Some people have PM'd me for tax information, here is a good view.

georg jetson said:

If they don't go, the IRS will get a judgement against them. If they go contest the case and lose, then they can appeal to district court.

The only ones ignorant or foolish are those attempting to fight the IRS relying on arguments that have already FAILED. Those interested in testing Mr. Kotmair's theories should apply due diligence and research all the cases where these theories have indeed failed. Also, regardless of what anyone says, you WILL end up in court. Will it be administrative or criminal will depend on how far you're willing to take this and how well you learn the rules of whatever courtroom you find yourself.

I have found out first hand how evil and treacherous the IRS can be. In my opinion it's gonna take a political movement to get rid of the IRS mob. The system has the upper hand when we fight them one by one.

Click to expand...

So, you're saying that you can be compelled to show up in tax court. Please cite that law.

Please list what failed arguments that Mr Kotmair is referring to.

What "theories" do you claim that Mr Kotmair has?

I never once said you would not end up in court. I specified that tax court is not a court of law and it has not the power to summon you. Please show us all where the government has the constitutional authority to create administrative courts.

What "theory" did you use that got you screwed over by the IRS? You do know that the courts, the DOJ, and the IRS are all corrupt, right?

------- Edit
The only theory that Mr Kotmair has ever presented to me, and yes I have talked to him in person, is that the law should be followed.
He has shared the fact that the judges, IRS agents, and other government workers, don't know the law and simply want to force what they have have been told their whole lives about what they think the law says.


It's the same thing with the open carry of firearms. Often times the police break the law knowingly, sometimes unknowingly, but they still break the law. Some believe that because you're carrying a gun you must carry ID with you. Others believe that they have the right to disarm you just because they want to harass you. The IRS agents are just as corrupt and/or ignorant as the local police many of us have had to deal with. The local police are often more honest and friendly toward your rights than IRS agents are.

georg jetson said:

If they don't go, the IRS will get a judgement against them. If they go contest the case and lose, then they can appeal to district court.

The only ones ignorant or foolish are those attempting to fight the IRS relying on arguments that have already FAILED. Those interested in testing Mr. Kotmair's theories should apply due diligence and research all the cases where these theories have indeed failed. Also, regardless of what anyone says, you WILL end up in court. Will it be administrative or criminal will depend on how far you're willing to take this and how well you learn the rules of whatever courtroom you find yourself.

I have found out first hand how evil and treacherous the IRS can be. In my opinion it's gonna take a political movement to get rid of the IRS mob. The system has the upper hand when we fight them one by one.

Click to expand...

The only thing you have proven is that you can contradict yourself and that you can't sit still for more than 2 minutes.

I said that that the part that address the tax courts STARTS around minute 48 in part 3 it is much longer than the 2 minutes that you claimed to have watched.

The other part is that you don't seem to understand what was said. The letter that you are referring to was saying that the "tax protester" was simply relying on the law. What is wrong with relying on the written law? You also have the right to rely on the decisions of the courts, any courts in the country, that have ruled on any issue in legal question. For example if one court in Tennessee rules that you have the right to the fruits of you labor and it has been ruled that a right cannot be taxed then, the fruits of your labor cannot be taxed. Otherwise if the fruit of you labor can be taxed then, you have no right to the fruits of you labor and that would mean that you are a slave.

Are you a slave? Do you support slavery? I know since you seem to support slavery and believe that you are a slave then, you have no right to keep and bear arms then either, since you can't even own yourself. Do us all a favor, give up your arms, your earnings, and ever thing you own to the government. That way your master can take care of you through benefits like welfare, food stamps, social security, etc.

Freedom1Man said:

The only thing you have proven is that you can contradict yourself and that you can't sit still for more than 2 minutes.

I said that that the part that address the tax courts STARTS around minute 48 in part 3 it is much longer than the 2 minutes that you claimed to have watched.

Click to expand...

If you're sticking to that then fine... it's not addressed. You watched the video. Answer my question.

