What happens when you actively refuse to pay Federal taxes

[Phoenix]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Kahl


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8765909951995033689#


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1482942108273111005&hl=en&emb=1#

[Phoenix]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiMz43zdE8k

[I am me, I am free]

Quantum, what I have to wonder is do you get paid for your sheepherding, or is a labor of love??

[Phoenix]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_and_Elaine_Brown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1RQkhjV85M

[Phoenix]

When someone tells you that you can "legally" refuse to pay taxes: THEY ARE LYING.

When someone tells you that you can "make" the government do something because "it's in the law": THEY ARE LYING - or they are insane.

[Phoenix]

Quantum


That's the username you and your Texas buddy Atahualpa set up, right?




what I have to wonder is do you get paid for your sheepherding, or is a labor of love??


How much do you make annually for peddling FALSEHOODS about how to get out of paying taxes without consequences?

Which titles do you sell to suckers, uh, I mean readers, about your fables?

Do you belong to some cult organization, like a Scientology "church" for "sovereign citizens"?

[I am me, I am free]

Dude, you're a real hoot. I don't know how anyone can take you seriously. You are literally a caricature. lol

[Phoenix]

The CON-MEN who tell you can get out of paying taxes without consequences are all telling you they're SMARTER than all the above...and all the below:


Tony Serra - successful lawyer

John L. Cheek

Bonita Lynne Meredith

William J. Benson

Richard M. Simkanin

Tom Cryer - successful lawyer

Sherry Peel Jackson - former IRS agent & CPA

Charles Thomas Clayton - successful medical doctor

[Phoenix]

Dude, you're a real hoot. I don't know how anyone can take you seriously. You are literally a caricature. lol


ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER of your fraudulent claims?

Can you provide ANYTHING? Anything at all?

[I am me, I am free]

I can easily prove* you like to meddle in the affairs of others where you have no business in the first place. lol

*Edited to add: I cannot take the credit for the proof that you can't seem to mind your own business, since you're the main one providing the proof (at the rate of >42 posts per day average). lol

[Phoenix]

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0500a.asp

The "Voluntary" Nature of the Income Tax
by Jacob G. Hornberger, May 2000

Last month, of course, was tax time, the month in which millions of Americans filed their income tax returns with the Internal Revenue Service and paid whatever income taxes they still owed the government for 1999. Citizens dutifully went to their neighborhood post office, deposited their tax returns and checks into the mail, and secured return-receipt certificates verifying that they weren't late in mailing in their returns and checks.

Why? Why do people fork over a large portion of their hard-earned money to people they don't even know?

After all, think of what all that tax money would buy. Let's assume that 10 years ago, a person who pays an average of $20,000 a year in income taxes had stopped paying income taxes. That would mean that today he would have $200,000 plus interest in the bank, a nice chunk of money that would help fund a savings account, his children's education, an additional room to his house, a European vacation, medical bills, or a few donations to his favorite charities.

Yet he decides instead to send the money to the Internal Revenue Service or, more properly, allows the IRS to take it from him.

Why?

For years, the IRS has proclaimed that the great virtue of America's tax system is that it's voluntary. How does the IRS define "voluntary"? It says that the tax is voluntary because everyone computes his own income tax liability and sends the amount owed to the government. In other words, if the government calculated the tax liability for the citizenry, the tax would be involuntary. But since the people themselves are permitted to compute the liability, the tax is voluntary.

One can only wonder, of course, how many public-school-trained Americans believe this nonsense. The truth is that the income tax is no more voluntary than the military draft. If you fail or refuse to pay, they will seize you, fine you, jail you, or in the worst case, kill you, just as they do if you refuse to comply with a military draft.

And this is the true reason that people troop down to the post office and dutifully deposit those returns and checks.

Of course, an IRS official would respond, "You have a choice, and that's what makes the tax voluntary. You can choose to pay the tax or you can choose to go to jail. No one forces you to choose to pay the tax, and so it's voluntary."

But the choice between two evils does not convert the choice of one of them into a voluntary act. It is instead a choice between two coerced options.

For example, suppose a thief grabs you in a dark alley, points a gun in your face, and says, "Your money or your life." You choose to give him your money rather than surrender your life.

Could the thief later appear in court and say to the judge, "Your honor, I'm not guilty of theft because my victim gave me his money voluntarily"?

The process is no different with the IRS. Despite all the deceptive hoopla about the IRS's being a nice, pleasant, friendly, benign agency (check out its website at www.irs.gov), the truth is that this agency is no different, in principle, from the Nazi Gestapo or the Communist KGB.

State-sponsored terrorism

The IRS is a state-sponsored terrorist organization. Its very existence depends on the terror that it is able to strike in the hearts and minds of the American people. And it knows that the reason that American citizens scurry down to that post office to mail their tax returns is that they live in deadly fear of retaliation by this agency, just as people in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia lived in mortal fear of the Gestapo and the KGB.

Every April, the IRS engages in a very subtle and sophisticated advertising campaign to reinforce the fear that it has instilled in the American people. For example, there was the time they hauled away the multimillionaire Leona Helmsley to jail for taking a few improper income-tax deductions. The not-so-subtle message to the rest of us? "If the wealthy and powerful cannot stand against us, what chance do you have? Pay your taxes on time or else!"

This year, the publicity campaign centered around the Indianapolis Baptist Church in Indiana. The church owes $6 million in unpaid payroll taxes. The church's position is that they never paid "salaries" to their employees but instead made a series of "love gifts."

Unfortunately, however, IRS people don't believe in love, because one of their spokesmen (who asked not to be identified) dismissed the church's argument, declaring, "In the United States, if you employ people, whether you are tax-exempt or not, you've got to withhold taxes for workers."

Got to? But I thought it was all voluntary!

The IRS threatened to begin foreclosing its tax lien on the property, and guess what date it selected to begin the process: April 10. What a remarkable coincidence! "If a 50-year old church with 1,000 members cannot stand against us, what chance do you have? Pay your taxes on time or else!"

The viciousness of the IRS

What happens if you refuse to file your tax returns and refuse to pay your income taxes? Well, tax resisters say that nothing will happen to you because, echoing the IRS commissioner, they say that the income tax is voluntary. Their arguments are multifaceted, ranging from their claim that the U.S. criminal statutes and IRS code do not require people to pay their taxes to their claim that the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified. On the basis of these claims, thousands of American tax resisters don't file and don't pay taxes and tell other people that they can live tax-free lives as well.

All too often, however, what the tax resisters don't tell others is that they live lives of misery and impoverishment. Most of them don't have bank accounts, preferring to deal with bank money orders purchased at convenience stores, because the IRS will simply place a levy on their bank accounts. They also customarily don't own real estate, including a home, because the IRS clouds their title with tax liens. They don't hold salaried positions because the IRS garnishes their wages. Thus, to truly avoid the IRS's collection of the taxes owed, tax resisters are often relegated to finding a series of "independent contracts," entailing no withholding tax, which provides them with a subsistence standard of living.

Are they principled? You bet. Are they courageous? You bet. But they cannot deny that when people free themselves from the "voluntary" income tax, the result is a lifestyle different from that of everyone else.

Tax resisters often point to the fact that they are not in jail as proof that the income tax is voluntary. But the truth is that many of them have gone to jail. And while the IRS doesn't go after all of them, especially those who keep a low profile, it is simply owing to staff shortages and not because the IRS has folded or surrendered.

Let me provide you with an example of the viciousness of these IRS people. When I was a young attorney, I represented a woman who owed the IRS, as I recall, somewhere around $20,000. Her husband had abandoned her and her child and was living somewhere in Mexico. The bank was foreclosing on her home, which had an equity of about $40,000 in it.

Owing to indifference or incompetence, the IRS had forgotten to file a tax lien against the property. We advertised the foreclosure sale in the local newspaper, and on the appointed day, lots of people showed up and bid on the property. The result was an enormous foreclosure check for the equity, which was made jointly payable to my client and her husband (who, unfortunately, was not around to endorse and cash the check).

We immediately filed suit for divorce in state court, deposited the check into the registry of the court, and asked the judge to use the money for child support for my client's teenage boy until he reached 18 years of age. By placing the money under the control of a state court, we had immunized it from IRS liens.

A local IRS agent got wind of what we had done, walked into my law office, and pleasantly demanded his share of the money. I pleasantly responded that there was nothing I could do because the money was under the control of the state judge, who himself was concerned about the welfare of the child.

The IRS agent smiled and left my office. He then embarked on a course of harassment that included regular telephone calls and visits both to my client's home and to her place of work. He also made regular visits to her son's high school, where he seized the boy's truck.

After several weeks of this abuse, my client walked into my office and said, "Pay them the money. I cannot live like this." The IRS's nasty, vicious, little devils who constantly remind us of the "voluntary" nature of the income tax and how they're here just to "serve" had won.

Tax resistance can be deadly

What happens to tax resisters who follow their principles to their logical conclusion? Government agents kill them. And the only reason that we don't see IRS killings is that tax resisters place limits on themselves as to how far they will actually follow their principles. For they know that if they follow their principles to the end, they will find themselves part of the next life. Leonard Read, the founder of The Foundation for Economic Education, made this point in his book Anything That's Peaceful.

For example, let's assume that a tax resister says, "The income tax is voluntary, and I'm not paying it." Someone asks him, "Aren't you going to sell your home? The IRS could put a lien on it." He responds, "No way. This is my home. It belongs to me. I bought and paid for it with my own money. No IRS agent is going to take it away from me and I'm not going to sell it to avoid these people. I ain't afraid of them!"

One day, the IRS files its tax lien and sends a notice of the lien to the tax resister, with a request that he pay the back taxes. The resister says, "They don't understand. I ain't paying." If in fact he did pay under threat of foreclosure, then we would have to ask him, "Why then did you refuse to pay in the first place?"

The IRS files suit to foreclose its lien and the judge orders the foreclosure to take place, The resister says, "Let them foreclose. What's that to me? I ain't leaving my home." Of course, if he paid the taxes to avoid the foreclosure, we'd have to ask him, "Why then did you refuse to pay in the first place?"

At the foreclosure sale, a buyer purchases the property and the judge orders the local sheriff to evict the resister and give possession of the property to the new buyer. The sheriff sends the resister a letter asking him to vacate the property. The resister says, "You people don't understand what I've said from the very beginning. I ain't paying my taxes and you ain't gonna take my property from me. This is my home." And after all, if he tried to negotiate a deal with the new owner and the IRS, we would have to ask him, "Why then did you refuse to pay the taxes in the first place?"

On the appointed day, armed deputy sheriffs (and possibly a few tanks) surround the tax resister's house, prepared to enforce the judge's writ of possession. Through a megaphone, they order the resister to come out and vacate the premises. If the resister comes out and departs, we would have to ask, "Why then did you refuse to pay your taxes in the first place?" But if the resister decides to resist force with force, they will kill him.

Thus, if a tax resister refuses to pay his taxes, and if he follows his principles to their logical conclusion, he is a dead man.

There is one -- and only one -- good solution to the income tax and the IRS: repeal the tax, abolish this Gestapo-KGB agency, and ensure through constitutional amendment that this horrific assault on the freedom and well-being of the American people can never again become part of American society.

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation, publisher of Your Money or Your Life: Why We Must Abolish the Income Tax by Sheldon Richman.

[Phoenix]

I can easily prove you like to meddle in the affairs of others where you have no business in the first place. lol


Go for it! Let's see this "proof."

[Phoenix]

The official alcoholic beverage of the patriot-for-profit "sovereign citizen" movement:

[I am me, I am free]

I can easily prove you like to meddle in the affairs of others where you have no business in the first place. lol


Go for it! Let's see this "proof."


This thread!! lol

I think this thread is not only proof of your proclivity to sheepherd others, it's also possibly an indicator of how unbalanced you may be. Of course I'm not a professional, therefore I recommend you consult a professional for help in getting well.

[Phoenix]

I can easily prove you like to meddle in the affairs of others where you have no business in the first place. lol


Go for it! Let's see this "proof."


This thread!! lol


I'm "meddling" in your self-serving business, eh? I imagine I am! The TRUTH is never good for the business of a con-man.

[I am me, I am free]

I can easily prove you like to meddle in the affairs of others where you have no business in the first place. lol


Go for it! Let's see this "proof."


This thread!! lol


I'm "meddling" in your self-serving business, eh? I imagine I am! The TRUTH is never good for the business of a con-man.


See? This is yet another indication of mental illness, in my non-professional opinion. I have NEVER engaged in the 'business' of selling info on how to live as a full liability free man on the land - neither here nor GIM. Just trying to set an example.

What kind of example are you trying to set, Quantum??

[I am me, I am free]

Quantum's intention with this thread: FEAR the corporate state - OBEY - SUBMIT - NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT - STAY ASLEEP - DO NOT QUESTION AUTHORITY!!!

Quantum's message: Whatever you do, DON'T PUT ON THOSE HOFFMAN LENSES!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSFT-R4N17g&feature=related

[Phoenix]

See? This is yet another indication of mental illness, in my non-professional opinion. I have NEVER engaged in the 'business' of selling info on how to live as a full liability free man on the land - neither here nor GIM.


You have never peddled your lies for any form of gratuitous gain? Real world or cyberspace?

It's OK to tell the Truth.

[Phoenix]

DO NOT QUESTION MY AUTHORITY!!!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid

"Trust me, I don't have a driver's license. If you dispute that, you're a 'sheep'."

"Trust me, I don't pay taxes. If you dispute that, you're an 'agent'."

"You only have to BELIEVE - believe in ME - and you, too, can overcome the Tasers and guns of the police!"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult

[palani]

What happens when you actively refuse to pay Federal taxes??

How do you respond to contract offers?
(1) accept ... pay your taxes
(2) refuse ... proceed to hearing
(3) go silent ... proceed to hearing
(4) counter offer ... cancel previous offer and place another offer on the table

Going silent is the same as refusing. Both are dishonorable and you have been instructed to agree with your neighbor lest he drag you in front of the magistrate. In the meantime there are two other options that (by the opening question) have been eliminated from discussion.

No one is in jail for not paying taxes. They are in jail because they either went silent when presented with a notice or refused to pay entirely. Laws have been enacted that no one shall be placed in jail for not being able to pay a bill. These institutions would be styled "debtor prisons" and have been outlawed. You are put in jail for REFUSAL to pay a bill. This is an ACTION and it creates a PERSON. It is the PERSON/ACTION that receives the punishment. It is the ACTION that is criminal.

Don't be a criminal and you will not be treated like one. The answer to the question is "If you refuse to pay Federal taxes you are going to be treated like a criminal."

[1970 silver art]

What happens when you do not pay Federal income taxes? (not in any particular order)

1. Your assets are seized

2. Wages are garnished

3. The IRS puts a lien on your property

4. Get charged, tried in court, convicted and end up going to prison


Sure, a person can fight it in court but the deck is stacked against them and even if a person miraculously wins their case and avoids prison, then so what? The gov't took that person's assets and that person's property is gone. Basically that person is financially ruined as a result of fighting the IRS. In other words, that person that fought and miraculously won in court really lost "the war" in the big scheme of things IMO.

In reality, the chance that a person will win a case against the IRS is slim and even if you fight the IRS, it will cost you one way or the other. That is why people will not do anything about it because they are not willing to handle the consequences of going up against the IRS.

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

SHERRY PEEL JACKSON, 45, of Stone Mountain, Georgia, a former IRS Revenue Agent, was sentenced on February 14, 2008 to four years in federal prison, to be followed by one year of supervised release, and was taken into custody immediately after sentencing. JACKSON was convicted by a federal jury on October 30, 2007, after a two-day trial on four counts of failure to file her individual tax returns for the years 2000 to 2003. Beginning in 2000, JACKSON operated a tax preparation business and continued to prepare, submit and file individual tax returns for her clients. For the next three years, however, JACKSON intentionally did not file her own tax returns, despite an income of over $400,000 during that time period.

http://www.youtube.com/v/c1jqLximBZI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1

[dysgenic]

Disinformation agents are often the first to encourage imprudent actions likely to result in negative consequences like jail or even death. They also tend to be the most vociferous.

dys

[Rebel Yarr]

I've read enough of it over the years to conclude for my own sanity that....


there are no magic legal words or paperwork used to opt out - i.e. straightforward process!
those not paying taxes are just able to avoid the taxman for the time being...i.e. never got in the crosshairs due to $ amount owed
or
Those preaching about not paying taxes know that the only way to avoid taxes is to not incur taxes - by living outside of the system and/or not being on the books.


Sure there are probably loop holes around the DL thing and various other forms of taxes/fees - if you feel like spending your life becoming a quasi-lawyer and reading material that isn't trustworthy - go for it. I highly doubt you will find anyone with any equity and income - worthy of note - willing to risk it all for buying into a fairy tale.

If one wants out of the taxes so bad - getting off the system/grid or moving out of the US are the only feasible options - from my perspective.

[Book]

I have NEVER engaged in the 'business' of selling info on how to live as a full liability free man on the land - neither here nor GIM. Just trying to set an example.



http://sacramentoscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/tent-city-sacramento.jpg

http://thebeatofphilly.com/files/2010/05/Tent-City.jpg

The American Flag is a nice touch...lol.

:oo-->

[Book]

Those preaching about not paying taxes know that the only way to avoid taxes is to not incur taxes - by living outside of the system and/or not being on the books.



http://www.glennsacks.com/blog-files/images/gb-most-wanted-hc.gif

I agree. I just recently became aware that "Real Money" forums are magnets for those who have destroyed their credit and legal standing within the community and cannot get a drivers license or bank account or employment or housing anymore. They come here and talk about FREEDOM and the CONSTITUTION and the BIBLE while scheming for any kind of unreported "cash only" income...lol.

:oo-->

[wildcard]

I remember that thread Sukhoi Fan talked about making his own license plate. I'd like to know more about that. I'm sure he's in with the local cops so they give him a pass. Drive off the reservation and see what happens.

*there is no magic word to defuse a roid-raged baboon cop, period. (Unless maybe it's Glock. ;D)

[I am me, I am free]

I agree. I just recently became aware that "Real Money" forums are magnets for those who have destroyed their credit and legal standing within the community and cannot get a drivers license or bank account or employment or housing anymore. They come here and talk about FREEDOM and the CONSTITUTION and the BIBLE while scheming for any kind of unreported "cash only" income...lol.

:oo-->


Spoken like a true collectivist/statist. lol

[I am me, I am free]

If one wants out of the taxes so bad - getting off the system/grid or moving out of the US are the only feasible options - from my perspective.

That's exactly what Spectism just recently posted.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/general-discussion/point-blank-question-re-property-taxes/msg88326/#msg88326

[Skirnir]

I agree. I just recently became aware that "Real Money" forums are magnets for those who have destroyed their credit and legal standing within the community and cannot get a drivers license or bank account or employment or housing anymore. They come here and talk about FREEDOM and the CONSTITUTION and the BIBLE while scheming for any kind of unreported "cash only" income...lol.

:oo-->


Spoken like a true collectivist/statist. lol


No, Book makes a valid point. If one was in such a predicament, one would seek to rationalise one's circumstances, and delude themselves with a fallacy of false cause. That is not to say all who are attracted to forums dealing with precious metals are of this class, but this demographic is the most noticeable and vociferous and serves to discredit others. That is not to say either that concerns over freedom and the Constitution are invalid, rather, they are simply the subjects of said fallacy.

To combat this, it is necessary to think practically. One can debate how many angels can dance upon the foolish Ganaposki's right testicle until Ragnarok, but what is the significance? Government, as Murray Rothbard said, is a gang of thieves writ large, and there are myriads upon myriads of instances where it has acted in this matter. Matters theological that are usually discussed here are just as frivolous; this biblical nonsense has no root in observable reality and only serves to delude and distract. It is as counter-productive as eschewing the medicinal knowledge of Eristratos and Galen as did the early Xtheists who instead preferred the equivalent of 'faith healing'. They favour things which coincide with their own pet doctrines over that which is derived from observation and logic.

I see a very strong thread of this fervour here, wherein people prostrate themselves before the cross of legal myths, among others. They expect magic chants and arcane rituals before judges and hired thugs will spare them temporal wrath. The foolishness being presented herein as legal advice will only serve to discredit all else that is discussed, if not cause an unwitting reader imprisonment or worse.

Please pardon this departure for I had agreed to stay in the precious metals section, for this matter is pertinent enough to warrant my commentary.

[I am me, I am free]

I agree. I just recently became aware that "Real Money" forums are magnets for those who have destroyed their credit and legal standing within the community and cannot get a drivers license or bank account or employment or housing anymore. They come here and talk about FREEDOM and the CONSTITUTION and the BIBLE while scheming for any kind of unreported "cash only" income...lol.

:oo-->


Spoken like a true collectivist/statist. lol


No, Book makes a valid point. If one was in such a predicament, one would seek to rationalise one's circumstances, and delude themselves with a fallacy of false cause. That is not to say all who are attracted to forums dealing with previous metals are of this class, but this demographic is the most noticeable and vociferous and serves to discredit others. That is not to say either that concerns over freedom and the Constitution are invalid, rather, they are simply the subjects of said fallacy.

To combat this, it is necessary to think practically. One can debate how many angels can dance upon the foolish Ganaposki's right testicle until Ragnarok, but what is the significance? Government, as Murray Rothbard said, is a gang of thieves writ large, and there are myriads upon myriads of instances where it has acted in this matter. Matters theological that are usually discussed here are just as frivolous; this biblical nonsense has no root in observable reality and only serves to delude and distract. It is as counter-productive as eschewing the medicinal knowledge of Eristratos and Galen as did the early Xtheists who instead preferred the equivalent of 'faith healing'. They favour things which coincide with their own pet doctrines over that which is derived from observation and logic.

I see a very strong thread of this fervour here, wherein people prostate themselves before the cross of legal myths, among others. They expect magic chants and arcane rituals before judges and hired thugs will spare them temporal wrath. The foolishness being presented herein as legal advice will only serve to discredit all else that is discussed, if not cause an unwitting reader imprisonment or worse.

Please pardon this departure for I had agreed to stay in the precious metals section, for this matter is pertinent enough to warrant my commentary.


Spoken like a youngster who still has a lot to learn about what goes on in the real world and such.

Skirnir, due to the era in which you came of age, I suggest you study more history in order to gain some historical perspective, as it appears to me you're lacking in that area. Just a thought.

[Saul Mine]

Get lost. Come back after you grow a brain. Then we can talk.

To be more specific, you have asked a stupid question. If you refuse to pay a tax you owe, well, nasty things will be done to you. But there is no penalty for refusing to volunteer for a tax you don't owe. When you can understand the difference, that is when we can talk coherently.

[I am me, I am free]

Get lost. Come back after you grow a brain. Then we can talk.

To be more specific, you have asked a stupid question. If you refuse to pay a tax you owe, well, nasty things will be done to you. But there is no penalty for refusing to volunteer for a tax you don't owe. When you can understand the difference, that is when we can talk coherently.


Thank you for succinctly getting to the heart of the matter.

[Skirnir]

No, Book makes a valid point. If one was in such a predicament, one would seek to rationalise one's circumstances, and delude themselves with a fallacy of false cause. That is not to say all who are attracted to forums dealing with previous metals are of this class, but this demographic is the most noticeable and vociferous and serves to discredit others. That is not to say either that concerns over freedom and the Constitution are invalid, rather, they are simply the subjects of said fallacy.

To combat this, it is necessary to think practically. One can debate how many angels can dance upon the foolish Ganaposki's right testicle until Ragnarok, but what is the significance? Government, as Murray Rothbard said, is a gang of thieves writ large, and there are myriads upon myriads of instances where it has acted in this matter. Matters theological that are usually discussed here are just as frivolous; this biblical nonsense has no root in observable reality and only serves to delude and distract. It is as counter-productive as eschewing the medicinal knowledge of Eristratos and Galen as did the early Xtheists who instead preferred the equivalent of 'faith healing'. They favour things which coincide with their own pet doctrines over that which is derived from observation and logic.

I see a very strong thread of this fervour here, wherein people prostate themselves before the cross of legal myths, among others. They expect magic chants and arcane rituals before judges and hired thugs will spare them temporal wrath. The foolishness being presented herein as legal advice will only serve to discredit all else that is discussed, if not cause an unwitting reader imprisonment or worse.

Please pardon this departure for I had agreed to stay in the precious metals section, for this matter is pertinent enough to warrant my commentary.


Spoken like a youngster who still has a lot to learn about what goes on in the real world and such.

Skirnir, due to the era in which you came of age, I suggest you study more history in order to gain some historical perspective, as it appears to me you're lacking in that area. Just a thought.


Seeing as you failed to respond to, much less refute, a single argument presented, it is thus foolish that you suggest things to me.

[gunDriller]

i thought this is about "What happens when you actively refuse to pay Federal taxes" - and continue to reside in the US.

if you expat to another country that does not have an extradition agreement with the US - it's different.

e.g. Julian Assange, the guy that run WikiLeaks. he lives in Sweden.

[The Great Ag]

Hey, Phoenix:

For they average "taxpayer," penalties, interest and possibly jail time. You have posted several examples of people who challenged the irs, spent considerable sums of money doing so, with limited success (Cryer had some.)

I have not read any of their cases but I suspect they could not show they were NOT liable for taxes. I suspect they do not understand the nature of FRNs, social security and nationality.

I am not writing to change your mind. From your posts it is clear you do NOT like the US gov't but believe there is NOTHING an individual can do to shuck the gov't. Sure one can try to make his/her liability as small as possible but never remove it altogether. And even if there was a way, it is futile to try as the gov't is bigger.

It is my opinion the gov't is NOT acting in good faith. It frequently tricks its citizens (fraud) so they can be taxed.

One of the fraudulent actions the US performs is to get citizens to certify under penalties of perjury they are US persons. The term "US person" is used exclusively for tax purposes. Why must the gov't create a fiction called "US person" to tax us?

The W-9 form shows this most clearly. Attached is screen shot from the most current W-9 form. I will say they revised it since I signed my first back in 98. It used to say, ". . .under penalties of perjury, I certify that I am a US person. . ." Now it is slightly different. It now says, "I am a US citizen or other US person."

However, notice the signature line where it states, "Signature of US person" Everyone who signs the form still certifies he/she is a US person.

Clearly the two are similar but NOT synonymous. What is the difference between the two? Answering that can shed some light about the nature of the tax system.

Also, I want to point out that the "person" who signs this form "under penalty of perjury" is doing so within the "United States." See 28USC1746 and reproduced below. (bold and underline mine) http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00001746----000-.html

TITLE 28 > PART V > CHAPTER 115 > § 1746
§ 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of perÂÂ*jury
Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:
(1) If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)�.

(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)�.

Do you live in the United States or in the United States of America? What is the gov't trying to do? It is still my opinion the gov't is not acting in good faith with reference to taxation.

What is your opinion regarding US citizen and US person.

[The Great Ag]

Here is another question for you, Phoenix:

Under current tax laws, I am classified as an independent contractor (Real estate agent). I do NOT receive any monies from the US gov't.

In 1912 a similar Realtor was NOT required to pay any federal income tax. FACT

In 1913 the gov't passed the 16th Amendment to the US CON. FACT

In 1914 the same Realtor was NOT required to pay any federal income tax. FACT Why was he/she NOT required to file a tax form?

In 2010 I am LEGALLY required to file a 1040 tax form reporting all income. What is the difference between me in 2010 and a 1914 counterpart?

These are the questions that should be asked by ALL taxpayers. What are your answers?

The Great Ag

[palani]

What is the difference between me in 2010 and a 1914 counterpart?

Your 1914 counterpart used lawful money obtained honestly while today you beg for a hamburger that you will gladly pay for on Thursday?

[The Great Ag]

What is the difference between me in 2010 and a 1914 counterpart?

Your 1914 counterpart used lawful money obtained honestly while today you beg for a hamburger that you will gladly pay for on Thursday?
Thanks for the memory, Palani. I love Wimpy. You are correct, and the 1914 counterpart did not apply NOR was issued a SS#.

However, as you know, it is possible to have lawful money today that is NOT gold and silver.

The Great Ag

[7th trump]

What is the difference between me in 2010 and a 1914 counterpart?

Your 1914 counterpart used lawful money obtained honestly while today you beg for a hamburger that you will gladly pay for on Thursday?

Actually in 1913 the government passed the 16th amendment which doesnt do much in helping tax protesters or tax guru's as they do not understand what this amendment did or didnt do.
What it didnt do was explain in detail who or what is taxed. All this amendment did was give broad authority to the fedeal government to tax unapportoinately. Theres a very good explaination for this because no amendment can not make void any prexisting article of the Constitution. The unapportioning article of the Constitution still exist, intact and enforced. More on that later.
Secondly, and not sure yet if this is even relevent, but the gold standard was suspended in 1933 to replace the currency with a fiat based currency. ( I have yet to see any statute imposing the income tax based on using fiat currency like I do with the Social security statutes). And in 1971 the silver standard, if you will, was also suspended.
And lastly, coupled with the passing of the 16th amendment Social Security was passed in 1935 which has no mandatory clause for participation of any American. The form SS-5 denotes the 14th amendment citizenship which as the Great Ag explains you sign under perjury as being a federal US citizen opposed to being a state citizen (I'm only using this state citizen as an example because the courts have ruled that state citizens get the full protections of the Bill of Rights).
This is the difference and why the 16th only applies to US citizens only and not state citizens because the laws surrounding the income tax on your labor first imply that everyone must first sign the ss-5 form under penalty that you are indeed the second class US citizen. The statutory details of taxable "wages" are in 26USC 3101(a) and 26USC 3401(a).

[7th trump]

Here is another question for you, Phoenix:

Under current tax laws, I am classified as an independent contractor (Real estate agent). I do NOT receive any monies from the US gov't.

In 1912 a similar Realtor was NOT required to pay any federal income tax. FACT

In 1913 the gov't passed the 16th Amendment to the US CON. FACT

In 1914 the same Realtor was NOT required to pay any federal income tax. FACT Why was he/she NOT required to file a tax form?

In 2010 I am LEGALLY required to file a 1040 tax form reporting all income. What is the difference between me in 2010 and a 1914 counterpart?

These are the questions that should be asked by ALL taxpayers. What are your answers?

The Great Ag

Mr. Ag you will not ever get any sort of answer from phoenix. He doesnt qualify himself as he never answers any questions to see if he even knows the statutues at hand.
You can ask, but he refuses to answer and yet like any socialist forces us to listen to his tripe that we are all wrong and only he is right.
Phoenix is not here to help anyone but his socialist agenda.
Give up on asking him anything......................hes not qualified!

[The Great Ag]

Mr. Ag you will not ever get any sort of answer from phoenix. He doesnt qualify himself as he never answers any questions to see if he even knows the statutues at hand.
You can ask, but he refuses to answer and yet like any socialist forces us to listen to his tripe that we are all wrong and only he is right.
Phoenix is not here to help anyone but his socialist agenda.
Give up on asking him anything......................hes not qualified!

I am always hopeful, as true debate can be very enlightening for all parties. However bantering back and forth, which happens far too much on most internet forums, does not enlighten anyone.

I am hoping to get a response so as to engage in honest debate.

You may be right. . .but I am hopeful.

The Great Ag

[Book]

Mr. Ag you will not ever get any sort of answer from phoenix.



I am hoping to get a response so as to engage in honest debate.

You may be right. . .but I am hopeful.



The Great Ag comes out of nowhere and piles on Phoenix. What's this "honest debate" nonsense?

:D

[7th trump]

Mr. Ag you will not ever get any sort of answer from phoenix.



I am hoping to get a response so as to engage in honest debate.

You may be right. . .but I am hopeful.



The Great Ag comes out of nowhere and piles on Phoenix. What's this "honest debate" nonsense?

:D





Hahahah..............................piles on phoenix?
Ag is asking simple questions. Wheres the piling on by asking simple questions?
If asking simple questions is piling on then you know something about phoenix that we can only speculate. Perhaps phoenix cannot answer simple question about law because phoenix doesnt understand law form and jurisdiction.
Hahahahahahaha..............

As for "honest bebate" we are still waiting on any honest, rational supported answers from phoenix and then you the GSUS socialist quatloos.com agent shows up.

[7th trump]

Has anyone else noticed that you never see the online green indicator for book and phoenix on at the same time.
Its one or the other never both or can someone confirm

[Book]

Hahahah..............................piles on phoenix?



The Great Ag did nothing more than endorse your continuing personal attack on Phoenix in this thread. If The Great Ag actually wanted "honest debate" he would start his own thread with a topic premise, state his own position on that topic, and then invite Phoenix and other GSUS members to post opposing comments. Scroll up and all there is, is a drive by shooting.

:oo-->

[wildcard]

Has anyone else noticed that you never see the online green indicator for book and phoenix on at the same time.
Its one or the other never both or can someone confirm


We're all book, you're book too.

*ok, you could never be book. I was just kidding. ;D

[1970 silver art]

Has anyone else noticed that you never see the online green indicator for book and phoenix on at the same time.
Its one or the other never both or can someone confirm


Book is "invisible" and that means that Book can still be logged in on GSUS but you will not see is name on the bottom of the main GSUS forum screen where it says "Users online".

[Skirnir]

I am hoping to get a response so as to engage in honest debate.

You may be right. . .but I am hopeful.



The Great Ag comes out of nowhere and piles on Phoenix. What's this "honest debate" nonsense?

:D



That is what I would like to know as well. One would think that people capable of critical thought would debate in a halfway-civilised manner, but instead it comes down to who can pander to the superstitions of others most emphatically. Nothing of any value is accomplished in this manner. Thus I think the medium is best for sharing opinions and data, not debating them, leaving the individual to determine the voracity of the arguments.

My argument all along is that the legal business is moot. Silent enim leges inter arma - laws are silent amidst the clash of arms. Let us say that the Mafia says I must pay protection money. I can go before the head of the Cosa Nostra and cite everything under the sun, be it ancient Mafia customs or splitting hairs about what some Don said a hundred years ago. My argument could be valid, but the collection agents will still come, and if they do not obtain their monies, kneecaps will be broken. Government is, again, nothing more than a gang of thieves writ large, ergo the Mafia example.

[wildcard]

After you accept the fact that we're not accomplishing jack doodly, then you can relax a bit and have some fun.

*but hey, do your own thing, jam that stick up a little further, if you use the right vocabulary you are bound to make an impact! :laugh

[Book]

Government is, again, nothing more than a gang of thieves writ large, ergo the Mafia example.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/01/home-state-democrats-reportedly-plan-lavish-birthday-party-rangel/

The evidence for your argument is printed on today's front page of every newspaper.

|--0--|

[Phoenix]

I have not read any of their cases but I suspect they could not show they were NOT liable for taxes.


Please provide the docket number(s) and court(s) of ANY case(s) you know of where the IRS went after someone, and that someone was able to have the court declare the IRS was wrong, and that that someone was "not liable" to pay the demanded taxes.

You contend that the government complies with words on paper. I contend the government does what it wants, based on its ability to wield superior force. You can prove me wrong if you can show where a victim of the IRS has compelled them to do his will with mere words.

[Phoenix]

What is the difference between me in 2010 and a 1914 counterpart?


The difference isn't you. The difference is the level of tyranny the US Government is now applying.

[Phoenix]

Has anyone else noticed that you never see the online green indicator for book and phoenix on at the same time.
Its one or the other never both or can someone confirm


You better check to see if "Quantum's" green light is on when Book's and mine are not.

:ROFL:

[Phoenix]

That is what I would like to know as well. One would think that people capable of critical thought would debate in a halfway-civilised manner, but instead it comes down to who can pander to the superstitions of others most emphatically. Nothing of any value is accomplished in this manner. Thus I think the medium is best for sharing opinions and data, not debating them, leaving the individual to determine the voracity of the arguments.

My argument all along is that the legal business is moot. Silent enim leges inter arma - laws are silent amidst the clash of arms. Let us say that the Mafia says I must pay protection money. I can go before the head of the Cosa Nostra and cite everything under the sun, be it ancient Mafia customs or splitting hairs about what some Don said a hundred years ago. My argument could be valid, but the collection agents will still come, and if they do not obtain their monies, kneecaps will be broken. Government is, again, nothing more than a gang of thieves writ large, ergo the Mafia example.


Skirnir, you're OK!

More insightful than the entire collection of "sovereign citizen" cultists.

[palani]

The difference is the level of tyranny the US Government is now applying.


Bad behavior has always been punishable.

[Phoenix]

there is no penalty for refusing to volunteer for a tax you don't owe.


Tell us which taxes we don't owe when the IRS says we do.

[Phoenix]

The difference is the level of tyranny the US Government is now applying.


Bad behavior has always been punishable.


"Good" behavior = do as we say.

[gunDriller]

My argument all along is that the legal business is moot. Silent enim leges inter arma - laws are silent amidst the clash of arms. Let us say that the Mafia says I must pay protection money. I can go before the head of the Cosa Nostra and cite everything under the sun, be it ancient Mafia customs or splitting hairs about what some Don said a hundred years ago. My argument could be valid, but the collection agents will still come, and if they do not obtain their monies, kneecaps will be broken. Government is, again, nothing more than a gang of thieves writ large, ergo the Mafia example.


that's the US government in a nutshell.

but the Mafia is nicer.

[palani]

[quote=palani ]
"Good" behavior = do as we say.

The order of things is confounded if every one preserves not his jurisdiction.

[Phoenix]

The order of things is confounded if every one preserves not his jurisdiction.


I challenge you to cite ONE court case you have been involved in where you were successful in arguing lack of jurisdiction.

[palani]

I challenge you to cite ONE court case you have been involved in where you were successful in arguing lack of jurisdiction.


If I were to argue then I would have no jurisdiction. Jurisdictional issues in any event are settled long before court.

[Phoenix]

I challenge you to cite ONE court case you have been involved in where you were successful in arguing lack of jurisdiction.


If I were to argue then I would have no jurisdiction. Jurisdictional issues in any event are settled long before court.


A sophisticated way of telling a lie.

If a government goon or private party files a suit against you, you must respond to the suit with a claim of invalid or inadequate jurisdiction, or you admit jurisdiction is valid resulting in default judgment.

[7th trump]

I challenge you to cite ONE court case you have been involved in where you were successful in arguing lack of jurisdiction.


If I were to argue then I would have no jurisdiction. Jurisdictional issues in any event are settled long before court.

Exactly Palani!
What our resident mossad agent phoenix doesnt understand is your signiture on a W4 form does two things.
1. Under penalty of perjury you reaffirm being a 14th amendment volunteer slave being under the jurisdiction of Congress. See 5USC 552(a)(13) "federal personel".
2. Under penalty of perjury you volunteeringly agree to treat your Common Law pay from your place of work as statutory 3121(a) "wages" to credit your SS account for immediate and deffered federal government benefits.
So yes, the IRS has you in their jurisdiction as long as they have you dead to rights volunteering into Social Security.
What all of the tax protester guru's along with the anti tax-protestrer guru's like Book and phoenix dont understand is they do not understand jurisdictional aspects of volunteering into SS.
What phoenix and his minions want you to beleive is you cannot escape social security and the only way out is total warfare against a system that they think is out of control.
You wouldnt dragged into court if the government didnt have you in their database as earning 3121(a) "wages".

[palani]

A sophisticated way of telling a lie.
Funny you should bring up lying. A previous member here (quantum) seemed to share similar views.


If a government goon or private party files a suit against you, you must respond to the suit with a claim of invalid or inadequate jurisdiction, or you admit jurisdiction is valid resulting in default judgment.
You seem to like to argue a lot. Do you find yourself losing accordingly?

[Phoenix]

What our resident mossad agent phoenix


:ROFL:




doesnt understand is your signiture on a W4 form does two things.


If you refuse to file or sign a W-4, your employer will do it for you, and the IRS will still take their tribute. Both you and the employer are subject to "civil penalties" (that's fines without due process of law) if a W-4 is not submitted.

BOTTOM LINE: the government DOES NOT require your "consent" for anything.

[Phoenix]

A previous member here (quantum) seemed to share similar views.


I'm sure "Quantum" believes the Sun rises in the East every morning, too.

Is that all you CULTISTS have? A cheap, worn-out, no-longer-effective insult that I am "Quantum"?



If a government goon or private party files a suit against you, you must
You seem to like to argue a lot. Do you find yourself losing accordingly?


Still waiting for you to present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please) where your fraudulent techniques actually work.

Can't do it, can you?

[palani]

Exactly Palani!
What our resident mossad agent phoenix doesnt understand is your signiture on a W4 form does two things.
1. Under penalty of perjury you reaffirm being a 14th amendment volunteer slave being under the jurisdiction of Congress. See 5USC 552(a)(13) "federal personel".
2. Under penalty of perjury you volunteeringly agree to treat your Common Law pay from your place of work as statutory 3121(a) "wages" to credit your SS account for immediate and deffered federal government benefits.
So yes, the IRS has you in their jurisdiction as long as they have you dead to rights volunteering into Social Security.
What all of the tax protester guru's along with the anti tax-protestrer guru's like Book and phoenix dont understand is they do not understand jurisdictional aspects of volunteering into SS.
What phoenix and his minions want you to beleive is you cannot escape social security and the only way out is total warfare against a system that they think is out of control.
You wouldnt dragged into court if the government didnt have you in their database as earning 3121(a) "wages".

I honestly don't know why everyone likes to chew on the government so much. Necessity imports privilege. Absolutely everything you do is voluntary so if you don't like it then don't volunteer.

Even signing under penalty of perjury is voluntary. If you consider the government to be de jure then perjury is a penalty that sticks. But if you consider the government to be de facto then you can lie with impunity (should you so desire) because at common law there is no crime of perjury in a de facto court. Should you be going into court with the handicap that you can only tell the truth when everyone else present from the judge to the prosecutor to the bailiff to the court clerk to your own attorney is lying through their teeth then I would suspect you will end up being the one paying for the room rent.

[7th trump]

What our resident mossad agent phoenix


:ROFL:




doesnt understand is your signiture on a W4 form does two things.


If you refuse to file or sign a W-4, your employer will do it for you, and the IRS will still take their tribute. Both you and the employer are subject to "civil penalties" (that's fines without due process of law) if a W-4 is not submitted.

BOTTOM LINE: the government DOES NOT require your "consent" for anything.

Nope, Wrong again and as usual.
A ssn is only required by the employee if the employee makes "wages" as in 3121(a) "wages". You have to have a ssn number to do that and the employer nor the IRS can sign you up for government benefits when it strips you of 9th and 10th amendment. Thats why it takes your consent. The government cannot take away your protections to tax you.
No government agency can deny you your constitutional protections period there are laws against that very such thing.

I've asked you to look at 42USc 1982, 1983 and 1984 and you didnt so the egg is on your face.


§ 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress(the Social security Act is an act of Congress) applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

[Skirnir]

Let me know when this arcanum will stop a bullet from a gun. :oo-->

[Phoenix]

if you consider the government to be de facto then you can lie with impunity (should you so desire) because at common law there is no crime of perjury in a de facto court.


The "sovereign citizen" movement version of the <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS330US330&q=kol+nidre+permit+to+lie&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=">Kol Nidre</a>.

PAY ATTENTION all! Palani is admitting that persons such as he have no reason NOT TO LIE to you.

[palani]

I'm sure "Quantum" believes the Sun rises in the East every morning, too.

Is that all you CULTISTS have? A cheap, worn-out, no-longer-effective insult that I am "Quantum"?
Cultist? Insult? I am a musician. I simply pluck the strings and listen for a melody. When I pluck your strings there is only discord.




Still waiting for you to present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please) where your fraudulent techniques actually work.

Can't do it, can you? Fraudulent? Is this your argument?

[Phoenix]

No government agency can deny you your constitutional protections period there are laws against that very such thing.


Rodney King can attest to how well these "laws" work:

http://iwanticewater.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/rodney-king.jpg


(apologies to Book for borrowing his idea)

[7th trump]

No government agency can deny you your constitutional protections period there are laws against that very such thing.


Rodney King can attest to how well these "law" work:

http://iwanticewater.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/rodney-king.jpg


(apologies to Book for borrowing his idea)

Well Rodney King was breaking the law wasnt he?
So whats your point ????????
Why would the government be coming after me with guns for not volunteering into the system?

[Phoenix]

Cultist?


Yes, cultist. You deny reality. You assert demonstrable falsehoods as "fact." When asked for proof, you ignore such requests. You have fellow cultists join in in attacking those who expose you.






Still waiting for you to present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please) where your fraudulent techniques actually work.

Can't do it, can you?

Fraudulent? Is this your argument?


present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)

[Phoenix]

Why would the government be coming after me with guns for not volunteering into the system?


You "volunteer" by living within their sights.

[palani]

if you consider the government to be de facto then you can lie with impunity (should you so desire) because at common law there is no crime of perjury in a de facto court.


The "sovereign citizen" movement version of the <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS330US330&q=kol+nidre+permit+to+lie&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=">Kol Nidre</a>.

PAY ATTENTION all! Palani is admitting that persons such as he have no reason NOT TO LIE to you.


Actually from a book entitled The De Facto Doctrine by Albert Constantineau available for download from google books. It is certainly a shame that Martha Stewart thought she was dealing with a de jure government but then she paid the price for her ignorance.

http://i32.tinypic.com/2z8dvsn.jpg

Are you ignorant of the law?

[Phoenix]

Are you ignorant of the law?


Obviously, you are:

http://www.paratexas.com/gestapotactics1.jpg

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/july2006/060706swat3.jpg

THAT is "the law."

[7th trump]

Why would the government be coming after me with guns for not volunteering into the system?


You "volunteer" by living within their sights.

How is living in their sights when nothing is reported for them to see in their sight?
Ohh.....I just love it how you pull that childish scare tactic when the law is shoved down your throat.

[7th trump]

Are you ignorant of the law?


Obviously, you are:

http://www.paratexas.com/gestapotactics1.jpg

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/july2006/060706swat3.jpg

THAT is "the law."

Hahahahahahahahaha.............the only card you can play isnt it.
Hahahahahahha.................ya gotta just love the nazi tactics.
For a so called God fearing person you sure are against God.

[palani]

THAT is "the law."
If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.

[7th trump]

THAT is "the law."
If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.

Phoenix is the only person scared and I mean really scared.
His scare tactics is really nothing more than a window into his mind.......................scared shytless he is!

[Phoenix]

If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.


Since you're having trouble reading this, BIG font:


present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)

[palani]

THAT is "the law."
If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.

Phoenix is the only person scared and I mean really scared.
His scare tactics is really nothing more than a window into his mind.......................scared shytless he is!

Sad really. He needs to grow a pair.

[Phoenix]

Sad really. He needs to grow a pair.


How about you, and answer the question:

present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)

[palani]

If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.


Since you're having trouble reading this, BIG font:


present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)


Remisus imperanti melius paretur. A man commanding not too strictly is best obeyed.

Of course the opposite is also true.

[Phoenix]

If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.


Since you're having trouble reading this, BIG font:


present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)


Remisus imperanti melius paretur. A man commanding not too strictly is best obeyed.

Of course the opposite is also true.


Palani admits: HE HAS NO PROOF WHATSOEVER OF HIS CLAIMS.

"Trust me," he says.

[Book]

Remisus imperanti melius paretur.



http://www.stus.com/images/products/cla249p12.gif

:oo-->

[palani]

If those pictures are your distorted view of law then I would advise you not to investigate my jurisdiction.


Since you're having trouble reading this, BIG font:


present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)


Remisus imperanti melius paretur. A man commanding not too strictly is best obeyed.

Of course the opposite is also true.


Palani admits: HE HAS NO PROOF WHATSOEVER OF HIS CLAIMS.

"Trust me," he says.


Refresh my memory please.

When did I say "trust me"?
What precisely are my claims?

[Book]

What precisely are my claims?



:ROFL:

[Skirnir]

This debate tactic Palani is trying to pull is tempting the opponent to reiterate his claims and using any factual or invented inaccuracies therein to discredit said opponent.

Nice try

[I am me, I am free]

You seem to like to argue a lot.

What I think you and others may not realize is that posting on this forum is apparently this guy's life, it's all he's got to entertain himself. I've encountered this type before, they're just another form of troll, they get their kicks from stirring it up with complete strangers in cyberspace. Being the biggest of cyperspace assholes is apparently their goal. imo

[palani]

What precisely are my claims?



:ROFL:


I don't think phoenix/quantum can point to any claim either, Demosthenes.

[palani]

This debate tactic Palani is trying to pull is tempting the opponent to reiterate his claims and using any factual or invented inaccuracies therein to discredit said opponent.

Nice try


I'll interpret your comments to say "I am just too lazy to read anything on my own so I'll just form an opinion based upon my ignorance". Am I close?

[palani]

You seem to like to argue a lot.

What I think you and others may not realize is that posting on this forum is apparently this guy's life, it's all he's got to entertain himself. I've encountered this type before, they're just another form of troll, they get their kicks from stirring it up with complete strangers in cyberspace. Being the biggest of cyperspace assholes is apparently their goal. imo


He might very well be a government troll working on a quota. Demosthenes has a vested interest in tax issues as well.

[Skirnir]

This debate tactic Palani is trying to pull is tempting the opponent to reiterate his claims and using any factual or invented inaccuracies therein to discredit said opponent.

Nice try


I'll interpret your comments to say "I am just too lazy to read anything on my own so I'll just form an opinion based upon my ignorance". Am I close?


Your interpretation is facetious.

[Phoenix]

What I think you and others may not realize is that posting on this forum is apparently this guy's life, it's all he's got to entertain himself. I've encountered this type before, they're just another form of troll, they get their kicks from stirring it up with complete strangers in cyberspace. Being the biggest of cyperspace assholes is apparently their goal. imo


This coming from someone who has been on GIM/GS-US every day I've been on, and seemingly as often, or more, than I've been on.

::)

I miss Agfinger. I seem to have had to take on their role here. If pointing out BULLSHIT from the likes of you and your fellow cultists makes me an "asshole," then I like being an "asshole."

[Book]

What I think you and others may not realize is that posting on this forum is apparently this guy's life...



website statistics:

I am me, I am free
Total Time Spent Online: 16 days, 17 hours and 30 minutes.

:oo-->

[Phoenix]

He might very well be a government troll working on a quota. Demosthenes has a vested interest in tax issues as well.


The government troll is Sukhoi Fan/I am Me, I am Free...he's admitted he's buddy-buddy with local "law enforcement." It's pretty clear he peddles this "sovereign citizen" shit to round up people who take the risk of coming out of the shadows, trusting that he's "on their side." That's the definition of con-man; someone who gains the mark's confidence.

[palani]

Your interpretation is facetious.

pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis is facetious.

[Book]

Palani: herein you have not make an iota of sense, are not worth my time, and have yet to even counter-argue my second argument. Additionally, stop with the capital letters already, it is puerile; note the proper use of capital letters in my posts.In a world of the blind a one eyed man might be KING.


Additionally, might I inquire if you are a lawyer?

No, you may not inquire. You are entitled to no due process because you have received no NOTICE. Your right to inquire is derived from NOTICE and you have received none (from me). Should you have received NOTICE from others then by all means pursue your inquiry from THEM.


:oo-->

[I am me, I am free]

What I think you and others may not realize is that posting on this forum is apparently this guy's life, it's all he's got to entertain himself. I've encountered this type before, they're just another form of troll, they get their kicks from stirring it up with complete strangers in cyberspace. Being the biggest of cyperspace assholes is apparently their goal. imo


This coming from someone who has been on GIM/GS-US every day I've been on, and seemingly as often, or more, than I've been on.

::)

I miss Agfinger. I seem to have had to take on their role here. If pointing out BULLsh*t from the likes of you and your fellow cultists makes me an "asshole," then I like being an "asshole."


My post avg = ~ 8 per day
Book's post avg = >20 per day
(Quantum)Phoenix's post avg = 46 posts per day (as Phoenix at least, as of right now, yesterday is was 'only' 42 posts/day)...day-um

Something else which should be taken into consideration is: whose wing are you under? whose flag do you fly? who do you serve? I think it is as self-evident as can be - with your CONSTANT affirmation of all the death cult memes you're serving the death cult. You CERTAINLY are not serving the causes of liberty. imo

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. --Thomas Jefferson

No doubt Quantum/Phoenix would argue with Thomas Jefferson himself. lol

[Skirnir]

Your interpretation is facetious.

pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis is facetious.


No, but its use is sesquipedalian.

[Book]

...you're serving the death cult.



:oo-->

[I am me, I am free]

...you're serving the death cult.



:oo-->


You are also serving the death cult, Book.

Funny thing is, both you and Quantum/Phoenix have pretty much the same MO from GIM from my observations: both of you are obsessive/compulsive posters, both got routinely banned for inappropriate, anti-social behavior (and yet resurrected as a different poster at the first opportunity), both of you get 'on a roll' about some topic, HEAVILY emotionally involved, and just can't seem to let it go, preferring to auger in, both of you have dark sides (mean-spirited, vindictive), both of you are thin-skinned, both of you like to find another poster to team up with to tag team the browbeating of complete strangers...what have I missed?

[Phoenix]

My post avg = ~ 8 per day
Book's post avg = >20 per day
(crap deleted) as Phoenix at least, as of right now, yesterday is was 'only' 42 posts/day)...day-um


I'm not going to address your "Quantum" crap.

42 posts per day @ average of 30 seconds a post? 21 minutes per day! OMG! Look at the Internet addict! ::)

Double it to one minute average per post, and it's still well less than an hour! Double it again for the time I use to read posts without responding, and it's less than TWO hours per day. What is that, less than half of what the typical American watches Talmudvision?




Something else which should be taken into consideration is: whose wing are you under? whose flag do you fly? who do you serve?


God Almighty is who I serve, and Truth is what God demands.

I fly no flags, I give no oaths to any Earthly power.




I think it is as self-evident as can be - with your CONSTANT affirmation of all the death cult memes you're serving the death cult. You CERTAINLY are not serving the causes of liberty.


Everything you say regarding the "sovereign citizen" garbage - "I don't have a license, I don't have a license plate, I don't pay taxes" - is ALL LIES.

Since the Devil is the father of lies, I guess that is who YOU serve.

[Phoenix]

both of you have dark sides (mean-spirited, vindictive)


You still haven't told Book or myself that you genuinely love us!

[7th trump]

You seem to like to argue a lot.

What I think you and others may not realize is that posting on this forum is apparently this guy's life, it's all he's got to entertain himself. I've encountered this type before, they're just another form of troll, they get their kicks from stirring it up with complete strangers in cyberspace. Being the biggest of cyperspace assholes is apparently their goal. imo


He might very well be a government troll working on a quota. Demosthenes has a vested interest in tax issues as well.

Yes Demothenes has a very interested vest in tax matters and I've called Book out on this before as I still say Book is from Quatloos.com.

[Skirnir]

Actually, in Phoenix' defence, his posting style involves more numerous posts because he responds to each post individually as opposed to addressing multiple posts in one. Thus, for comparison purposes, it may be wise to scale his post count per day down by a factor of two.

[7th trump]

Sad really. He needs to grow a pair.


How about you, and answer the question:

present even ONE court case (docket number and court, please)
Demanding arent we to ask palani to answer a question when you have refused each questi0on posed from the gitgo.

[I am me, I am free]

92 posts in the last 24 hours. I was ROFLMAO!

Clearly he's a time THIEF, attempting to get others to engage him by him posting the most idiotic, moronic, asinine CRAP.

I must discipline myself. Gonna do something constructive and worthwhile - gonna take the puppy outside and play -

PS - don't feed the trolls

[Phoenix]

Actually, in Phoenix' defence, his posting style involves more numerous posts because he responds to each post individually as opposed to addressing multiple posts in one. Thus, for compassionate purposes, it may be wise to scale his post count per day down by a factor of two.


Thank you, Skirnir. I like to post individually for the clarity of others' reading.

But, I couldn't care less what these genuine LOSERS think of me or how much I spend online each day. I have busy days every day, and come to GS-US, or Drudge, rense.com, and the local paper's website, to give me a change of pace from what I'm usually doing. I come here for no personal gain, unlike them, I come here in a quest for Truth, unlike them, and I'm always willing to extend appreciation for someone who helps in that quest (hence, my very high "thanks given" stat), unlike them.

[Phoenix]

92 posts in the last 24 hours. I was ROFLMAO!


92 minutes?

[Skirnir]

PS - don't feed the trolls


Good advice; I should have ignored your antics from the beginning.

[SirCruz]

Taxes are nothing but robbery!!

Plain and simple!!

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nX-03Sf1wDo&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nX-03Sf1wDo&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aroN2uRbIMc&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aroN2uRbIMc&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rPypDaXfIV8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rPypDaXfIV8&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fFwJevCy0iw&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fFwJevCy0iw&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wRkPxf5f-rk&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wRkPxf5f-rk&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[I am me, I am free]

92 posts in the last 24 hours. I was ROFLMAO!


92 minutes?


By your last posts for today only, it appears you've been on GSUS continuously since 10am PDT to 3:39pm PDT with only three breaks of 20, 22, and 26 minutes between posts (and the 26 minute 'break' appears right before you posted a long ass thread-starter post) - the rest of your 71 posts for today (since 10am PDT) average only about 4-5 minutes apart (many only 2-3 minutes apart). I'm guessing the only reason you 'appear' to be offline at GSUS since 3:39pm PDT today is because I pointed out that you live in front of the computer, that your entire life consists of posting online at GSUS. lol

Did you really think that anyone couldn't see through your bullsh*t and that they wouldn't look to your post record to show that you were spouting bullsh*t?? As if...lol

[Phoenix]

Taxes are nothing but robbery!!

Plain and simple!!


In America, that is absolutely correct...ARMED robbery!

Yet some people try to claim that the ARMED ROBBERS obey magic words.

[Phoenix]

Did you really think that anyone couldn't see through your bullsh*t and that they wouldn't look to your post record to show that you were spouting bullsh*t??


Did you really think that anyone couldn't see through your bullsh*t and that they wouldn't investigate your fraudulent claims to discover that you were spouting bullsh*t??

ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER?

ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER?

Phony license plate man.

[Phoenix]

By your last posts for today only, it appears you've been on GSUS continuously since 10am PDT to 3:39pm PDT with only three breaks of 20, 22, and 26 minutes between posts (and the 26 minute 'break' appears right before you posted a long ass thread-starter post) - the rest of your 71 posts for today (since 10am PDT) average only about 4-5 minutes apart (many only 2-3 minutes apart). I'm guessing the only reason you 'appear' to be offline at GSUS since 3:39pm PDT today is because I pointed out that you live in front of the computer, that your entire life consists of posting online at GSUS. lol


BTW, what sort of NUT goes to such lengths to account for an Internet poster's time online?

[The Great Ag]

I have not read any of their cases but I suspect they could not show they were NOT liable for taxes.


Please provide the docket number(s) and court(s) of ANY case(s) you know of where the IRS went after someone, and that someone was able to have the court declare the IRS was wrong, and that that someone was "not liable" to pay the demanded taxes.

You contend that the government complies with words on paper. I contend the government does what it wants, based on its ability to wield superior force. You can prove me wrong if you can show where a victim of the IRS has compelled them to do his will with mere words.

Fair enough, Phoenix.

I have been very busy the past month and will be so for some time to come. However, as soon as I can, I shall post a separate thread with a court cite for all to read where a jury found a man did NOT have a tax liability. I have to dig through a lot of old information to get to it.

I would appreciate you answering my first question regarding the difference between a US person and a US citizen.

The Great Ag

[Phoenix]

the difference between a US person and a US citizen


None, if the US Government considers you a "US Citizen." Please, no "14th Amendment citizen" crap. We both know that means nothing to the IRS, or any Federal agency for that matter.

[Fortyone]

This question is easy! YOU GO TO JAIL! Im waiting for the whole deal to fail,Im not rotting in jail or spending all my FRNs fighting the system, bottom line, if you use FRNs for you currency, your stuck in the system. you cant have it both ways.
As for these con men, thats just what they are.

[The Great Ag]

the difference between a US person and a US citizen


None, if the US Government considers you a "US Citizen." Please, no "14th Amendment citizen" crap. We both know that means nothing to the IRS, or any Federal agency for that matter.

There is, but you are not who I thought you were. Too bad, otherwise it could have been quite lively. I will not be responding in this thread anymore. Some GIMer, who became a GSUSer stated in his sig line, "I can explain it you, but I can't understand it for you."

However, I will stick with my word and post the court case in the general forum marked with your attention when I find it.

The Great Ag

[Phoenix]

you arenot who I thought you were


Who did you think I was, "Quantum"?

I'm Fred/PDT, etc., etc.



"I can explain it you, but I can't understand it for you."


I could say the same to you. You obey, or you suffer the consequences: THAT is the whole of American government.




However, I will stick with my word and post the court case in the general forum marked with your attention when I find it.


Thank you, I look forward to it.

[Book]

...you're serving the death cult.



:oo-->


You are also serving the death cult, Book.



:oo-->

[7th trump]

the difference between a US person and a US citizen


None, if the US Government considers you a "US Citizen." Please, no "14th Amendment citizen" crap. We both know that means nothing to the IRS, or any Federal agency for that matter.

And yet phoenix puts his foot in his mouth once again.
The sole authority of the IRS to define citizen is the 14th amendment. From the IRS's horses mouth here you go phoenix. Make yourself totally stupid and ignorant as usual.


C. The Meaning of Certain Terms Used in the Internal Revenue Code
1. Contention: Taxpayer is not a “citizen� of the United States, thus
not subject to the federal income tax laws.
Some individuals argue that they have rejected citizenship in the United
States in favor of state citizenship; therefore, they are relieved of their
federal income tax obligations. A variation of this argument is that a
person is a free born citizen of a particular state and thus was never a
citizen of the United States. The underlying theme of these arguments is
the same: the person is not a United States citizen and is not subject to
federal tax laws because only United States citizens are subject to these
laws.

The Law:
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
defines the basis for United States citizenship, stating that “[a]ll persons
born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction
22
thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they
reside.� The Fourteenth Amendment therefore establishes simultaneous
state and federal citizenship. Claims that individuals are not citizens of the
United States but are solely citizens of a sovereign state and not subject
to federal taxation have been uniformly rejected by the courts. The IRS
issued Revenue Ruling 2007-22, 2007-14 I.R.B. 866, warning taxpayers of
the consequences of making this frivolous argument

And the regulation:
26cfr 1-1.1(c)

(c) Who is a citizen. Every person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen. For other rules governing the acquisition of citizenship, see chapters 1 and 2 of title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401–1459). For rules governing loss of citizenship, see sections 349 to 357, inclusive, of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1481–1489), Schneider v. Rusk, (1964) 377 U.S. 163, and Rev. Rul. 70–506, C.B. 1970–2, 1. For rules pertaining to persons who are nationals but not citizens at birth, e.g., a person born in American Samoa, see section 308 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1408). For special rules applicable to certain expatriates who have lost citizenship with a principal purpose of avoiding certain taxes, see section 877. A foreigner who has filed his declaration of intention of becoming a citizen but who has not yet been admitted to citizenship by a final order of a naturalization court is an alien.


And who is that the IRS imposes?
We find out one paragraph before 26CFR 1.1-1(c)


(b) Citizens or residents of the United States liable to tax. In general, all citizens of the United States, wherever resident, and all resident alien individuals are liable to the income taxes imposed by the Code whether the income is received from sources within or without the United States. Pursuant to section 876, a nonresident alien individual who is a bona fide resident of a section 931 possession (as defined in §1.931–1(c)(1) of this chapter) or Puerto Rico during the entire taxable year is, except as provided in section 931 or 933 with respect to income from sources within such possessions, subject to taxation in the same manner as a resident alien individual. As to tax on nonresident alien individuals, see sections 871 and 877.




And what do thew courts say about the 14th?




“...he was not a citizen of the United States, he was a citizen and voter of the State,...� “One may be a citizen of a State an yet not a citizen of the United States�.
McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883)


“We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of it’s own...�
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)


]"A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government ..."
Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383



“The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other�.
Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)


“There is a difference between privileges and immunities belonging to the citizens of the United States as such, and those belonging to the citizens of each state as such�.
Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41 (1900)


“The rights and privileges, and immunities which the fourteenth constitutional amendment and Rev. St. section 1979 [U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1262], for its enforcement, were designated to protect, are such as belonging to citizens of the United States as such, and not as citizens of a state�.
Wadleigh v. Newhall 136 F. 941 (1905)


“...rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship�.
Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940)

Now tell me in front of everyone in this forum how the government can force anyone to take a number to confer federal citizenship that strips those who consent their natural and inherent God given Rights phoenix?
Are you ballzy enough to stand in front of us and boldly LIE?

[Skirnir]

If the unfortunate were to befall some of these posters who say they need not pay their 'protection money' once they get to prison, will they squeal at the top of their lungs, take it silently, or actually enjoy it? ::)

[Book]

If the unfortunate were to befall some of these posters who say they need not pay their 'protection money'...



http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/recess_03_18/r32_18254339.jpg

It is obvious now that these posters don't have any real income to tax. They lost their jobs, wives, kids, drivers license, and credit worthyness long ago and today just rant while wrapping their deluded selves in The Flag. Probably post from a computer at the local public library...lol.

[Skirnir]

If the unfortunate were to befall some of these posters who say they need not pay their 'protection money'...



http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/recess_03_18/r32_18254339.jpg

It is obvious now that these posters don't have any real income to tax. They lost their jobs, wives, kids, drivers license, and credit worthyness long ago and today just rant while wrapping their deluded selves in The Flag. Probably post from a computer at the local public library...lol.


Some may, some may not. I worked under the table for awhile and paid in cash so it could be that. $3/hr is not much but I learned Chinese ;D

[I am me, I am free]

If the unfortunate were to befall some of these posters who say they need not pay their 'protection money'...



http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/recess_03_18/r32_18254339.jpg

It is obvious now that these posters don't have any real income to tax. They lost their jobs, wives, kids, drivers license, and credit worthyness long ago and today just rant while wrapping their deluded selves in The Flag. Probably post from a computer at the local public library...lol.


I defy you to find the definition of the term 'income' in Title 26.

Due to this lack of comprehension of plain English I have concluded you're a dolt.

[palani]

I worked under the table for awhile and paid in cash so it could be that. $3/hr is not much but I learned Chinese ;D


So low wages is an excuse to commit a criminal act?

[Joe King]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_and_Elaine_Brown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1RQkhjV85M

Ron nails the problem after 1:40 mark when he speaks of the zombies going along because it's easy.
If we're f'ed .gov-wise, we only have to thank the zombies amongst us and those of the past several generations who, as Milgrim showed us, seek to obey figures of authority no matter what.

It all comes down to zombies vs non-zombies.
Which one are you?

[Fudup]

As this thread is on the internet, I believe none of you. ;D

[Phoenix]

I defy you to find the definition of the term 'income' in Title 26.


I defy you to PROVE you drive around without a license, without real license plates, and don't pay all taxes the government demands of you.

[Phoenix]

I worked under the table for awhile and paid in cash so it could be that. $3/hr is not much but I learned Chinese ;D


So low wages is an excuse to commit a criminal act?


I thought you people said he "wasn't liable" to pay income tax?

::)

[Phoenix]

It all comes down to zombies vs non-zombies.
Which one are you?


It all comes down to <a href="http://www.europac.net/">people at home with their families</a> vs. <a href="http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&FirstName=Irwin&Middle=&LastName=Schiff&Race=U&Sex=U&Age=&x=65&y=12">inmates</a>.

Which one do you want to be?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiMz43zdE8k

[Skirnir]

I worked under the table for awhile and paid in cash so it could be that. $3/hr is not much but I learned Chinese ;D


So low wages is an excuse to commit a criminal act?


If I can get away with it, why not?

[Phoenix]

I worked under the table for awhile and paid in cash so it could be that. $3/hr is not much but I learned Chinese ;D


So low wages is an excuse to commit a criminal act?


If I can get away with it, why not?


Skirnir, you're missing the point! Don't you feel guilty for taking away the profits of these CON-MEN, by telling everyone about the ONLY effective way of avoiding paying taxes?

No, I don't suppose you do...nor should you. ;D

[Joe King]

It all comes down to zombies vs non-zombies.
Which one are you?
It all comes down to <a href="http://www.europac.net/">people at home with their families</a> vs. <a href="http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&FirstName=Irwin&Middle=&LastName=Schiff&Race=U&Sex=U&Age=&x=65&y=12">inmates</a>.
Which one do you want to be?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiMz43zdE8k
You seem to have missed the point of my post. What I was getting at is the fact that if the zombies of past generations hadn't blindly trusted in .gov and went along with the program simply to get along, we'd still have our fully functioning Republic.
Unfortunately, too many of our parents, grandparents, and their parents fell asleep during their Watch.

Milgrim aptly demonstrated the zombie effect that RP spoke of.
Now that's something that should be taught in school. {how to avoid being a zombie}

[I am me, I am free]

Where's the definition of the term 'income' in Title 26??

It's fascinating how some browbeat others into signing a document swearing under the pains and penalties of perjury that it's all true and correct when they really haven't a shred of comprehension of any of it. lol Talk about DUMB.

[Phoenix]

Where's the definition of the term 'income' in Title 26??


26 USC 61:

Gross income defined

(a) General definition
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;
(2) Gross income derived from business;
(3) Gains derived from dealings in property;
(4) Interest;
(5) Rents;
(6) Royalties;
(7) Dividends;
( 8 ) Alimony and separate maintenance payments;
(9) Annuities;
(10) Income from life insurance and endowment contracts;
(11) Pensions;
(12) Income from discharge of indebtedness;
(13) Distributive share of partnership gross income;
(14) Income in respect of a decedent; and
(15) Income from an interest in an estate or trust.

26 USC 63:

Taxable income defined

(a) In general
Except as provided in subsection (b), for purposes of this subtitle, the term “taxable income� means gross income minus the deductions allowed by this chapter (other than the standard deduction).
(b) Individuals who do not itemize their deductions
In the case of an individual who does not elect to itemize his deductions for the taxable year, for purposes of this subtitle, the term “taxable income� means adjusted gross income, minus�
(1) the standard deduction, and
(2) the deduction for personal exemptions provided in section 151.
(c) Standard deduction
For purposes of this subtitle�
(1) In general
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the term “standard deduction� means the sum of�
(A) the basic standard deduction,
(B) the additional standard deduction,
(C) in the case of any taxable year beginning in 2008 or 2009, the real property tax deduction,
(D) the disaster loss deduction, and
(E) the motor vehicle sales tax deduction.
(2) Basic standard deduction
For purposes of paragraph (1), the basic standard deduction is�
(A) 200 percent of the dollar amount in effect under subparagraph (C) for the taxable year in the case of�
(i) a joint return, or
(ii) a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2 (a)),
(B) $4,400 in the case of a head of household (as defined in section 2 (b)), or
(C) $3,000 in any other case.
(3) Additional standard deduction for aged and blind
For purposes of paragraph (1), the additional standard deduction is the sum of each additional amount to which the taxpayer is entitled under subsection (f).
(4) Adjustments for inflation
In the case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 1988, each dollar amount contained in paragraph (2)(B), (2)(C), or (5) or subsection (f) shall be increased by an amount equal to�
(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under section 1 (f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable year begins, by substituting for “calendar year 1992� in subparagraph (B) thereof�
(i) “calendar year 1987� in the case of the dollar amounts contained in paragraph (2)(B), (2)(C), or (5)(A) or subsection (f), and
(ii) “calendar year 1997� in the case of the dollar amount contained in paragraph (5)(B).
(5) Limitation on basic standard deduction in the case of certain dependents
In the case of an individual with respect to whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable to another taxpayer for a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the individual’s taxable year begins, the basic standard deduction applicable to such individual for such individual’s taxable year shall not exceed the greater of�
(A) $500, or
(B) the sum of $250 and such individual’s earned income.
(6) Certain individuals, etc., not eligible for standard deduction
In the case of�
(A) a married individual filing a separate return where either spouse itemizes deductions,
(B) a nonresident alien individual,
(C) an individual making a return under section 443 (a)(1) for a period of less than 12 months on account of a change in his annual accounting period, or
(D) an estate or trust, common trust fund, or partnership,
the standard deduction shall be zero.
(7) Real property tax deduction
For purposes of paragraph (1), the real property tax deduction is the lesser of�
(A) the amount allowable as a deduction under this chapter for State and local taxes described in section 164 (a)(1), or
(B) $500 ($1,000 in the case of a joint return).
Any taxes taken into account under section 62 (a) shall not be taken into account under this paragraph.
( 8 ) Disaster loss deduction
For the purposes of paragraph (1), the term “disaster loss deduction� means the net disaster loss (as defined in section 165 (h)(3)(B)).
(9) Motor vehicle sales tax deduction
For purposes of paragraph (1), the term “motor vehicle sales tax deduction� means the amount allowable as a deduction under section 164 (a)(6). Such term shall not include any amount taken into account under section 62 (a).
(d) Itemized deductions
For purposes of this subtitle, the term “itemized deductions� means the deductions allowable under this chapter other than�
(1) the deductions allowable in arriving at adjusted gross income, and
(2) the deduction for personal exemptions provided by section 151.
(e) Election to itemize
(1) In general
Unless an individual makes an election under this subsection for the taxable year, no itemized deduction shall be allowed for the taxable year. For purposes of this subtitle, the determination of whether a deduction is allowable under this chapter shall be made without regard to the preceding sentence.
(2) Time and manner of election
Any election under this subsection shall be made on the taxpayer’s return, and the Secretary shall prescribe the manner of signifying such election on the return.
(3) Change of election
Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, a change of election with respect to itemized deductions for any taxable year may be made after the filing of the return for such year. If the spouse of the taxpayer filed a separate return for any taxable year corresponding to the taxable year of the taxpayer, the change shall not be allowed unless, in accordance with such regulations�
(A) the spouse makes a change of election with respect to itemized deductions, for the taxable year covered in such separate return, consistent with the change of treatment sought by the taxpayer, and
(B) the taxpayer and his spouse consent in writing to the assessment (within such period as may be agreed on with the Secretary) of any deficiency, to the extent attributable to such change of election, even though at the time of the filing of such consent the assessment of such deficiency would otherwise be prevented by the operation of any law or rule of law.
This paragraph shall not apply if the tax liability of the taxpayer’s spouse for the taxable year corresponding to the taxable year of the taxpayer has been compromised under section 7122.
(f) Aged or blind additional amounts
(1) Additional amounts for the aged
The taxpayer shall be entitled to an additional amount of $600�
(A) for himself if he has attained age 65 before the close of his taxable year, and
(B) for the spouse of the taxpayer if the spouse has attained age 65 before the close of the taxable year and an additional exemption is allowable to the taxpayer for such spouse under section 151 (b).
(2) Additional amount for blind
The taxpayer shall be entitled to an additional amount of $600�
(A) for himself if he is blind at the close of the taxable year, and
(B) for the spouse of the taxpayer if the spouse is blind as of the close of the taxable year and an additional exemption is allowable to the taxpayer for such spouse under section 151 (b).
For purposes of subparagraph (B), if the spouse dies during the taxable year the determination of whether such spouse is blind shall be made as of the time of such death.
(3) Higher amount for certain unmarried individuals
In the case of an individual who is not married and is not a surviving spouse, paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be applied by substituting “$750� for “$600�.
(4) Blindness defined
For purposes of this subsection, an individual is blind only if his central visual acuity does not exceed 20/200 in the better eye with correcting lenses, or if his visual acuity is greater than 20/200 but is accompanied by a limitation in the fields of vision such that the widest diameter of the visual field subtends an angle no greater than 20 degrees.
(g) Marital status
For purposes of this section, marital status shall be determined under section 7703.

[I am me, I am free]

That definition is for 'gross income'. That's like saying 'gross widgets' - I comprehend the term 'gross', but what's a widget??

Still waiting for that definition for the term 'income' from Title 26. Only a fool would accept the term 'gross income' without the term 'income' defined.

[Phoenix]

That definition is for 'gross income'.


26 USC 63:

Taxable income defined




Still waiting for that definition for the term 'income' from Title 26. Only a fool would accept the term 'gross income' without the term 'income' defined.


http://gold-silver.us/forum/general-discussion/do-you-trust-legal-advice-in-internet-forums/msg89413/#msg89413

"Now watch him obfuscate, backpeddle, and generally use sophistry to try to argue that 26 USC 61 and 63 don't actually mean what they say."

[palani]

I worked under the table for awhile and paid in cash so it could be that. $3/hr is not much but I learned Chinese ;D


So low wages is an excuse to commit a criminal act?


If I can get away with it, why not?


By your reasoning then murder must be ok as well as long as you can get away with it?

[7th trump]

That definition is for 'gross income'. That's like saying 'gross widgets' - I comprehend the term 'gross', but what's a widget??

Still waiting for that definition for the term 'income' from Title 26. Only a fool would accept the term 'gross income' without the term 'income' defined.

To be honest I'am gross income does include everything you do towards Social Security except for whats excluded or exempted from the terms 26 USC 3121(b) "empoyment" and 26USC 3121(a) "wage".
I do not have the statute in front of me I'am, but "compensation for services" is synonymous to Social Security 3121(b) "employment". You can find it easy enough on the SS website in the online "SS handbook". A lot of people today wouldnt be serving a sentence if they just looked at that "SS handbook" and changed their ignorance stance on income taxes.
Anyway to get down to the nut and bolts of what is and what is not taxable you have to actually go to look up 26USC 3401(a) "wages" to see what is excluded from the term.
For those who dont know what 3401(a) "wages" are, 3401(a) "wages" are what Congress has defined you make in order for the Section 1 imposition (federal income tax) to take effect. In other words 3401(a) "wages" is the amount you earned through out the year that put you in the box on the 1040 from your W2 receipt.
3401(a) has exclusion or exemptions from the term meaning what is not deemed 3401(a) "wages" is not considered taxable. But what is most interesting about these exclusions is the fact that what is excluded from 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 federal income tax to have any effect comes directly from both 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" of chapter 21 of Title 26 for Social Security purposes.
Heres the section so you can see for yourself.


§ 3401. Definitions
(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages� means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid�
(1) for active service performed in a month for which such employee is entitled to the benefits of section 112 (relating to certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces of the United States) to the extent remuneration for such service is excludable from gross income under such section; or
(2) for agricultural labor (as defined in section 3121 (g)) unless the remuneration paid for such labor is wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)); or
(3) for domestic service in a private home, local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority; or
(4) for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business performed in any calendar quarter by an employee, unless the cash remuneration paid for such service is $50 or more and such service is performed by an individual who is regularly employed by such employer to perform such service. For purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be deemed to be regularly employed by an employer during a calendar quarter only if�
(A) on each of some 24 days during such quarter such individual performs for such employer for some portion of the day service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business; or
(B) such individual was regularly employed (as determined under subparagraph (A)) by such employer in the performance of such service during the preceding calendar quarter; or
(5) for services by a citizen or resident of the United States for a foreign government or an international organization; or
(6) for such services, performed by a nonresident alien individual, as may be designated by regulations prescribed by the Secretary; or
[(7) Repealed. Pub. L. 89–809, title I, § 103(k), Nov. 13, 1966, 80 Stat. 1554]
(8)
(A) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof)�
(i) performed by a citizen of the United States if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income under section 911; or
(ii) performed in a foreign country or in a possession of the United States by such a citizen if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, the employer is required by the law of any foreign country or possession of the United States to withhold income tax upon such remuneration; or
(B) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States (other than Puerto Rico), if it is reasonable to believe that at least 80 percent of the remuneration to be paid to the employee by such employer during the calendar year will be for such services; or
(C) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within Puerto Rico, if it is reasonable to believe that during the entire calendar year the employee will be a bona fide resident of Puerto Rico; or
(D) for services for the United States (or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States to the extent the United States (or such agency) withholds taxes on such remuneration pursuant to an agreement with such possession; or
(9) for services performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order; or
(10)
(A) for services performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution; or
(B) for services performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such services, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back; or
(11) for services not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, to the extent paid in any medium other than cash; or
(12) to, or on behalf of, an employee or his beneficiary�
(A) from or to a trust described in section 401 (a) which is exempt from tax under section 501 (a) at the time of such payment unless such payment is made to an employee of the trust as remuneration for services rendered as such employee and not as a beneficiary of the trust; or
(B) under or to an annuity plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 403 (a); or
(C) for a payment described in section 402 (h)(1) and (2) if, at the time of such payment, it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be entitled to an exclusion under such section for payment; or
(D) under an arrangement to which section 408 (p) applies; or
(E) under or to an eligible deferred compensation plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 457 (b) which is maintained by an eligible employer described in section 457 (e)(1)(A),[1] or
(13) pursuant to any provision of law other than section 5(c) or 6(1) of the Peace Corps Act, for service performed as a volunteer or volunteer leader within the meaning of such Act; or
(14) in the form of group-term life insurance on the life of an employee; or
(15) to or on behalf of an employee if (and to the extent that) at the time of the payment of such remuneration it is reasonable to believe that a corresponding deduction is allowable under section 217 (determined without regard to section 274 (n)); or
(16)
(A) as tips in any medium other than cash;
(B) as cash tips to an employee in any calendar month in the course of his employment by an employer unless the amount of such cash tips is $20 or more; [2]
(17) for service described in section 3121 (b)(20); [2]
(18) for any payment made, or benefit furnished, to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment or such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment or benefit from income under section 127, 129, 134 (b)(4), or 134 (b)(5); [2]
(19) for any benefit provided to or on behalf of an employee if at the time such benefit is provided it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such benefit from income under section 74 (c), 108 (f)(4), 117, or 132; [2]
(20) for any medical care reimbursement made to or for the benefit of an employee under a self-insured medical reimbursement plan (within the meaning of section 105 (h)(6)); [2]
(21) for any payment made to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment from income under section 106 (b); [2]
(22) any payment made to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment from income under section 106 (d); or
(23) for any benefit or payment which is excludable from the gross income of the employee under section 139B (b).
The term “wages� includes any amount includible in gross income of an employee under section 409A and payment of such amount shall be treated as having been made in the taxable year in which the amount is so includible.

Now I've only highlighted and bolded the easy ones that dont need much research, however most of these exclusions come directly from Social Security. And the most revealing aspect of what I'm showing you is prior the revised 1939 code there wasnt ever a chapter 21 or Social Security in any previous revenue acts. The 1916 revenue as well as the 1923 or the 1934 revenue acts didnt have these Social Security exclusions nor Social Security itself.
So what is important about all of this?
Whats important is the only way you are going to be included into the definition of "Gross Income" by way of "compensation for personal services" according to the law is you are going to have to be 3121(b) "employed or making 3121(a) "wages" which means, by law, you have to have ssn for this to happen. And by the law, there is no law, Act of Congress, statute, regulation or code that says every American has to have a ssn to live and work in America. In fact, the SSA says you dont need a ssn to live and wok in America.
I can go on and on and on with this but right now I dont have time.

[7th trump]

Just so you have fun playing around with 3121(a) "wages" heres 3121(a) "wages" so you can see that I'm not making this up.


3121. Definitions
(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages� means all remuneration for employment, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include�

(1) in the case of the taxes imposed by sections 3101 (a) and 3111 (a) that part of the remuneration which, after remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) equal to the contribution and benefit base (as determined under section 230 of the Social Security Act) with respect to employment has been paid to an individual by an employer during the calendar year with respect to which such contribution and benefit base is effective, is paid to such individual by such employer during such calendar year. If an employer (hereinafter referred to as successor employer) during any calendar year acquires substantially all the property used in a trade or business of another employer (hereinafter referred to as a predecessor), or used in a separate unit of a trade or business of a predecessor, and immediately after the acquisition employs in his trade or business an individual who immediately prior to the acquisition was employed in the trade or business of such predecessor, then, for the purpose of determining whether the successor employer has paid remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) with respect to employment equal to the contribution and benefit base (as determined under section 230 of the Social Security Act) to such individual during such calendar year, any remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) with respect to employment paid (or considered under this paragraph as having been paid) to such individual by such predecessor during such calendar year and prior to such acquisition shall be considered as having been paid by such successor employer;
(2) the amount of any payment (including any amount paid by an employer for insurance or annuities, or into a fund, to provide for any such payment) made to, or on behalf of, an employee or any of his dependents under a plan or system established by an employer which makes provision for his employees generally (or for his employees generally and their dependents) or for a class or classes of his employees (or for a class or classes of his employees and their dependents), on account of�
(A) sickness or accident disability (but, in the case of payments made to an employee or any of his dependents, this subparagraph shall exclude from the term “wages� only payments which are received under a workman’s compensation law), or
(B) medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability, or
(C) death, except that this paragraph does not apply to a payment for group-term life insurance to the extent that such payment is includible in the gross income of the employee;
[(3) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–21, title III, § 324(a)(3)(B), Apr. 20, 1983, 97 Stat. 123]
(4) any payment on account of sickness or accident disability, or medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability, made by an employer to, or on behalf of, an employee after the expiration of 6 calendar months following the last calendar month in which the employee worked for such employer;
(5) any payment made to, or on behalf of, an employee or his beneficiary�
(A) from or to a trust described in section 401 (a) which is exempt from tax under section 501 (a) at the time of such payment unless such payment is made to an employee of the trust as remuneration for services rendered as such employee and not as a beneficiary of the trust,
(B) under or to an annuity plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 403 (a),
(C) under a simplified employee pension (as defined in section 408 (k)(1)), other than any contributions described in section 408 (k)(6),
(D) under or to an annuity contract described in section 403 (b), other than a payment for the purchase of such contract which is made by reason of a salary reduction agreement (whether evidenced by a written instrument or otherwise),
(E) under or to an exempt governmental deferred compensation plan (as defined in subsection (v)(3)),
(F) to supplement pension benefits under a plan or trust described in any of the foregoing provisions of this paragraph to take into account some portion or all of the increase in the cost of living (as determined by the Secretary of Labor) since retirement but only if such supplemental payments are under a plan which is treated as a welfare plan under section 3(2)(B)(ii) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,
(G) under a cafeteria plan (within the meaning of section 125) if such payment would not be treated as wages without regard to such plan and it is reasonable to believe that (if section 125 applied for purposes of this section) section 125 would not treat any wages as constructively received,
(H) under an arrangement to which section 408 (p) applies, other than any elective contributions under paragraph (2)(A)(i) thereof, or
(I) under a plan described in section 457 (e)(11)(A)(ii) and maintained by an eligible employer (as defined in section 457 (e)(1));
(6) the payment by an employer (without deduction from the remuneration of the employee)�
(A) of the tax imposed upon an employee under section 3101, or
(B) of any payment required from an employee under a State unemployment compensation law,
with respect to remuneration paid to an employee for domestic service in a private home of the employer or for agricultural labor;
(7)
(A) remuneration paid in any medium other than cash to an employee for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business or for domestic service in a private home of the employer;
(B) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for domestic service in a private home of the employer (including domestic service on a farm operated for profit), if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than the applicable dollar threshold (as defined in subsection (x)) for such year;
(C) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than $100. As used in this subparagraph, the term “service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business� does not include domestic service in a private home of the employer and does not include service described in subsection (g)(5);
(8)
(A) remuneration paid in any medium other than cash for agricultural labor;
(B) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for agricultural labor unless�
(i) the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such labor is $150 or more, or
(ii) the employer’s expenditures for agricultural labor in such year equal or exceed $2,500,
except that clause (ii) shall not apply in determining whether remuneration paid to an employee constitutes “wages� under this section if such employee (I) is employed as a hand harvest laborer and is paid on a piece rate basis in an operation which has been, and is customarily and generally recognized as having been, paid on a piece rate basis in the region of employment, (II) commutes daily from his permanent residence to the farm on which he is so employed, and (III) has been employed in agriculture less than 13 weeks during the preceding calendar year;
[(9) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–21, title III, § 324(a)(3)(B), Apr. 20, 1983, 97 Stat. 123]
(10) remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for service described in subsection (d)(3)(C) (relating to home workers), if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than $100;
(11) remuneration paid to or on behalf of an employee if (and to the extent that) at the time of the payment of such remuneration it is reasonable to believe that a corresponding deduction is allowable under section 217 (determined without regard to section 274 (n));
(12)
(A) tips paid in any medium other than cash; (B) cash tips received by an employee in any calendar month in the course of his employment by an employer unless the amount of such cash tips is $20 or more;
(13) any payment or series of payments by an employer to an employee or any of his dependents which is paid�
(A) upon or after the termination of an employee’s employment relationship because of
(i) death, or
(ii) retirement for disability, and
(B) under a plan established by the employer which makes provision for his employees generally or a class or classes of his employees (or for such employees or class or classes of employees and their dependents),
other than any such payment or series of payments which would have been paid if the employee’s employment relationship had not been so terminated;
(14) any payment made by an employer to a survivor or the estate of a former employee after the calendar year in which such employee died;
(15) any payment made by an employer to an employee, if at the time such payment is made such employee is entitled to disability insurance benefits under section 223(a) of the Social Security Act and such entitlement commenced prior to the calendar year in which such payment is made, and if such employee did not perform any services for such employer during the period for which such payment is made;
(16) remuneration paid by an organization exempt from income tax under section 501 (a) (other than an organization described in section 401 (a)) or under section 521 in any calendar year to an employee for service rendered in the employ of such organization, if the remuneration paid in such year by the organization to the employee for such service is less than $100;
(17) any contribution, payment, or service provided by an employer which may be excluded from the gross income of an employee, his spouse, or his dependents, under the provisions of section 120 (relating to amounts received under qualified group legal services plans);
(18) any payment made, or benefit furnished, to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment or such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment or benefit from income under section 127, 129, 134 (b)(4), or 134 (b)(5);
(19) the value of any meals or lodging furnished by or on behalf of the employer if at the time of such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such items from income under section 119;
(20) any benefit provided to or on behalf of an employee if at the time such benefit is provided it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such benefit from income under section 74 (c), 108 (f)(4), 117, or 132;
(21) in the case of a member of an Indian tribe, any remuneration on which no tax is imposed by this chapter by reason of section 7873 (relating to income derived by Indians from exercise of fishing rights);
(22) remuneration on account of�
(A) a transfer of a share of stock to any individual pursuant to an exercise of an incentive stock option (as defined in section 422 (b)) or under an employee stock purchase plan (as defined in section 423 (b)), or
(B) any disposition by the individual of such stock; or
(23) any benefit or payment which is excludable from the gross income of the employee under section 139B (b).
Nothing in the regulations prescribed for purposes of chapter 24 (relating to income tax withholding) which provides an exclusion from “wages� as used in such chapter shall be construed to require a similar exclusion from “wages� in the regulations prescribed for purposes of this chapter. Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any third party which makes a payment included in wages solely by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) shall be treated for purposes of this chapter and chapter 22 as the employer with respect to such wages.

[7th trump]

And heres 3121(b) "employment". Do you recognize any of these exclusions in 3401(a)? you should.

[quote](b) Employment
For purposes of this chapter, the term “employment� means any service, of whatever nature, performed
(A) by an employee for the person employing him, irrespective of the citizenship or residence of either,
(i) within the United States, or
(ii) on or in connection with an American vessel or American aircraft under a contract of service which is entered into within the United States or during the performance of which and while the employee is employed on the vessel or aircraft it touches at a port in the United States, if the employee is employed on and in connection with such vessel or aircraft when outside the United States, or
(B) outside the United States by a citizen or resident of the United States as an employee for an American employer (as defined in subsection (h)), or (C) if it is service, regardless of where or by whom performed, which is designated as employment or recognized as equivalent to employment under an agreement entered into under section 233 of the Social Security Act; except that such term shall not include�
(1) service performed by foreign agricultural workers lawfully admitted to the United States from the Bahamas, Jamaica, and the other British West Indies, or from any other foreign country or possession thereof, on a temporary basis to perform agricultural labor;
(2) domestic service performed in a local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority, by a student who is enrolled and is regularly attending classes at a school, college, or university;
(3)
(A) service performed by a child under the age of 18 in the employ of his father or mother;
(B) service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, or domestic service in a private home of the employer, performed by an individual under the age of 21 in the employ of his father or mother, or performed by an individual in the employ of his spouse or son or daughter; except that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to such domestic service performed by an individual in the employ of his son or daughter if�
(i) the employer is a surviving spouse or a divorced individual and has not remarried, or has a spouse living in the home who has a mental or physical condition which results in such spouse’s being incapable of caring for a son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter (referred to in clause (ii)) for at least 4 continuous weeks in the calendar quarter in which the service is rendered, and
(ii) a son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter of such employer is living in the home, and
(iii) the son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter (referred to in clause (ii)) has not attained age 18 or has a mental or physical condition which requires the personal care and supervision of an adult for at least 4 continuous weeks in the calendar quarter in which the service is rendered;
(4) service performed by an individual on or in connection with a vessel not an American vessel, or on or in connection with an aircraft not an American aircraft, if
(A) the individual is employed on and in connection with such vessel or aircraft, when outside the United States and
(B)
(i) such individual is not a citizen of the United States or
(ii) the employer is not an American employer;
(5) service performed in the employ of the United States or any instrumentality of the United States, if such service�
(A) would be excluded from the term “employment� for purposes of this title if the provisions of paragraphs (5) and (6) of this subsection as in effect in January 1983 had remained in effect, and
(B) is performed by an individual who�
(i) has been continuously performing service described in subparagraph (A) since December 31, 1983, and for purposes of this clause�
(I) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after being separated therefrom for a period of less than 366 consecutive days, regardless of whether the period began before, on, or after December 31, 1983, then such service shall be considered continuous,
(II) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after being detailed or transferred to an international organization as described under section 3343 of subchapter III of chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, or under section 3581 of chapter 35 of such title, then the service performed for that organization shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A),
(III) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) is reemployed or reinstated after being separated from such service for the purpose of accepting employment with the American Institute in Taiwan as provided under section 3310 of chapter 48 of title 22, United States Code, then the service performed for that Institute shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A),
(IV) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after performing service as a member of a uniformed service (including, for purposes of this clause, service in the National Guard and temporary service in the Coast Guard Reserve) and after exercising restoration or reemployment rights as provided under chapter 43 of title 38, United States Code, then the service so performed as a member of a uniformed service shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A), and
(V) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after employment (by a tribal organization) to which section 105(e)(2) [1] of the Indian Self-Determination Act applies, then the service performed for that tribal organization shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A); or
(ii) is receiving an annuity from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, or benefits (for service as an employee) under another retirement system established by a law of the United States for employees of the Federal Government (other than for members of the uniformed service);
except that this paragraph shall not apply with respect to any such service performed on or after any date on which such individual performs�
(C) service performed as the President or Vice President of the United States,
(D) service performed�
(i) in a position placed in the Executive Schedule under sections 5312 through 5317 of title 5, United States Code,
(ii) as a noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive Service or a noncareer member of the Senior Foreign Service, or
(iii) in a position to which the individual is appointed by the President (or his designee) or the Vice President under section 105 (a)(1), 106 (a)(1), or 107 (a)(1) or (b)(1) of title 3, United States Code, if the maximum rate of basic pay for such position is at or above the rate for level V of the Executive Schedule,
(E) service performed as the Chief Justice of the United States, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, a judge of a United States court of appeals, a judge of a United States district court (including the district court of a territory), a judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims, a judge of the United States Court of International Trade, a judge of the United States Tax Court, a United States magistrate judge, or a referee in bankruptcy or United States bankruptcy judge,
(F) service performed as a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of or to the Congress,
(G) any other service in the legislative branch of the Federal Government if such service�
(i) is performed by an individual who was not subject to subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, or to another retirement system established by a law of the United States for employees of the Federal Government (other than for members of the uniformed services), on December 31, 1983, or
(ii) is performed by an individual who has, at any time after December 31, 1983, received a lump-sum payment under section 8342 (a) of title 5, United States Code, or under the corresponding provision of the law establishing the other retirement system described in clause (i), or
(iii) is performed by an individual after such individual has otherwise ceased to be subject to subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code (without having an application pending for coverage under such subchapter), while performing service in the legislative branch (determined without regard to the provisions of subparagraph (B) relating to continuity of employment), for any period of time after December 31, 1983,
and for purposes of this subparagraph (G) an individual is subject to such subchapter III or to any such other retirement system at any time only if
(a) such individual’s pay is subject to deductions, contributions, or similar payments (concurrent with the service being performed at that time) under section 8334(a) of such title 5 or the corresponding provision of the law establishing such other system, or (in a case to which section 8332(k)(1) of such title applies) such individual is making payments of amounts equivalent to such deductions, contributions, or similar payments while on leave without pay, or
(b) such individual is receiving an annuity from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, or is receiving benefits (for service as an employee) under another retirement system established by a law of the United States for employees of the Federal Government (other than for members of the uniformed services), or
(H) service performed by an individual�
(i) on or after the effective date of an election by such individual, under section 301 of the Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act of 1986, section 307 of the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Act (50 U.S.C. 2157), or the Federal Employees’ Retirement System Open Enrollment Act of 1997 [2] to become subject to the Federal Employees’ Retirement System provided in chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code, or
(ii) on or after the effective date of an election by such individual, under regulations issued under section 860 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, to become subject to the Foreign Service Pension System provided in subchapter II of chapter 8 of title I of such Act;
(6) service performed in the employ of the United States or any instrumentality of the United States if such service is performed�
(A) in a penal institution of the United States by an inmate thereof;
(B) by any individual as an employee included under section 5351 (2) of title 5, United States Code (relating to certain interns, student nurses, and other student employees of hospitals of the Federal Government), other than as a medical or dental intern or a medical or dental resident in training; or
(C) by any individual as an employee serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, earthquake, flood, or other similar emergency;
(7) service performed in the employ of a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or any instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, except that this paragraph shall not apply in the case of�
(A) service which, under subsection (j), constitutes covered transportation service,
(B) service in the employ of the Government of Guam or the Government of American Samoa or any political subdivision thereof, or of any instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, performed by an officer or employee thereof (including a member of the legislature of any such Government or political subdivision), and, for purposes of this title with respect to the taxes imposed by this chapter�
(i) any person whose service as such an officer or employee is not covered by a retirement system established by a law of the United States shall not, with respect to such service, be regarded as an employee of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof, and
(ii) the remuneration for service described in clause (i) (including fees paid to a public official) shall be deemed to have been paid by the Government of Guam or the Government of American Samoa or by a political subdivision thereof or an instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, whichever is appropriate,
(C) service performed in the employ of the District of Columbia or any instrumentality which is wholly owned thereby, if such service is not covered by a retirement system established by a law of the United States (other than the Federal Employees Retirement System provided in chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code); except that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to service performed�
(i) in a hospital or penal institution by a patient or inmate thereof;
(ii) by any individual as an employee included under section 5351 (2) of title 5, United States Code (relating to certain interns, student nurses, and other student employees of hospitals of the District of Columbia Government), other than as a medical or dental intern or as a medical or dental resident in training;
(iii) by any individual as an employee serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, snow, earthquake, flood or other similar emergency; or
(iv) by a member of a board, committee, or council of the District of Columbia, paid on a per diem, meeting, or other fee basis,
(D) service performed in the employ of the Government of Guam (or any instrumentality which is wholly owned by such Government) by an employee properly classified as a temporary or intermittent employee, if such service is not covered by a retirement system established by a law of Guam; except that
(i) the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to services performed by an elected official or a member of the legislature or in a hospital or penal institution by a patient or inmate thereof, and
(ii) for purposes of this subparagraph, clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (B) shall apply,
(E) service included under an agreement entered into pursuant to section 218 of the Social Security Act, or
(F) service in the employ of a State (other than the District of Columbia, Guam, or American Samoa), of any political subdivision thereof, or of any instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, by an individual who is not a member of a retirement system of such State, political subdivision, or instrumentality, except that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to service performed�
(i) by an individual who is employed to relieve such individual from unemployment;
(ii) in a hospital, home, or other institution by a patient or inmate thereof;
(iii) by any individual as an employee serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, snow, earthquake, flood, or other similar emergency;
(iv) by an election official or election worker if the remuneration paid in a calendar year for such service is less than $1,000 with respect to service performed during any calendar year commencing on or after January 1, 1995, ending on or before December 31, 1999, and the adjusted amount determined under section 218(c)(8)(B) of the Social Security Act for any calendar year commencing on or after January 1, 2000, with respect to service performed during such calendar year; or
(v) by an employee in a position compensated solely on a fee basis which is treated pursuant to section 1402 (c)(2)(E) as a trade or business for purposes of inclusion of such fees in net earnings from self-employment;
for purposes of this subparagraph, except as provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, the term “retirement system� has the meaning given such term by section 218(b)(4) of the Social Security Act;
(8)
(A) service performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order, except that this subparagraph shall not apply to service performed by a member of such an order in the exercise of such duties, if an election of coverage under subsection (r) is in effect with respect to such order, or with respect to the autonomous subdivision thereof to which such member belongs;
(B) service performed in the employ of a church or qualified church-controlled organization if such church or organization has in effect an election under subsection (w), other than service in an unrelated trade or business (within the meaning of section 513 (a));
(9) service performed by an individual as an employee or employee representative as defined in section 3231;
(10) service performed in the employ of�
(A) a school, college, or university, or
(B) an organization described in section 509 (a)(3) if the organization is organized, and at all times thereafter is operated, exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of a school, college, or university and is operated, supervised, or controlled by or in connection with such school, college, or university, unless it is a school, college, or university of a State or a political subdivision thereof and the services performed in its employ by a student referred to in section 218(c)(5) of the Social Security Act are covered under the agreement between the Commissioner of Social Security and such State entered into pursuant to section 218 of such Act;
if such service is performed by a student who is enrolled and regularly attending classes at such school, college, or university;
(11) service performed in the employ of a foreign government (including service as a consular or other officer or employee or a nondiplomatic representative);

[7th trump]

HAd to continue on with another reply as the section is to big for one post.



(12) service performed in the employ of an instrumentality wholly owned by a foreign government�
(A) if the service is of a character similar to that performed in foreign countries by employees of the United States Government or of an instrumentality thereof; and
(B) if the Secretary of State shall certify to the Secretary of the Treasury that the foreign government, with respect to whose instrumentality and employees thereof exemption is claimed, grants an equivalent exemption with respect to similar service performed in the foreign country by employees of the United States Government and of instrumentalities thereof;
(13) service performed as a student nurse in the employ of a hospital or a nurses’ training school by an individual who is enrolled and is regularly attending classes in a nurses’ training school chartered or approved pursuant to State law;
(14)
(A) service performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution;
(B) service performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such service, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back;
(15) service performed in the employ of an international organization, except service which constitutes “employment� under subsection (y);
(16) service performed by an individual under an arrangement with the owner or tenant of land pursuant to which�
(A) such individual undertakes to produce agricultural or horticultural commodities (including livestock, bees, poultry, and fur-bearing animals and wildlife) on such land,
(B) the agricultural or horticultural commodities produced by such individual, or the proceeds therefrom, are to be divided between such individual and such owner or tenant, and
(C) the amount of such individual’s share depends on the amount of the agricultural or horticultural commodities produced;
(17) service in the employ of any organization which is performed
(A) in any year during any part of which such organization is registered, or there is in effect a final order of the Subversive Activities Control Board requiring such organization to register, under the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended, as a Communist-action organization, a Communist-front organization, or a Communist-infiltrated organization, and
(B) after June 30, 1956;
(18) service performed in Guam by a resident of the Republic of the Philippines while in Guam on a temporary basis as a nonimmigrant alien admitted to Guam pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(15)(H)(ii));
(19) Service which is performed by a nonresident alien individual for the period he is temporarily present in the United States as a nonimmigrant under subparagraph (F), (J), (M), or (Q) of section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and which is performed to carry out the purpose specified in subparagraph (F), (J), (M), or (Q), as the case may be;
(20) service (other than service described in paragraph (3)(A)) performed by an individual on a boat engaged in catching fish or other forms of aquatic animal life under an arrangement with the owner or operator of such boat pursuant to which�
(A) such individual does not receive any cash remuneration other than as provided in subparagraph (B) and other than cash remuneration�
(i) which does not exceed $100 per trip;
(ii) which is contingent on a minimum catch; and
(iii) which is paid solely for additional duties (such as mate, engineer, or cook) for which additional cash remuneration is traditional in the industry,
(B) such individual receives a share of the boat’s (or the boats’ in the case of a fishing operation involving more than one boat) catch of fish or other forms of aquatic animal life or a share of the proceeds from the sale of such catch, and
(C) the amount of such individual’s share depends on the amount of the boat’s (or the boats’ in the case of a fishing operation involving more than one boat) catch of fish or other forms of aquatic animal life,
but only if the operating crew of such boat (or each boat from which the individual receives a share in the case of a fishing operation involving more than one boat) is normally made up of fewer than 10 individuals; or
(21) domestic service in a private home of the employer which�
(A) is performed in any year by an individual under the age of 18 during any portion of such year; and
(B) is not the principal occupation of such employee.
For purposes of paragraph (20), the operating crew of a boat shall be treated as normally made up of fewer than 10 individuals if the average size of the operating crew on trips made during the preceding 4 calendar quarters consisted of fewer than 10 individuals. [/quote]