All you guys are wasting your hard earned money!greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread
NEVER AGAIN PAY ANOTHER DIME IN INCOME TAXES!
Because there is NO LAW requiring Americans to pay income taxes...
Let Irwin Schiff, the nationBs leading authority on the income tax (and how the Government illegally collects it) get the IRS off your back and out of your life forever. Would you believe there is no law requiring Americans to pay income taxesB.or keep books and records for income tax purposes? If you don't believe it, ask your tax lawyer or C.P.A. to show you a statute that provides otherwise. They won't be able to do it.
Internal Revenue Service is only an administrative agency...
Legally, the Internal Revenue Service is only an administrative agency without any enforcement powers whatsoever. Despite the IRS having no enforcement powers, the Federal government uses the IRS to extort income taxes from the American public. It gets away with it because of the help it gets from praetorian, federal judges and U.S. attorneys and a legal profession that earns billions of dollars litigating a law that doesn't exist, while numerous other private sector interests earn billions feeding off the public's monumental ignorance concerning the real nature of our income tax "laws".
Let Irwin Schiff lead you to the truth. Learn how you can immediately stop paying income taxes. It will simplify your life (you will no longer be a pack rat for the federal government), put more money in your pocket, and give you more time for productive and family activities.
File a totally honest income tax return (in under three minutes)...
Let Irwin Schiff show you how you can file a totally honest income tax return (in under three minutes) and request a refund of all of the taxes you paid in 1999. And, he doesn't care if you earned millions in salaries, fees, commissions, gambling and lottery winnings etc., and additional millions in stock and other kinds of trading profits. For income tax purposes, you can legally report "zero" income (and pay no income taxes) regardless of how much money you might have earned from such sources.
Help your country... The Power to tax involves the Power to destroy...
By not paying income taxes you will also be helping eliminate many of America's social problems which have developed, because Washington politicians have been destroying America's industrial base through excessive taxation and regulation. Former Chief Justice John Marshall said " The Power to tax involves the Power to destroy." That's what New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Society etc. politicians have been doing; destroying America's industrial base with excessive and irresponsible taxation. We can only reverse this trend by reducing the flow of funds to the self serving, destructive Washington politicians. Millions of Americans are attempting to take back America by not paying the voluntary income "tax." Why not join us?
So, if you are interested in preserving and maintaining constitutional rights for both yourself and other Americans (while keeping most of the money you earn), check out our informative web site.
THE "ZERO" RETURN-YOUR PASSPORT TO AN INCOME TAX FREE LIFE...
The key ingredient to living and enjoying an income tax free life is Irwin SchiffBs "zero" income tax return. While there are no laws that require Americans to file income tax returns, or pay income taxes, many Americans have been illegally prosecuted for failing to do so. Since all information on a tax return can be used against those who file, any such "filing" requirement would make income tax "laws" unconstitutional just on this ground alone B and there are numerous other grounds that would make the compulsory filing and paying of income taxes unconstitutional.(a) That is why all official government documents correctly inform the public that the payment of income taxes is based on "voluntary compliance." Do other governmental authorities ever claim that drug or traffic laws, for example, are based on "voluntary compliance"? Why not? Because such laws (as are all laws) are required to be obeyed: so they can not be based on voluntary compliance. However, if you mention this to IRS personnel or private, tax practitioners, they will try to convince you that "voluntary compliance" does not mean that compliance is voluntary, but that, in reality, compliance is actually compulsory. If they try to confuse you like this, ask them: "Are you saying that Bvoluntary complianceB and Bcompulsory complianceB both mean the same thing?" B if not, "What exactly is the difference?" And if you canBt see through the double talk you will be getting in response to that question, then you may have a language or comprehension problem.
Illegal prosecutions were designed to intimidate Americans into paying a tax that no law required them to pay...
Despite the fact that no law requires Americans to file income tax returns or pay income taxes, many people have been prosecuted for failing to do so.(b) Such illegal prosecutions were designed to intimidate Americans into paying a tax that no law required them to pay. If this confuses you, just remember that "courts" exist under all forms of tyranny B and when it comes to income taxes, our "courts" are no different than those that exist under fascist dictators. Therefore, to avoid such illegal prosecutions, Irwin Schiff developed the "zero" return, which not only allows you to avoid the risks of not filing and not paying income taxes, but actually enables you to recover all the income taxes you have already paid for the year in question. The filing of a "zero" return also constitutes a "claim for refund" and establishes your legal right, on several grounds, to a full refund of all the income taxes you have already paid for that year. Click on the check below to see copies of some checks received in response to "zero" returns. (c)
For tax purposes, "income" only means corporate "PROFIT"...
Those who order the Federal Mafia or the video or cassette seminars from Freedom Books will get a two page, twelve paragraph statement that attaches to your 1040 "zero" return. On the 1040 itself (see sample below) you report "zero" income regardless of how much you received in: wages, commissions, interest, alimony, capital gains or from operating a business. For tax purposes, "income" only means corporate "profit." Therefore, no individual receives anything that is reportable as "income."(d) In essence we have a profits tax, not an income tax. Corporations, for example, pay no income taxes on their "income" They only pay income taxes on their "profit," if they have any. And if they have no profit, they pay no income taxes, regardless of how much "income" they have. Therefore, whatever "income" means, to corporations (for tax purposes), also applies to individuals. The law that purports to define the meaning of "income" for income tax purposes does not define it one way for corporations and another way for individuals. So whatever applies to corporations, must also apply to individuals.
How many legal references do you put on your 1040 to support the figures you show there?
Our 12 paragraph attachment lists no less than 17 court decisions, 13 statutes, 1 Treasury Department regulation and numerous other official sources that we claim supports our position that we had "zero" income, owe no income taxes, and are entitled to a full refund of all the taxes we paid for that year. How many legal references do you put on your 1040 to support the figures you show there? Unlike many other Americans, those who file "zero" returns can sleep peacefully at night knowing that they have filed a totally truthful return.
We essentially have a lying and deceitful Government...
The reason that Americans have been so deceived concerning the alleged legal requirement to pay income taxes is because we essentially have a lying and deceitful Government. In case you hadnBt noticed B our Government lies to us about almost everything. It lies about the solvency and character of social security, which is essentially a chain letter that is running out of chain. It lies about the character and legitimacy of our money. Actually no money (which the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 identifies as being either gold or silver) circulates in the United States. What circulates in America are intrinsically worthless tokens or slugs and intrinsically worthless, fiat paper which is identified on its face as being a "note." But try redeeming these "notes" at any Federal Reserve Bank that issued them. All they will give are smaller worthless notes for those notes you try to redeem. And, of course, the Government lies about the full extent of the national debt, by omitting from that debt the amount of the GovernmentBs unfunded and contingent liabilities B which alone exceeds the total amount of the reported debt. And, of course, the Government lies about the cause and degree of "inflation, " and the real basis of our alleged "prosperity" - which is based solely on the (irrational) willingness of other countries to send us consumer goods, which they allow us to pay for by going ever deeper into debt. These examples by no means exhaust all of the areas in which our Government lies to us. But if the Government can get away with these lies, why canBt it get away with also lying to us about the legal requirement to pay income taxes?
If it weren't for the Federal income tax, half of our NationBs lawyers would have to seek honest employment...
In successfully pulling off its income tax scam, the Government gets a lot of help from the private Sector. For one thing, if it weren't for the Federal income tax, half of our NationBs lawyers would have to seek honest employment. Lawyers in America earn billions of dollars litigating a tax that doesn't even exist (e), while arguments over money or the lack thereof (due to the financial drain caused by income taxes) generate fees for divorce and bankruptcy lawyers B to say nothings of the corporations that are formed just to lower income taxes. And remember, it is these same lawyers (those who are properly political connected) that go on to become Federal judges. And let us not forget the accountants. Look at the money they make by keeping the public in the dark about income taxes B though most accountants are in the dark themselves when it comes to income taxes. (Most accountants donBt even know that they donBt know.) And how about all of the other tax practitioners like H.R. Block? They recently reported that they earned over 1 billion dollars preparing income tax returns for the public. How much money would H.R. Block earn if they told the public the truth B that no one is required to pay income taxes? Also, letBs not overlook the billions earned by the publishing industry. They sell books that advise people how to lower a tax that the public is not even required to pay in the first place. Is it conceivable that these "experts" donBt know this? LetBs not forget the tax service and newsletter people. They also earn billions putting out all sorts of information that supposedly allows you to lower your income taxes. Is it conceivable that these "experts" donBt know that the payment of income taxes is strictly voluntary?
The income TAX SCAM is so extensive that it almost defies comprehension...
Admittedly, the income tax scam is so extensive that it almost defies comprehension. The irony, of course, is that the very "experts" the public looks to for income tax advice make their living giving the public misinformation and false advice B money they wouldn't earn if they told the truth. No wonder our Government has been able to deceive the American public for so long B look at the help it gets from the "experts" in the private sector!
Help promote and expand your local economy...
Isn't it time you learned the truth about income taxes? Isn't it time you threw off your chains of ignorance and started to breath the free air envisioned for you by our Founding Fathers? Stop sending your money to the parasites and liars in Washington, D.C., where most of it gets shoveled down the Federal rat hole anyway. Spend more of it on yourself, your loved ones, to expand your business, and to help promote and expand your local economy.
Nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands...
And lastly we would like to leave you with the words of the Judge Learned Hand who said in Helvering v. Gregory, 60 Fed.2d 809, that:
Anyone may arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; He is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the Treasury; There is not even a patriotic duty to increase oneBs taxes. Over and over again courts have said there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible, everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right; for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands. (f) Taxes are an enforceable extraction, and not a voluntary contribution. (Emphasis added)
(a) The Government, for example, sent both Leona Helmsley and Pete Rose to jail (as they have done to countless others) by using against them the very information they furnished on their tax returns. Can the Government really compel information from the public and than use it against them in this manner? If you believe the Government can, than you apparently also believe that the Government could even get away with reintroducing the medieval rack.
(b) If your accountant or tax lawyer tries to tell you that there are laws that require you "to pay" income taxes or make you "liable" for income taxes ask them to produce the laws, so you can see them with your own eyes. Since they will not be able to do so B they might offer you some excuse as to why they can not do so. However, such specific "payment" provisions can easily be found in the Internal Revenue Code with respect to numerous other federal taxes.
(c) Not everyone who files a "zero" return gets a refund check, because we are dealing largely with a lawless Government; therefore, the IRS may attempt to deny you your refund on several, contrived grounds. However Freedom Books has available responses to all such IRS letters. Freedom Books can even supply you with a sample lawsuit that can be used to sue the government if they deny you the refund to which you are legally entitled. In any case, by filing a "zero" return you will not give the IRS another dime in income taxes - while the money you already paid, was largely lost, whether you filed a "zero" return or not. And our material will show you how to stop any further income taxes from being taken from your pay.
(d) And though corporations may have "income" that falls within that definition as used in the Internal Revenue Code, no laws requires corporations to pay income taxes on that income.
(e) Since a tax is a "mandatory" exaction, there can be no such thing as a "voluntary" tax.
(f) "And the law demands you pay nothing." (Irwin Schiff, 1974, as quoted from his color-coded, "The Tax RebelBs Guide to the Constitution and Declaration of Independence" recently republished and available from Freedom Books for $5.00, plus $.1.00 postage and handling.)
The Zero Return Click below to enlarge
Do not file a "zero" income tax return unless you attach to it our two- page attachment and only if you thoroughly understand and verify to your satisfaction all twelve paragraphs that it contains.
The 1999 edition of The Federal Mafia is here! Click here to see it.
If you have any questions feel free to call us...
If you have any questions regarding your income taxes and how you too can STOP paying the IRS, feel free to call us at:
1- 800 829-6666 1- 800 TAX NO MORE
Click here to see Irwin's new building Freedom Books 544 East Sahara Las Vegas, Nevada 89104
Click here to Email Freedom Books.
"If you expect a nation to be ignorant and free, you expect what never was and can never be."
Contact the Webmaster
-- @l-d the old dog @ zianet.com (@email@example.com), October 27, 2000
My wife has her period. The tax thread is here. nuff said.
-- FutureShock (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 27, 2000.
"If you expect a nation to be ignorant and free, you expect what never was and can never be."
Amazing how Ol' TOM characterized this post so many years ago. I guess he knew that ignorance would exist forever.
-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 27, 2000.
Yes, it's apparently that time of the month again :^) I'd love to see a tax return one of these morons filed....but I could probably only see it during visiting hours at the Federal pen.
-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), October 28, 2000.
Otto Skinner claims Schiff is a fraud with his Zero Tax Returns!! ******************************************************************
ZERO TAX RETURNS FOLLOW-UP. (It pays to read the cases.)
After I sent out my email articles on the "Zero" tax returns which resulted in guilty verdicts for Kenneth Youngblood on all four felony counts, I have received emails from various concerned individuals who have also followed Schiff's "Zero" tax return plan. I don't believe any of these individuals actually bothered to read the cases upon which Schiff supposedly relies, and upon which these people are now supposedly relying.
Perhaps you have not taken the time to study the cases that Schiff claims support his "Zero" tax return theory. (For a detailed discussion, see my web site article on Schiff at http://www.ottoskinner.com ) If you do study these cases, I'm sure you are going to find that these cases do not say what Schiff claims that they say. Let me give you an example.
One of the cases that Schiff supposedly relies upon to support his "Zero" tax return theory is the case of United States v. Moore, 627 F.2d 830 (7th Cir. 1980). When you study this case, be sure to look at where the 7th Circuit refers to the case of United States v. Smith, 618 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1980), which the 7th Circuit cited with approval on pages 834-835 of the Moore case.
The citation says:
"In United States v. Smith, 618 F.2d 280, 281 (5th Cir. 1980), the taxpayer put zeros in some of the income blanks. The court said the 'return' did not purport to disclose the required information and would not be treated as a return." United States v. Moore, 627 F.2d 830, 834-835 (7th Cir. 1980).
Another case that Schiff supposedly relies upon is the case of United States v. Long, 618 F.2d 74 (9th Cir. 1980). In this case, the court forewarns the reader as to what can happen if a person puts zeros on a tax return. This is exactly what happened to Kenneth Youngblood and which resulted in his conviction on four felony counts.
After you study these cases, see if you can honestly tell anyone that any of these cases support Schiff's "Zero" tax return theory, as he claims. After you study these cases, see if you can honestly tell anyone that you believe that Schiff just doesn't know that these cases do not really support his "Zero" tax return theory. After you study these cases, see if you can honestly tell people that they can rely upon what Schiff tells them.
While you are posing questions to yourself, see if you can determine the possible reasons why Schiff would tell people that cases say certain things, when, after you review the cases, you find that the cases say something entirely different. See if you can honestly tell people that Schiff has their best interests at heart.
And how about all of the other promoters who have promoted Schiff and his material? Don't they have some sort of an obligation to study these cases before they promote Schiff and his material to other people? Don't they have some sort of a moral obligation to warn others about the cases that Schiff supposedly relies upon? Why haven't they urged you to study these cases as I am doing? What are the real motives of all of these people? These are serious questions that you should at least be asking yourself.
Another part of Schiff's "Zero" tax return theory is his claim that the term "income" for tax purposes means corporate profit. I think when you study the cases that Schiff supposedly relies upon for his definition of "income" you will see that these cases just do not say that the term "income" for tax purposes only means corporate profit. Schiff has this issues sufficiently convoluted as to make it a bit complex. For a discussion on this issue, see the article called "Meaning of the term 'income'" on my web site at http://www.ottoskinner.com
Regardless how much Schiff shouts and screams and spews his claims all over the place, that is not going to change the facts as to what the court cases really say. I urge the readers to review my articles on my web site. But don't stop after reading my articles. The articles just help point you in the right direction. Get copies of the cases and read them. It is not all that difficult. Just take a list of the names and numbers of the cases to a law library. The librarian will show you how to find the cases so you can make copies to take home and study. The only way the reader is really going to know the truth of all of this is to study the cases for himself.
I believe I can point out the same kind of flaws in the information that Schiff puts out on at least 16 other issues. I can't write on all 17 issues in one email article, but I do intend to urge people to check out everything that Schiff promotes before they rely upon it. (For that matter, I urge people to check out what anyone promotes, before they rely upon it.) On how many issues do you want to be wrong? I explain my views on most of these 17 issues in my books.
The "Zero" tax return thing reminds me of something that was promoted back in the early 1980's. People were urged by various promoters to file claim forms for a refund of taxes. Some people actually received checks from the IRS. This got a lot of people excited. Many of these people in turn, filed the same kinds of forms. Later on, people were being convicted for filing false claims to an agency of the United States along with charges for other violations. Two cases that come to mind are United States v. Ferguson, 615 F.Supp. 8 (D.C.Ind. 1985), and United States v. Cheek, 882 F.2d 1263 (7th Cir. 1989). (Cheek got his first conviction reversed and remanded for further proceedings because of faulty jury instructions. He was then retried and convicted for the second time, and the second conviction stuck.)
If Schiff's claim that the term "income" for tax purposes means only corporate profit were really a legally valid argument, then it would provide a defense for charges of attempted tax evasion under 26 U.S.C. 7201 for anyone who did not have corporate profit, so why file a "Zero" return?
If Schiff's claim that the term "income" for tax purposes means only corporate profit were really a legally valid argument, then it would also provide a defense for failure to file under 26 U.S.C. 7203 for anyone who did not have corporate profit, so again, why file a "Zero" return? In this case, by filing a "Zero" return, the individual would be trading what he fears may be a misdemeanor charge under 26 U.S.C. 7203 for a potential felony charge of filing false forms under 26 U.S.C. 7206. If he is charged with 7206, the individual has also placed a burden upon himself to try to convince a jury that he really believed that the term "income" for tax purposes means only corporate profit, and that a "Zero" return is a legally valid return (which is contrary to the court rulings). Given the cases that Schiff (and also the defendant) supposedly relied upon, convincing a jury that this is truly his good-faith belief is going to be a difficult task.
Kenneth Youngblood was charged by indictment which stated that he declared on his returns that he did not have any income and that he well knew, in truth and fact, that he did have income. Youngblood was unable to convince the jury that he did not willfully violate the revenue laws. He was unable to convince the jury that he really believed that he did not have any income. In other words, he was unable to negate the government's allegation of willfulness. The jury returned verdicts of guilty as charged in the indictment on all four felony counts.
Just think about it. If you were sitting in the witness chair, how would you explain to a jury why you truly believed that the term "income" for tax purposes means only corporate profit? How would you explain to a jury why you truly believed that a "Zero" return is a legally valid return?
Let's summarize what takes place regarding the "Zero" tax returns. The individual is informed by the IRS or others that he may be criminally charged with failure to file if he does not file the "required" tax returns. This rattles the non-filer's cage. He gets nervous. Schiff comes along and suggests filing "Zero" returns which is supposed to solve his non- filing problems. By filing the "Zero" tax returns with the attachments provided by Schiff, the individual has now committed himself to a claimed belief which he is going to have a difficult time trying to prove, and to tax return forms that the courts do not accepts as legally valid returns. (IT PAYS TO READ THE CASES!) By filing "Zero" returns, he has now committed acts that are even more difficult to defend against than failure to file under 26 U.S.C. 7203 or attempted tax evasion under 26 U.S.C. 7201. Additionally, the individual is now facing $500 civil penalties under 26 U.S.C. 6702 for each frivolous return filed. (In this instance, frivolous means no foundation in law). In my view, Schiff's "Zero" tax return plan is a trap that places the individual into a more difficult situation than he was in before. In my view, the Schiff "Zero" tax return plan provides the government with hard-copy evidence that it did not have before, but can now use against the defendant.
I suspect that many of the people who have fallen into the "Zero" tax return trap did not really hold to any well-founded beliefs to start with. However, I think any individual who truly has well-founded beliefs that he is not required to file should stick with his beliefs and be well prepared to defend them. If he truly believes he is not required to file, why should he fall into the "Zero" tax return trap?
If you would like for me to send you a series of email articles that I have sent out over the past year or so, just ask. I think you will find these articles interesting and informative.
Feel free to forward this message on to other individuals and groups you think may be interested.
NOTE: Most Americans have been provided very little accurate information about the so-called "income" tax and the Sixteenth Amendment. They have also been tremendously misled and misinformed regarding these issues. Even people within what may be termed as the "patriot movement" (or "freedom movement" or "non-filing community") have been provided with a great deal of false information. Confusion and disagreements abound.
My first book, The Best Kept Secret, provides the very clearest and best explanation of the so-called "income" tax and the Sixteenth Amendment ever written up to 1997. First written in 1986 and revised in 1996, it probably still provides the very best introduction into these issues, as well as providing a solid foundation for understanding the material provided in my next two books. While there is some duplication of information, not all of the information in The Best Kept Secret is carried over into the next two books.
My second book, If You Are the Defendant, digs deeper into the Internal Revenue Code and introduces defense strategy information for those who may eventually be criminally charged for alleged violations of the tax laws. This book provides the important distinction between being charged by "information" as opposed to being indicted. Again, not all of the information in If You Are the Defendant is carried over into the next book.
My latest book, The Biggest "Tax Loophole" of All, published in 1997, is two pounds of "dynamite" information. This book digs even deeper into the issues and also explains many of the legally flawed arguments and other items of misinformation that have been perpetrated upon non-filers and the rest of America. This book provides important information regarding summonses for books and records. This book also explains legally insufficient indictments and why they should be legally dismissed. This book also provides a sample motion to dismiss such legally insufficient indictments.
Having been involved in these issues for over 19 years, I sincerely believe that individuals should study all three of my books and all 21 past issues of the newsletters, page by page, cover to cover, and in the order they were written. Additionally, I sincerely believe that individuals should study all of the applicable court cases in order to verify for themselves the material contained in my books and newsletters. (Along with other valuable information, the newsletters contain a trial transcript with pleadings, and with my comments and analysis added as the trial moves along.) Individuals who have followed these admonitions have learned a great deal and appreciate the value of thoroughly studying the issues in this manner.
I should add that my first two books were entered by a defendant as evidence in one federal criminal trial, with the defendant walking away with NOT GUILTY verdicts on all counts. This case involved charges of attempted tax evasion and failure to file tax returns. (Gabe Scott criminal trial in Fairbanks, Alaska in July of 1992. United States v. Scott, Case Number A92-077 CR, Judge James Fitzgerald, presiding.)
For more information about the above material, see http://www.ottoskinner.com
Feel free to forward this message on to individuals and groups you think may be interested.
-- Rubber Ducky (email@example.com), October 28, 2000.
no old dogs here!! yawn-this brings back fond memories of old-tb2000 firstname.lastname@example.org--------YAAAAAAWWWWWNNNNN!
-- al-d. (email@example.com), October 28, 2000.