Freedom1Man said:

The other part is that you don't seem to understand what was said. The letter that you are referring to was saying that the "tax protester" was simply relying on the law. What is wrong with relying on the written law?

Click to expand...

The law (unfortunately) also encompasses jurisprudence as well as court orders. Some of the arguments that I see Mr. Kostmair present have failed in court. It doesn't matter whether I agree with the written law. It only matters what a citizen can PROVE in COURT. I also mentioned the way he remained vague about the details of what happened. That is a trademark of the snake oil peddler. I'm not saying YOU are a snake oil peddler, but I'm proposing that Mr. Kotmair MAY be.

Freedom1Man said:

You also have the right to rely on the decisions of the courts, any courts in the country, that have ruled on any issue in legal question.

Click to expand...

What?

Freedom1Man said:

For example if one court in Tennessee rules that you have the right to the fruits of you labor and it has been ruled that a right cannot be taxed then, the fruits of your labor cannot be taxed.

Click to expand...

What court? Federal? State? Specifics are important.

Freedom1Man said:

Otherwise if the fruit of you labor can be taxed then, you have no right to the fruits of you labor and that would mean that you are a slave.

Click to expand...

I agree that the "fruit of your labor" should not be taxed and that any such taxation is theft. However, this argument will get you nowhere in tax court. You should be researching WHY this is the case.

Freedom1Man said:

Are you a slave? Do you support slavery? I know since you seem to support slavery and believe that you are a slave then, you have no right to keep and bear arms then either, since you can't even own yourself. Do us all a favor, give up your arms, your earnings, and ever thing you own to the government. That way your master can take care of you through benefits like welfare, food stamps, social security, etc.

Click to expand...

Keep the discussion focused. We're on the same side.

georg jetson said:

I agree that the "fruit of your labor" should not be taxed and that any such taxation is theft. However, this argument will get you nowhere in tax court. You should be researching WHY this is the case.



Keep the discussion focused. We're on the same side.

Click to expand...

Tax court is only a fact finding court that you would have to petition to have it brought up. It is a fact finding court only and has no authority to make rulings of law. It can only rule on facts. Now, if you watch the whole video, it will save us both much time. One of the things about that tax courts that is addressed, in the video, is that the IRS lies to you by not disclosing all your legal remedies when it files a "Notice of deficiency," against you. The IRS fails to disclose to you, that you have a right to a remedy in a court of law. The IRS is required to disclose all your legal remedies but chooses to not do so thus, deceiving you into believing the tax court is the only remedy that you have.

As for fact finding, yes I have not filed a form 1040 in over 10 years. That is fact. The tax court can only say that yes, I did not file a return. But the tax court cannot make any ruling on the law. So the tax court cannot say that there is a requirement for me to file it can only say that I did not file

As for a Notice of deficiency the IRS agents have to lie to the computer to have such a notice issued in the first place. Seeing as however cent of what is being withheld from your paycheck is being withheld under Subtitle C of the IRC per your written request to have money withheld. Not having a Subtitle C tax withheld from you pay and subsequently not paying it at the end of the year does not constitute a deficiency under section 6211 and thus cannot have a "Notice of deficiency," issued under Section 6212 the IRS agent would have to have lied to the computer system to have one issued to you.

In order for you to make the claim that John is being vague or not, you must watch the complete video parts 1 through 6 and then please tell me what part(s) you found him to be vague on. I am willing to wait a week or two so as to allow you ample time to watch and re-watch any part that you feel needed to be re-watched and to allow for your time to do independent research on the topic.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/subtitle-F/chapter-63/subchapter-B

Making this easier for Eye95 to find.

Just so we are clear

This is the Social Lounge and you guys can discuss this if you want.

However, just so we are clear, there are any number of 'tax avoidance' and 'tax protest' schemes out there that attempt to paint the tax code as 'voluntary' or only applicable to foreign earned income, etc. The people who have followed such advice have historically lost in the courts, and in some cases lost bad. See Wesley Snipes.

If you want to change tax code, then vote. If you want to stay out of jail and retain your right to own firearms then I personally suggest you engage the services of a tax professional to legally minimize your tax burden and then pay what remains.

Just my 2 cents.


John

legally minimize your tax burden.....that's funny. And, to some[SUP]1[/SUP], un-American.

[SUP]1[/SUP]Liberals

John Pierce said:

This is the Social Lounge and you guys can discuss this if you want.

However, just so we are clear, there are any number of 'tax avoidance' and 'tax protest' schemes out there that attempt to paint the tax code as 'voluntary' or only applicable to foreign earned income, etc. The people who have followed such advice have historically lost in the courts, and in some cases lost bad. See Wesley Snipes.

If you want to change tax code, then vote. If you want to stay out of jail and retain your right to own firearms then I personally suggest you engage the services of a tax professional to legally minimize your tax burden and then pay what remains.

Just my 2 cents.


John

Click to expand...

+1

Although the Supreme Court defined what "income" means and it isn't wages, and this definition hasn't been changed by them, and SCOTUS has yet to rule on it again.

John Pierce said:

This is the Social Lounge and you guys can discuss this if you want.

However, just so we are clear, there are any number of 'tax avoidance' and 'tax protest' schemes out there that attempt to paint the tax code as 'voluntary' or only applicable to foreign earned income, etc. The people who have followed such advice have historically lost in the courts, and in some cases lost bad. See Wesley Snipes.

If you want to change tax code, then vote. If you want to stay out of jail and retain your right to own firearms then I personally suggest you engage the services of a tax professional to legally minimize your tax burden and then pay what remains.

Just my 2 cents.


John

Click to expand...

If there is anything factually wrong about the information have presented, I would like for you to point those things out.

I do not claim that the "income tax" is voluntary, nor do I claim that OUR government taxes foreign earned income rather the other country does. etc etc. If you owe the "income tax" then you MUST PAY IT. Please read section 1461 of the IRC to see if you are liable for it though first.

I remember when the Wesley Snipes case went public reading his presented idea and knowing it was factually wrong and that he would lose.

Tommy Cryer won against the IRS. http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cryer_inspires116.html
Larry Becraft has also won multiple cases launched by the IRS.

I do not wish to change the tax code I only wish that the law be followed, plain and simple.

I do contend that most people confuse the "income tax" subtitle A, with the "employment and wage taxes" (Social security taxes) subtitle C. There is no requirement in the law to participate in the Social(ist) security program. Nor is there any requirement to OBTAIN a TIN/ITIN/SSN for an individual who you hire to work for you. The only exception that I have been able to find is FORM-1099(MISC) in regards to an attorney (lawyers) acting as an attorney on behalf of a company then the attorney must give it's TIN but is not required to certify that it is correct.

sudden valley gunner said:

+1

Although the Supreme Court defined what "income" means and it isn't wages, and this definition hasn't been changed by them, and SCOTUS has yet to rule on it again.

Click to expand...

Well if you read the 1939 IRC section 22, which is still the legal effect of the law, then you will learn that earnings are not "income" either. That "income" is a profit or gain derived from the activities listed there in.

Freedom1Man said:

Well if you read the 1939 IRC section 22, which is still the legal effect of the law, then you will learn that earnings are not "income" either. That "income" is a profit or gain derived from the activities listed there in.

Click to expand...

The court case I am thinking of said as much too.

Stratton's Independence v. Howbert, Southern Pacific v. John Z. Lowe, Merchants Loan & Trust Company v. Smietanka, These cases span from the first Income tax that was struck down, and then after the 16 amendment. The courts ruled the definition of "income" hasn't changed and is defined basically as corporate profit.

Eisner v. Macomber "Congress cannot by any definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution."

So the IRS does not define Income. They use the term Gross Income in Section 61 of their Code. And make their own definition for that.

