to a copy of the letter you sent the IRS, and put it somewhere real secure, like a personal safe or bank deposit box.

I don’t have to explain why, now do I?

Now, how many calls to FOX’ Bill O’Reilly will it take to convince him we know he’s doing a spin in the No-Spin Zone by sitting on this story? Start e-mailing O’Reilly at oreilly@foxnews.com, and be sure to give him your city and state. He’s gonna love me.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: axixofevil; bobschulz; givemeliberty; incometax; irs; kuglin; schulz; taxes; taxevasion; taxhonesty; taxprotester; taxreform; verdict; vernicekuglin; verniekuglin; wethepeople
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last
To: 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.

Sec. 861 (a)(3) states that gross income includes compensation for labor or personal services performed in the United States. I still don't get it.

21 posted on 08/11/2003 2:39:16 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: weaponeer
What difference does it make?

If she tries to work, her wages get attached. She's not free to move her own money around. It's a big deal owing money to anybody, especially the IRS. If she does try to hide assets then she could be charged again for evasion. Her tax questions need to be answered in tax court to bring a final resolution to her troubles.

22 posted on 08/11/2003 2:43:55 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Tax Court? How is that authorized by the US Constitution. On what authority do they have to confiscate personal wealth.
23 posted on 08/11/2003 2:51:01 PM PDT by Dead Dog (There are no minority rights in a democracy. 51% get's 49%'s stuff.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Focault's Pendulum; Labyrinthos
Why did they file criminal charges.
And where exactly is the law written that she is obligated to pay.

Don't know the specifics other than she claimed 99 dependents on her w-4 form. Guess they figured she tried to evade withholding by fraudulent means. The law that is commonly used is in the tax code I believe. The particular statute regarding what the IRS and the courts regard as personal income is posted above by Labyrinthos.

24 posted on 08/11/2003 2:53:55 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dead Dog
The tax court came about the same way immigration laws did. Congress.
25 posted on 08/11/2003 2:55:36 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
Sec. 861 (a)(3) states that gross income includes compensation for labor or personal services performed in the United States. I still don't get it.

There's nothing to "get". Despite all wishful thinking, the income tax is currently the law of the land, and wages are subject to it. The tax evasion crowd would have you (incorrectly) believe that through tortured semantics, when the tax code refers to the "United States", it really means only Washington DC or other federal territories. This is why such cases usually have the evader claiming to be "a resident of the sovereign state of (fill in state name here)".

26 posted on 08/11/2003 3:14:18 PM PDT by kevkrom (This tag line for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CodeWeasel
This is the Sixth District (6th District). I wonder if it can be used as case law precedent in other districts besides the 6th.

I think Kuglin's probably on leave from her job because the IRS has bullied FedEx into withholding more of her wages if she returns. Also, now that the IRS has come after her in criminal court, she probably cannot claim any longer that she has not been informed by the IRS that she owes taxes on her "income" as an "individual" (whatever those terms mean legally).

McCalla received some sort of judicial reprimand for being and acting very conservatively in court.

If Kuglin is smart, she will have liquidated her assets (eg, into diamonds or platinum) and given them to a friend for safekeeping while the IRS attempts to revv up any potential civil court case against her. (And by all means she seems to be smart...)

27 posted on 08/11/2003 3:22:07 PM PDT by SteveH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom
Despite all wishful thinking, the income tax is currently the law of the land, and wages are subject to it.

And HR 25 would make all this mental speculation a moot point.

http://fairtax.org

28 posted on 08/11/2003 3:23:09 PM PDT by ovrtaxt ( Support real tax reform - HR 25! See http://www.fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
USCS is not law. You must use 26 CFR not 26 USCS.

http://www.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/cfrassemble.cgi?title=200326

Additionally, you must use all of the relevant code.
29 posted on 08/11/2003 3:26:44 PM PDT by justalurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
I've been reading 26 CFRfor the last few hours...I'm so confused I don't want to play on this thread anymore.
30 posted on 08/11/2003 7:12:45 PM PDT by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson