Posted on 06/03/2013 9:44:55 AM PDT by Errant
Amid an unusual spotlight on IRS conduct, a Colorado businessman contends his case is one the government particularly wants to keep hidden, because it could cause the whole federal agency to self-destruct.
Jeff Maehr, a Colorado chiropractor who has engaged in a number of business ventures, including PureHealthSystems.com, admits he has refused to file federal income tax returns since 2002, but he says the IRS is afraid to press criminal charges against him.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Well, what can an honest person do about that? Nothing really, except to ensure any efforts directed toward harassing investigations, for that reason alone, are indeed costly and wasteful to the PTB by making sure you dot your i's and cross your t's, if you speak out. That shouldn't even be an issue for honest citizens like those who frequent FR, or belong to the TEA parties.
I see one huge advantage over what we've seen coming from these tyrants. That advantage is for the most part, those citizens targeted, are honest, upright, hard working, charitable, respectful, kind, considerate, and last but certainly not least, follow the letter of the law.
Can you say that about those now in government????
Our fault is we do have our limits. Just ask those who've attacked us in the past - foreign or domestic. In this case, the IRS has, or has been directed to attack a group of hard working, concerned, tax paying citizens with no regard to their financial well being or constitutional rights. Are they so stupid as to believe they can get away with that?
I don't think so. Graves around the world are filled with brave men and women who have given everything to protect those very rights now trampled.
On second thought, maybe having our limit isn't a fault. Maybe it's what makes the world a better place, eventually.
Are you serious?
You know, I just reread your post and realize that I misread it. You are entirely correct - there is nothing that says one has to pay taxes. In fact, many don’t. The rule is that you have to pay whatever tax is owed. My apologies.
Yes.
The article states that a court decided that exchanging ones labor for money did not meat the definition of "income." It's what the person based his case on. Be it far better for a court to decide than I. ;-)
Personally, I enjoy spending more time enjoying life, even if frugally, than trying to win some rat race where the odds are stacked against you, and vultures are poised to attack.
But that's just me...
Errant, my post 83 was meant for you. D’oh!
You'll get no argument from me, even though one of my proudest achievements on FR, was winning a debate on the law with a Freeper lawyer from the NE, whom I later discovered to be Jewish even. He retired and moved to Southern California. :-)
Errant, I misread your post and issued an apology in post 83, but I posted it back to myself by mistake - not once but twice. Geeze, you’d think this was my first day posting. :-) Fregards.
Don't sword fight with Zorro, I say...
No problemo friend. Your expertise and input is appreciated.
GO SCREW:
I know what you mean. I have to go rewire my utility trailer myself, before it gets dark. The going bottom shop rate here is about $85 hour. I suppose I better keep up with my labor and tax myself for 2013 income. :-)
Maybe I should send myself a 1099?
Don't bring a sword to a gun fight.
Negative on paying yourself and taxing yourself for your personal use utility trailer repair. If too many others do it, they might make us all do it and call it an “impact fee” or something. ;-)
If “reasonable” means one thing for me, then it shouldn’t mean something different for anyone else or any other entity: business, corporation, government, foundation, etc.
Why black limos when they could use Kia minivans?
Better than all of this garbage about who gets to deduct what, why not just have a sales tax and be done with the income tax?
Sounds like you learned that one the hard way.
Wouldn't surprise me! :-)
Chapter 4 of the TRUTH!
The TRUTH About Income!
In the last chapter we learned the truth about income tax. In this chapter we will learn the truth about the real definition of income itself! Nowhere in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) is income defined.
So the big question becomes, what IS income? And did you have any that was taxable?
The word “income” is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code, as the court stated in U.S. v. Ballard 535 F.2d 400 at 404, but the Supreme Court has defined it for us in numerous cases.
Stratton’s Independence v. Howbert 231 U.S. 399 (1913) “As has been repeatedly remarked, the corporation tax act of 1909 was not intended to be and is not, in any proper sense, an income tax law. This court has decided in the Pollock Case that the income tax of 1894 amounted in effect to a direct tax upon property, and was invalid because not apportioned according to population, as prescribed by the Constitution. The act of 1909 avoided this difficulty by imposing not an income tax, but an excise tax upon the conduct of business in a corporate capacity, measuring, however, the amount of tax by the income of the corporation, . . .”
“As to what should be deemed “income” within the meaning of Sec. 38, it of course need not be such an income as would have been taxable as such, for at that time (the 16th amendment not having been as yet ratified) income was not taxable as such by Congress without apportionment according to population, and this tax was not apportioned. Evidently Congress adopted the income as the measure of the tax to be imposed with the respect to the doing of business in corporate form because it desired that the excise should be imposed, approximately at least, with regard to the amount of benefit presumably derived by such corporations from the current operations of the government.”
whole article here:
http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap4.html
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.