[citizenx7]

Geezer: The legal community has NOT answered the questions, and more importantly, the government, which is at the center of this controversy, has NOT, and WILLNOT answer the questions. You can find them at www.givemeliberty org .

Incidentally geezer, if you are watching carefully, WTP is NOT doing anything but asking for a honest response from the government, to questions. A serious petition for redress of grievance.

It is not a question of Taxes, taxes are provided for in the Constitution. It is a question of the government doing what they do in a proper, constitutional way. That is at the heart of the matter. So far, they have not been willing to answer a careful, legitimate inquiry from the people, which they must answer according to that document. It may, somehow, be painful, but this is a necessary and proper process. Also, its not something that they have just been made aware of, this immediate process has been going on for at least 3 1/2 years. It is throughly documented that some people within our government don't even wish to answer, clearly and on the record, questions of this nature.

Incidentally, while this is much bigger, and more important than just taxes, your responses in bringing out some of the cites, and quotes from the code, do not answer the questions that the government has been asked, and will not answer. Many professional people from the field have documented this, including forensic accountants, and ex-IRS people, amoung others. Believe me, they are serious questions, NOT answered solely in the IRS Code! These are questions that the Congress, and the Executive branch must look at for resolution. Look into it further.

[ancient_geezer]

You can find them

I've seen the list, and analyzed their basis. They boil down to nothing at all, that is not answered above.

The bottom line, the income tax as it is applied to wages & salaries is not dependant upon the 16th Amendment.

The tax on occupations, trades, professions and employments, is and always has been within the power of Congress under Article I Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution to lay and collect duties and excises uniform among the United States since the writing of the Constitution of 1887, as a replacement to the Articles of Confederation of 1776.

The entire premise of Schulz and his cohort of scammers is destroyed by the Constitution, the words of its chief proponents and the meaning of the language of the period:

Constitution for the United States of America:

• Article VI: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

• Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,
  to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
  but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "

• Article I Section 8: "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

 

A LAW DICTIONARY
by John Bouvier, Revised Sixth Edition, 1856:
DUTIES. In its most enlarged sense, this word is nearly equivalent to taxes, embracing all impositions or charges levied on persons or things;

A LAW DICTIONARY
by John Bouvier, Revised Sixth Edition, 1856:
EXCISES. This word is used to signify an inland imposition, paid sometimes upon the consumption of the commodity, and frequently upon the retail sale.

Federalist #21:

• The principle of regulating the contributions of the States to the common treasury by QUOTAS is another fundamental error in the Confederation. Its repugnancy to an adequate supply of the national exigencies has been already pointed out, and has sufficiently appeared from the trial which has been made of it.

Federalist #39:

• "The difference between a federal and national government, as it relates to the OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT, is supposed to consist in this, that in the former the powers operate on the political bodies composing the Confederacy, in their political capacities; in the latter, on the individual citizens composing the nation, in their individual capacities. On trying the Constitution by this criterion, it falls under the NATIONAL, not the FEDERAL character;"

Federalist #45:

• "The change relating to taxation may be regarded as the most important; and yet the present [Continental] sic Congress have as complete authority to REQUIRE of the States indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare, as the future [Constitutional] Congress will have to require them of individual citizens;

James Madison, Elliots Debates Vol 3 p128:

• "If a government depends on other governments for its revenues -- if it must depend on the voluntary contributions of its members -- its [*129] existence must be precarious."

• "If the general government is to depend on the voluntary contribution of the states for its support, dismemberment of the United States may be the consequence."

[ancient_geezer]

Believe me, they are serious questions, NOT answered solely in the IRS Code!

You don't read other's responses very well do you. Only Congress replies with Public Law, (i.e. IRS Code). I have answered in the Founder's words, the Constitution, the Courts of the period, and have provided the governments aswers to Schulz as well.

The questions Schulz & Company lay are carefully crafted to support a specific inference leaving out aspects contrary to their agenda. They however do not reflect anything that, in reality, supports their position that American citizens are not subject to the income tax law and thus, may have a defense against prosecution in the courts.

If you want to get rid of the income tax, then work for the repeal of statutes and constitutional amendment that expressly prohibits the levy of taxes with regard to income as oppossed to expenditure of the individual.

Ignoring the statutes as Schulz & company advocate, is just a quick way to add fines and possibly jail time to the tax bill already owed.

My premise and answers lay with the Constitution, the language of the era in which it was written, the authors and proponents of the Constitution, and the Courts of the period(mainly made up of Judges who participated in the written of the that Consitution).

The Anti-Federalists (and consequently Schulz') lost the debate with the ratification of the Constitution replacing the Articles of Confederation. That debate over the power of Congress to lay and collect taxes from the individyal citizen is long lost, though some seem never to get the message.

[Action-America]

So far, they have not been willing to answer a careful, legitimate inquiry from the people, which they must answer according to that document.

Actually, as Geezer pointed out above, they have gone to great length to answer far more than a reasonable number of variants of the same questions.

The problem is that when the TPers don't like the answer, they rephrase the question over and over.  If they were to ask the government the color the sky, the conversation might go like this.

TPer:  What color is the sky?

Govt:  Blue.

TPer:  No.  Exactly what color is the sky?

Govt:  Sky Blue.

TPer:  No.  Be more specific.  What is the exact color of the sky?

Govt:  Red = 210, Green = 210, Blue = 255

TPer:  No.  RGB isn't acceptable.  What is the exact color of the sky?

Govt:  Cyan = 15%, Magenta = 15%, Yellow = 0%, Black = 0%

TPer:  No.  CMYK isn't acceptable.  What is the exact color of the sky?

Govt:  Hue = 240, Saturation = 18%, Brightness = 100%

TPer:  No.  HSB isn't acceptable.  What is the exact color of the sky?

Govt:  Lightness = 85, a Axis = 7, b Axis = -22

TPer:  No.  Lab color isn't acceptable.  What is the exact color of the sky?

Govt:  Focoltone 4035

TPer:  No.  Focoltone isn't acceptable.  What is the exact color of the sky?

Govt:  You've been given the answer numerous times and in numerous manners.
          Any further questions like this are frivolous.  Deal with it!

TPer:  See!  See!  The government isn't answering our question!  See!  See!  We told you so!

Sure, the government isn't answering the TPer's questions anymore.  That's because they have already been more than patient and answered an absurdly large number of variants of those same questions.  There is a point, when faced by such lunacy, that you have to accept that the people continuously rephrasing the same questions over and over again are either fools or they just don't want to hear the answer.  Either way, the government has better things to do with our money than waste more time playing their ridiculous games.

The TPer's questions have been thourghly addressed by the courts and Congress and it's now time for the TPers to just DEAL WITH IT!