Post reply

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
(Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rtf, mp3, webp, odt, html
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 30000KB, maximum individual size 30000KB
Note that any files attached will not be displayed until approved by a moderator.
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Dale Eastman
« on: August 24, 2024, 05:47:00 AM »

Quote from: 20 August @ 09:32
Wait until you finally give up and withdraw it all, cause the tax man is standing right there waiting...
Quote from: 23 August @ 07:40
You don't know what you don't know.
What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestic receipts?

SCOTUS has said:
In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions, by implication, beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen." GOULD v. GOULD, 245 U.S. 151 (1917).

SCOTUS has said:
... [T]he well-settled rule ... the citizen is exempt from taxation unless the same is imposed by clear and unequivocal language, and that where the construction of a tax law is doubtful, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid... SPRECKELS SUGAR REFINING CO. v. MCCLAIN, 192 U.S. 397 (1904)

SCOTUS has said:
If it is law, it will be found in our books; if it is not to be found there, it is not law.
Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 627 (1886)
Quote from: 23 August @  08:20
Dale Eastman They'll lock your ass up until you die anyway, they do not care. They get about 99% compliance with their "voluntary system", and there are many fairly high profile cases of those who have fought the system. One that comes to mind is Irwin Schiff.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Schiff
Quote from: 23 August @  09:48
Please answer the question:
What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestic receipts?
Quote from: 23 August @  12:35
Dale Eastman The question is irrelevant. The consequences of acting against those who make up whatever answer they deem appropriate is what matters.
Quote from: 23 August @  15:24
I accept your offer to role play. You are the judge. Judge, What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestic receipts?