EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Wed Nov 26, 2014 3:48 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:24 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5778
Location: USA
denni50 wrote:
I like this better.... 8)

A symbol represents qualities or characteristics that are expressions of the ideals of a culture and principles of the people it represents…when I look at the flag I see a stark contrast with reality.


You're saying you now understand the difference between ideals and reality?

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:53 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 5941
Wayne Stollings wrote:
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
HEY WAYNE...STILL IN THE MIDDLE OF EVERYTHING...HERES SOMETHING FOR YOU TO DELVE INTO IN THE MEANTIME.


1040 Checkmate?

DOJ Dismisses Felony Tax Prosecution
-- With Prejudice -- After PRA Defense Raised

Evidence OMB Complicit In Income Tax Fraud

DOJ & IRS Petitioned To Explain


On May 12, 2006 in Peoria, Illinois, the attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) begged the court to dismiss all charges against IRS victim Robert Lawrence in federal District Court.

The motion for dismissal came on the heels of a surprise tactic by Lawrence’s defense attorney Oscar Stilley.

The tactic threatened exposure of IRS’s on-going efforts to defraud the public. The move put DOJ attorneys in a state of panic that left them with only one alternative: beg for dismissal, with prejudice.

Stilley’s tactic paid off. Sixty days earlier, the DOJ had indicted Lawrence on three counts of willful failure to file a 1040 form, and three felony counts of income tax evasion. The federal Judge dismissed all charges with prejudice, meaning the DOJ cannot charge Lawrence with those crimes again.

The trial was to have started on Monday morning, May 15th.

On Wednesday, May 10, Stilley mailed a set of documents to the DOJ in response to DOJ’s discovery demands. The documents revealed to DOJ for the first time that Lawrence was basing his entire defense on an act of Congress, 44 U.S.C. 3500 – 3520, also known as the "Paperwork Reduction Act" (PRA).

http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTP2/UPDATES/Update2006-06-09.htm


The supposed failure based on the form not being compliant with the PRA does in no way make the tax illegal nor unconstitutional.


In Section 3512 of the Act, titled "Public Protection," it says that no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with an agency’s collection of information request (such as a 1040 form), if the request does not display a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the Act, or if the agency fails to inform the person who is to respond to the collection of information that he is not required to respond to the collection of information request unless it displays a valid control number.

I am not sure if I am following you here wayne...the law states that government documents MUST have an OMB number, otherwise responding to them is voluntary ( simplistic wording I know) The 1040 form which is used to prosecute folks for failure to file does NOT have an OMB number. The government is required to inform you that a response is NOT required if it does not have that number.


This is one of the attempts by anti-tax proponents to make a point. They do not like taxes and do not want to pay so they try anything and everything to keep from doing so. In this case they claim the form is incorrect, which is not related to whether the act of taxation of income is or is not legal. If the form is incorrect it would be corrected by clarification in the PRA or by changing the form, in either case it does not make the act of taxation of income illegal.

IF this is legit WAYNE ( keep in mind I am NOT Trying to argue or educate you, I am trying to learn more so keep shooting these things down as you can as it makes me dig snd look even though time is in short supply right now) how can I be charged with willful failure to file IF the law says that I can ignore the form if it does not have the # which it does not. Keep in mind as soon as this argument was brought forth the IRS lawyers IMMEDIATELY dismissed all charges with prejudice.
ALSO a tax on income was illegal prior to the 16th amendment...it was ruled unconstitutional by the scotus......they have since ruled that the 16th gave congress no new powers, so how can it NOW be legal?
I posted earlier that the scotus ruled that my labor is my property and that in an equal exchange of property( my labor for your money) there is no profit. I personally know people ( I have seen the papers from the IRS with my own eyes) that have filed tax returns and even amended returns for monbey payed in in the past using this ruling as the basis for having no tax liability. The IRS returned the money they had payed in previous years and agreed that they had no taxable income for the years. The ONLY issue was the guy got greedy and tried to go back beyond the statute of limitations and was fined 1500 bucks for a frivolous return ( or whatever the catch all term is they use) AGAIN this is NOT second hand stuff I have SEEN the returns and KNOW the guy well. I also have spoken to the guy who pointed him in this direction and he claims near 100% success in dealing with the IRS using this method.
this has been a few years back and everything is still fine for him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:05 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20580
Location: Southeastern US
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
IF this is legit WAYNE ( keep in mind I am NOT Trying to argue or educate you, I am trying to learn more so keep shooting these things down as you can as it makes me dig snd look even though time is in short supply right now) how can I be charged with willful failure to file IF the law says that I can ignore the form if it does not have the # which it does not. Keep in mind as soon as this argument was brought forth the IRS lawyers IMMEDIATELY dismissed all charges with prejudice.


I am a little leery of drawing conclusions based on partial information. There can be many reasons for this action and not all fit with some of their assumptions. In any case this deals solely with the tax code itself and not the legality of the tax in general, as do most of these cases.

Quote:
ALSO a tax on income was illegal prior to the 16th amendment...it was ruled unconstitutional by the scotus......they have since ruled that the 16th gave congress no new powers, so how can it NOW be legal?


You would have to give me the reference for the ruling that taxing income was unconstitutional. The only ruling that comes to mind is the one that treats income from property (rents, etc) as a direct tax and thus would have to be apportioned, but no ruling of illegality of the tax itself in whole or part.

Quote:
I posted earlier that the scotus ruled that my labor is my property and that in an equal exchange of property( my labor for your money) there is no profit.


Again I would have to see a reference to a ruling in relation to taxes in order to reply as I am unaware of any such ruling otherwise.

Quote:
I personally know people ( I have seen the papers from the IRS with my own eyes) that have filed tax returns and even amended returns for monbey payed in in the past using this ruling as the basis for having no tax liability. The IRS returned the money they had payed in previous years and agreed that they had no taxable income for the years. The ONLY issue was the guy got greedy and tried to go back beyond the statute of limitations and was fined 1500 bucks for a frivolous return ( or whatever the catch all term is they use) AGAIN this is NOT second hand stuff I have SEEN the returns and KNOW the guy well. I also have spoken to the guy who pointed him in this direction and he claims near 100% success in dealing with the IRS using this method.
this has been a few years back and everything is still fine for him.


I know of a "friend of a friend" who has not paid taxes in some years as he claims his business is losing money. This is a flag to me because you can only deduct your basis in losses and if a company has never made money it runs the risk of being classified as a hobby. He is still doing it as far as I know and driving a new Caddy, which was purchased with the business "losses" he claims. There will probably be a point in the future when he will get caught and that will be the end of his "cash-only" business and more importantly his freedom.

I know a little about the tax codes and I have caught a couple of errors by my accountants because of that knowledge, but I would never profess to be an expert by any means. The code is far too complex and I have never had the inclination to do more than keep a slightly better than general knowledge on the subject.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:55 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 5941
26 USC §7203 [Willful Failure to File]:
Any person required under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, or required by this title or by regulations made under authority thereof to make a return, keep any records, or supply any information, who willfully fails to pay such estimated tax or tax, make such return, keep such records, or supply such information, at the time or times required by law or regulations, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $25,000 ($100,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 USC §7343 [Definition of the term "Person"]:
The term ''person'' as used in this chapter [chapter 75] includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on this definition, an ordinary American Citizen who is under no duty to perform any act on behalf of another, under the internal revenue laws of the United States, is not a "person" for the purposes of Willful Failure to File.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:00 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 5941
a case titled Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad wherein it was the unanimous decision of the US Supreme Court that the 16th amendment did not give Congress any new power to tax any new subjects; it merely tried to simplify the way in which the tax was imposed. It also showed that the income tax was in fact an excise tax on corporate privileges and privileged occupations. The defense then brought out a case entitled Flint v. Stone Tracy wherein an excise tax was defined as a tax being laid upon the manufacture, sale and consumption of commodities within the country; upon licenses to pursue certain occupations; and upon corporate privileges.
http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl16f.shtml


