Woman Beats IRS in Court Over Income Tax Protest

FoxNews ^ | 08/14/03 | Staff Writer

[HeadOn]

if the IRS levies & seizes her assets, she won't be left with much.

Don't bet on it. She's a FedEx pilot...

[mvpel]

You're missing the point on an amendment. Art. 1 Sec. 8, limited the government's actions on collection of taxes (Clause 1). The 16th Amendment changed that restriction. In order to presever the document, ammendment to the Constitution do not go back and strike or insert words in the original text. When there is a conflict, the most recent Amendment wins. Looks at 18 and 21, or any of the voting rigths and elections issues.

Congress didn't need the 16th Amendment to be able to tax incomes. The income taxes that were imposed prior to the enactment of the 16th Amendment were frequently being mistaken as a direct tax, rather than its true nature as an indirect excise tax on a taxable activity measured by the income produced from that activity. The 16th Amendment did not expand Congress' taxing power, it just codified income taxes as indirect, which they fundamentally already were.

However, can you tell me whether Congress has the power to tax a citizen of China living and working in China? If not, why not?

[Sgt_Schultze]

Bump!

[savedbygrace]

If she answers yes, then I would ask what the response was.

Then she waves all the correspondence she's had with the IRS, and says, "I asked the premiere tax expert in the country, the Internal Revenue Service. They wouldn't answer any of my questions, leading me to conclude that I am not liable for the tax."

[Dead Dog]

OK, so the next thing the IRS will do is take her on in a civil court. Can they go after her for intrests and fines? I doubt a court will levy the fine for them.

So then they have to come up with an amount that she owes, and prove that she owes it by the tax code. At that point, and IMO where all hell brakes lose, is when she counters with IRS agents...hostile witnesses..who reach different conclusions for amount of tax owed. What then?

If they try to garnish her wages and seize assets outside of a court of law (not IRS arbitration), she would have recourse of a violation of the 4th amendment, and off to the USSC we go.

[NYFriend]

The US would be unable to collect taxes on Chinese citizen in China, because China is a sovereign power. States (American States) are not truly sovereign because the are legally and politically inferior to the federal government.

An income tax, in all its forms, is a direct tax. Excise taxes are different. There was some archaic excise tax concept that essentially defined it as any indirect tax on something not realted to real property. But the real nature of an excise tax has more to do with the fact that it's independent of value. That's really the key, if the income tax was $10 per person per day worked, it would probably hit the definition of an excise tax.

[Dead Dog]

The only way out for them now is if she dies in an "accident".

[Elliott Jackalope]

Don't forget the penalties on the interest owed, or the interest on the penalties. Then there's the interest on the penalties from interest, and the penalties on the interest from the penalties. Then there's the penalty interest penalty interest on the interest from the penalties, and the interest penalty interest penalties on the penalties from the interest.

Our government is nothing more than a mafia protection racket.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

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

[mvpel]

The US would be unable to collect taxes on Chinese citizen in China, because China is a sovereign power. States (American States) are not truly sovereign because the are legally and politically inferior to the federal government.

Actually, you're mistaken. The US Constitution was designed as an agreement among the 13 soverign states to delegate certain specific powers, such as coining money or making foreign treaties (a complete list is in Article I, Section 8) to a central government in order to facilitate cooperation and commerce among the soverign states.

In those delegated areas, and those areas only, is the Federal Government superior to the state governments. States may not coin money because they gave up that power willingly under the Constitution. And as clarified by the Tenth Amendment, any power that was not specifically delegated to the federal government is retained by the state.

The reason that the US can't legally levy and collect taxes on a Chinese citizen in China is not just because China has an army to stop it, it is because the Constitution sets forth the legal limits on the power of the Congress, defining its jurisdiction.

The US Congress has no jurisdiction in China, and neither does it have jurisdiction over intra-state commerce, such as that between a California employeer and his California-resident employee.

This is why the Title 26 statues and their associated regulations define a "source" of income as having only to do with various kinds of foreign and posessions commerce. This is the basis on which Larken Rose has not filed a return or paid income tax since 1997 and has yet to be taken up on his repeated requests to the IRS to prosecute him.

[DB]

Yes, she's going to fined late fees and interest on the amounts due.

If you don't think so, your living on a different planet than me.

She's won nothing up to this point short of not sitting in prison. And the only reason she isn't sitting in prison is because the IRS screwed up the handling of her letters.

[1rudeboy]

Then: "So you believe a non-response is permission to do what you wish? Wouldn't a reasonable person, such as yourself, try to get a second opinion? After you received no response from the IRS, what did you do? Please explain the logic underlying your decision to fail to file returns based on no response from the IRS?"

[lawdude]

Let's see. This is rather like the situation where the Score is 49-3 with 0 (zero) seconds on the clock. The Ref decides to put 4 seconds back on the clock for the trailing team after review of the tape!

Good luck!

[savedbygrace]

"Yes, when the government has a legal responsibility to respond to formal requests such as these, particularly the large numbers of formal requests I made, and they don't, a reasonable person would conclude that the government is avoiding the answers, and hiding the truth."

[1rudeboy]

"So, Ms. Kuglin, have you ever called the State Patrol to inquire about speed limits? Have you ever called a City Clerk to inquire about a dog license? If there was a failure to respond, would you conclude that you can speed with impunity, or neglect to get rabies shots for your dog?"

[Lancey Howard]

I hear ads on the radio all the time from tax lawyers who promise to "settle your IRS debt for pennies on the dollar". I think Vernice should give one of these guys a call.

[savedbygrace]

Objection. Irrelevant.

[Catspaw]

I hear ads on the radio all the time from tax lawyers who promise to "settle your IRS debt for pennies on the dollar". I think Vernice should give one of these guys a call.

LOL! I got yer Offer of Comprise right here, baby...for only 25% of what you owe the IRS.

My guess is that she's not going to do that, though. She's definitely going to have a much lighter wallet & bank account when they start levying.

[savedbygrace]

If the objection were overruled (it woudn't be) she'd answer: "I've had occasion to call both the State Police and the City Clerk. I've always received an answer to my questions. Plus, the traffic laws are written in a manner that is relatively easy to understand, and there aren't hundreds of thousands of pages of traffic laws. Also, they don't make major changes to the traffic laws every year."

[1rudeboy]

"Ms. Kuglin, are you aware that the U.S. government taxes individual income? Why did you claim 99 exemptions on your Form W-2? Was it to avoid having payroll taxes deducted? Certainly you understood that your income was taxable at that time?"