← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · d daxx
Thread ID: 4690 | Posts: 3 | Started: 2003-01-30
2003-01-30 05:02 | User Profile
As the day of fraud and infamy approaches I wonder just how many citizens of the States realize just WHO is 'one' required to file both federal and State taxing forms; the latter is questionable only if the State in question 'shirt-tails' the federal form! The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and it prohibits the direct taxation of ANYONE unless the tax is apportioned to the States. A discerner can readily see upon reading the taxing statutes, the revenue acts and the internal revenue Code, that unless you ARE a TAXPAYER you are not 'one' required'.Sound confusing? Not really since a taxpayer is one that is "doing business" for a 'gain or profit' as the Supreme Court has determined in the Eisner v Macomber case, 252 US 189, 1920. The Congress is the lawmaker, not any agency, and the Congress has ALWAYS stated in the Congressional Record that the income tax was to be the extension of the Corporation TAx Act of 1909 to individuals and copartnerships that were "doing business". Sure, generically, "doing business" is defined as every enterprise that is undertaken by anyone in the day to day transactions, HOWEVER, the Statutory intent is that "doing business" is whatever business venture that any entity, a person, a private business, a partnership, a corporation or an association, does in an attempt to realize, accrue, acquire or attain a PROFIT. Therefore, unless you are "doing business" for a 'gain or profit' and involved in a business venture, you ARE NOT a taxpayer and have been submitting federal and State taxing forms and withholding forms voluntarily and have not been compelled to do so. Why do you think that the taxing forms state that you are to sign under penalty of perjury? SELF INCRIMINATION! There is absolutely nothing in the IRCode or any of the taxing regulations to refute the aforemention statements of fact. Certainly wages are income! Certainly salaries are income! Certainly any compensation for services or earnings that are realized for labor compensation are income, BUT THEY ARE NOT statutory income: Only income that is realized from "doing business" for a 'gain or profit' is statutory income! If you do not mind having approximately 40% of your labor earnings confiscated then pay the tax. If you foolishly believe that the income tax is needed to provide for the function of government, then you had better attend Income Tax 101 at your local school and learn that the collection of income tax is immediately transferred to the federal reserve, a non-governmental corporation, where is is 'applied' to the national debt: A debt that is created by the borrowing of fiat paper by the government - they loan nothing - and then the non-debt is repaid with the asset value of the united States of America!
Why do you think that it is called a voluntary tax? u[/u]
2003-02-15 06:48 | User Profile
Clarification of who is 'one required' :angry: :angry: :angry: Let's begin with the original Law of the Land: the Constitution of the united States of Americal The Constitution prohibits unapportioned direct taxation and commands that all indirect taxation must be uniform. Regardless and notwithstanding the enactment of the 16th amendment, the IRCode, the revenue acts, the income tax acts and whatever tariff acts that may apply, THERE IS NO LAW OR AMENDMENT that changed, altered, revised or created an act that has permitted anything different than the original intent of the Constitution! The Brushaber Supreme Court, 1915, 240 US 1, opinioned that nothing had changed with regard to the 16th amendment; what the Congress intended to tax it could always tax! THEN WHY THE 16TH AMENDMENT? The Congress had always wanted to tax the 'gain or profit' that the private market-place had been lavishly enjoying but could not determine how the profits could be separated from the earnings of the work force. When the Corporation Tax Act was enacted the congress knew what management was earning since the stockholders would demand an accounting for their investment(s)! After 1909, whenever the Congress debated the income tax, the Record always was worded to extend the Corporation Tax Act to individuals and copartnerships that were "doing business", in the act of "doing business" or the carrying on of "doing business!" Prior to 1913, the House Report, HR 416, and the House Bill, HR 21214, that was superceded by the 16th amendment, both specifically stated that "doing business" was the intent of the income tax! The vagueness and ambiguity of the 16th amendment is an indication that the congress did not know how a non-corporate entity would be able to determine how to separate, if possible, it's labor earnings from the gross profits, i.e., if one electrical contractor has a gross profit of $100,000 while another, similar contractor, has a gross profit of $80,000, is there a profit? Is there a net profit? Who determines what a person, any person, is worth, labor-wise? Recognize that in 1913, when the income tax act was enacted, the average wage earned was less than $900 per year. Since the initial deduction was $5,000, there were probably few small businesses that were even affected by the income tax! In 1920, the supreme Court in Eisner v Macomber, 252 US 189, defined the income that was intended to be taxed as that income that was derived FROM the 'gain or profit' that was realized FROM labor, FROM capital or FROM both combined, PROVIDED that the income was realized FROM PROFIT! For all intents and purposes the question of the source of income was resolved; it MUST be realized FROM PROFIT! Since a taxable income must be realized FROM PROFIT there should never have been a question regarding the taxability of wages, salaries or compensation for services, however, there was still no documentation to determine how a small, privately owned business was able to, or was even supposed to, separate his/her labor earnings from the gross 'gain or profit'! The in(fer)nal revenue (dis)service has created terms like, voluntary-compliance, zero-base, and all income is income in order to add to the confusion that the 16th amendment has created and the courts have certainly not made any attempt to clarify the error: The courts receive a percentage of all fines added to their pension fund(s)! If you want to stop government waste and also enjoy all of your (nontaxable) labor earnings, challenge your employer(s) to provide the law that requires them to withhold (there is none) and the law(s) that require that a wage-earner submit taxing forms or is required to pay an income tax (there is none)! :angry: :angry: :angry:
2003-02-17 23:09 | User Profile
:angry: :angry: :angry: Wake up peoples! Time is running out. Go to your employer and DEMAND that he/she/it provide the legality that commands that withholding be kept from your labor earnings. Demand the legality that commands that you submit taxing forms. Demand, it is your Right, that the employer satisfy your request or that he/she/it attach an affidavit to your employee status sheet that negates your submission of taxing forms. There is nothing in any law, regulation, statute or the IRCode that states that wages, salaries or compensation for services or that any labor earnings are TAXABLE income. Certainly, all of the aforementioned legal enactments 'may' state that wages, salaries or compensation for services are income, it doesn't take a grade-school education to recognize that fact, but none of them state that earnings are TAXABLE income, because labor earnings ARE NOT taxable income! Your employer(s) are the primary thieves because they take your labor earnings and commit the criminal act of larceny by conversion by sending your withholding to either the irs or the federal reserve; the latter being neither federal nor is a reserve! How much would you resist if a burglar utilized a weapon to steal your earnings? Your employer only uses coercion and intimidation and you comply! If you have doubts, just look up any of the taxing (alleged) authorities to see that what has been stated above is true!