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:02 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:02 pm
Posts: 5941
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
a case titled Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad wherein it was the unanimous decision of the US Supreme Court that the 16th amendment did not give Congress any new power to tax any new subjects; it merely tried to simplify the way in which the tax was imposed. It also showed that the income tax was in fact an excise tax on corporate privileges and privileged occupations. The defense then brought out a case entitled Flint v. Stone Tracy wherein an excise tax was defined as a tax being laid upon the manufacture, sale and consumption of commodities within the country; upon licenses to pursue certain occupations; and upon corporate privileges.
http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl16f.shtml

I believe that this means wayne that the income tax AS WRITTEN is for priviliged activities( something requiring a license such as being a lawyer or a doctor) or for corporations ( which are also considered a privilige) the 16th amendment simply made the taxation process OF THOSE THINGS easier.
AGAIN not arguing and I appreciate you not flying off like some and telling me that I am retarded and going to prison lol....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:56 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20580
Location: Southeastern US
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
26 USC §7203 [Willful Failure to File]:
Any person required under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, or required by this title or by regulations made under authority thereof to make a return, keep any records, or supply any information, who willfully fails to pay such estimated tax or tax, make such return, keep such records, or supply such information, at the time or times required by law or regulations, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $25,000 ($100,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 USC §7343 [Definition of the term "Person"]:
The term ''person'' as used in this chapter [chapter 75] includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on this definition, an ordinary American Citizen who is under no duty to perform any act on behalf of another, under the internal revenue laws of the United States, is not a "person" for the purposes of Willful Failure to File.....


No, the "includes" does not limit that definition to ONLY an employee or officer of a corporation, but expands that definition to include those people as the representative for the artifical entity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 8:20 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20580
Location: Southeastern US
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
a case titled Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad wherein it was the unanimous decision of the US Supreme Court that the 16th amendment did not give Congress any new power to tax any new subjects; it merely tried to simplify the way in which the tax was imposed. It also showed that the income tax was in fact an excise tax on corporate privileges and privileged occupations. The defense then brought out a case entitled Flint v. Stone Tracy wherein an excise tax was defined as a tax being laid upon the manufacture, sale and consumption of commodities within the country; upon licenses to pursue certain occupations; and upon corporate privileges.
http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl16f.shtml

I believe that this means wayne that the income tax AS WRITTEN is for priviliged activities( something requiring a license such as being a lawyer or a doctor) or for corporations ( which are also considered a privilige) the 16th amendment simply made the taxation process OF THOSE THINGS easier.
AGAIN not arguing and I appreciate you not flying off like some and telling me that I am retarded and going to prison lol....


That is what they want to believe, but that is not what the court case determined. All that case determined was there was insufficient proof for the jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) there was no filing of income tax returns 2) there was a legal requirement for filing and 3) the lack of filing was willful intent. Beyond this finding of not guilty there is no proof of agreement to any particular aspect of the defense, but of the defense in general when compared to the prosecution.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 8:23 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20580
Location: Southeastern US
OHIOSTEVE wrote:
AGAIN not arguing and I appreciate you not flying off like some and telling me that I am retarded and going to prison lol....


I cannot say that if you follow these plans that you will not go to prison, but there is a significantly increased chance that is cumulative over time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:10 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:17 am
Posts: 9576
Here's a golden oldie. This thread covers some ground....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:53 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:59 pm
Posts: 1348
I know America is still a young country and the population growth since 1776 has been colossal. A phenomena I would suggest. The mixture of people is quite extraordinary. But when the president (leader of the most powerful nation in the world) shouts 'God bless America', do the Americans not feel this kind of isolates themselves from the rest of the world? To me it does create a barrier on a superficial level though I know deep down we are all the same, fellow travellers on the same spacetime train. :?:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 6:10 pm 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 7:59 am
Posts: 2
Just about sums it up, and for all other flags as well. We have to rescue the poor bankers, but every one else can starve, die due to lack of health care or just suffer but we can always afford to fight wars.

Alan


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group