U.S. v Ballard "The general term 'income' is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code."

Senator Albert B. Cummins of Iowa said it would be dangerous and useless for congress to attempt to define it.....(wonder why)

Then there is the total trashing of the 4th amendment in being forced into sharing your personal finances and records with the government, I guess and the 5th too. And the 7th.

How about the fact that the way they tax wages as purely immoral, a coporation or business gets to write off its costs of doing business yet wage earners are not allowed to write off their degrees, cars, gas, clothing,you need to eat, housing, or the mere fact they have no value for us and our time , because unlike a corporation our body and our precious time is what gains us our income.

But the fact is they don't care, the constitution and laws of limited government mean nothing to them. And us mere mortals will loose in court against them.

P.S. all of the above information was easily found in Peter Schiff's book The Real Crash.

sudden valley gunner said:

snip
P.S. all of the above information was easily found in Peter Schiff's book The Real Crash.

Click to expand...

I am a bit leery of information obtained from Schiff still. Not saying he's a shill I am just not sure he's got all the facts.

Part of it is that I have not researched him and part of it is what either he has said or at least has been accredited with saying.

Freedom1Man said:

I am a bit leery of information obtained from Schiff still. Not saying he's a shill I am just not sure he's got all the facts.

Part of it is that I have not researched him and part of it is what either he has said or at least has been accredited with saying.

Click to expand...

The information he provided, that I relayed is all verifiable. I don't agree with all his opinions, and he is off on some libertarian issues, but he does have the economy fairly well nailed.

April is approaching. Just follow the law.

Think contract law. IRS cannot compel a person to contract with them, most people contract with them out of fear.
IRS,SSA,DMV operate because people enter into contracts with them unknowing that they/person are giving up there rights.

THINK CONTRACT LAW.

georg jetson said:

I see no reference to anything about having a case brought to federal district court without first being filed in administrative(tax) court.

Click to expand...

The law allows you to do either :

1) don't pay the IRS what it wants and go to tax court (IRS is opposing consul) .. no jury trial allowed

2) pay then ask for a refund & when denied (or after 180 days of no response), go to district court (AG or DOJ office is opposing consul).. jury trial allowed

davidmcbeth said:

The law allows you to do either :

1) don't pay the IRS what it wants and go to tax court (IRS is opposing consul) .. no jury trial allowed

Click to expand...

False, you have to petition to get into tax court if you WANT to go to tax court.

2) pay then ask for a refund & when denied (or after 180 days of no response), go to district court (AG or DOJ office is opposing consul).. jury trial allowed

Click to expand...

False, you should never have to file a refund for income taxes. The only refunds are from prepaid taxes such as the tax stamps on liquor.

You buy 1000 gallons worth of stamps, you manufacture 700 gallons of alcohol, you can then file for a refund on the remaining 300 gallons. If you do not file for that refund then it's presumed that you had in fact manufactured the full 1000 gallons.

countryclubjoe said:

Think contract law. IRS cannot compel a person to contract with them, most people contract with them out of fear.
IRS,SSA,DMV operate because people enter into contracts with them unknowing that they/person are giving up there rights.

THINK CONTRACT LAW.

Click to expand...

Sorta false.

You have to request to interact with the SSA/IRS by applying for a SSN.

The IRS cannot keep a file on a citizen unless that citizen has applied for a SSN.

countryclubjoe said:

Think contract law. IRS cannot compel a person to contract with them, most people contract with them out of fear.
IRS,SSA,DMV operate because people enter into contracts with them unknowing that they/person are giving up there rights.

THINK CONTRACT LAW.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Those things you list comprise administrative law. Misunderstanding this may lead to dangerous consequences.

Freedom1Man said:

Sorta false.

You have to request to interact with the SSA/IRS by applying for a SSN.

The IRS cannot keep a file on a citizen unless that citizen has applied for a SSN.

Click to expand...

I never applied for a SSN. My parents did. No contract.