Can anyone honestly point to a law that states that americans are supposed to file a federal income tax?

cincywahine

I am amazed of the number of sheep on here that do not even have the brain to think about questioning their government with.

It's flat out disgusting.

mild_irritant

The 16th ammendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

Griff

No need to watch a movie to know that there is no federal law stating a citizen must file a tax return. However, there are federal laws covering tax evasion and tax fraud. It's those laws you must worry about.

smacky

No, I cannot. But I can point to people that have been put in jail for not filing federal income tax.

FRAGINAL-NOYPI

Filing of the federal income tax is mandatory as provided for in the tax laws.

I see this question 10 times a week. Don't pay your taxes then. When the IRS catches up with you and sends you to prison, send us an e-mail telling us what laws you broke!

Akkita

In April 1909, Senator Joseph W. Bailey, a conservative Democrat from Texas who was also opposed to income taxes, decided to further embarrass the Republicans by forcing them to openly oppose an income tax bill similar to those which had been introduced in the past. He introduced his bill expecting it to get the usual opposition. However, to his amazement, Teddy Roosevelt and a growing element of liberals in the Republican party came out in favor of the bill and it looked as though it was going to pass.

Thus, the Democrats were off guard when President Taft unexpectedly sent a message to Congress on June 16th, 1909, recommending the passage of a constitutional amendment to legalize federal income tax legislation.

The Senate approved the Sixteenth Amendment with an astonishing unanimity of 77-0! The House approved it by a vote of 318-14.
The tax bill which the Sixteenth Amendment authorized was introduced as House Resolution 3321 on October 3, 1913. It turned out to be somewhat of a legislative potpourri for tax attorneys, accountants and the federal courts. In the ensuing years, untold millions of dollars have been spent trying to figure out exactly what this tax law, and those which followed it, were intended to provide. However, tucked away in its inward parts was that precious key which safely locked up the riches of the super wealthy.
Here are the magic words under Section 2, paragraph G:
"Provided, however, that nothing in this section shall apply...to any corporation or association organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific or educational purposes."

All of the foundations of the super-rich were designed to qualify under one or more of these categories.

da_hammerhead

You don't have to file. Its against the law not to. A catch 22

Rich B

Careful Wally...Blade (Wesley Snipes) just took it in the hinder over this same thing. Someone convinced him that there was no law on the books and he is having to bug out because of it. These people are scammers man. Don't fall for it.

RunningManÂ²

Tell that to the judge,, It's called tax evasion. I'm not sure you need to file, but you do have to pay.

cool

cool video.. had no clue until now... im too naive

Kinnley

I have heard and have been told the same thing. And, in this day and time of extreme high government expensures with it "war for oil," and it "war for corporate profits," the least that it could do is to revamp the current system and make it more equitable and simplier. But, that would make too much sense for the politicans to do. To me, a federal income tax is simply "a cash cow," that allows politicans to to carry out their great screw job of the American people (which the framers of the Constitution never meant to happen as they wanted to limit federal government in the lives of its citizens). And, the current administration has currently proven that by spending over 400 billion dollars on an unjust war in Iraq. And, they have the nerve to ask for another 100 billion dollars to continue to fund the so called, "war on terror," when is nothing more is needed than police action in my opinion, and others such a Colin Powell. And, very few people realize that this money to fund this "war on terror" is coming from the Social Security Trust Fund, through the federal government issuing that fund, "I Owe You's." And, this spending of the Social Security Trust Fund's money on a war will have severe consequences for us all in this country, if you are in the working class and or the middle class. To me, this is one way that the Conservatives in this country want to simply bankrupct the country and sell it off in squares, so that it can be ran not by laws and a constitution any more, but as one huge corporation, for their profits and control.

gray shadow

I found the film "Freedom to Fascism" to be intellectually dishonest and a vehicle for the filmmaker to further his political beliefs with blatant misformation. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and educate the viewer. This one doesn't.

The film claims there is no law that requires someone to pay income tax with the only explanation that we pay tax is because of a huge conspiracy with everyone in government going along.

I thought it was odd the filmmaker could not find the statute. So I looked it up on the internet and found it in five minutes in title 26, subchapter A of the U.S. Code:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006012----000-.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000001----000-.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00000003----000-.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00006651----000-.htm

So why couldn't the film maker find it, or someone show it to him in the course of the movie? According to the N.Y. Times, an IRS agent did show him this law. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/31/movies/31russ.html?ei=5088&en=05c0d0988f58fc50&ex=1311998400&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1168610441-+WMb5s9XWnJCyRind696sw . But he dismissed it. A responsible documentary maker would have acknowledged that.

That's just one example.

Bottom line: The film lied to you.

And that's too bad. The tax law has a lot of room for improvement. But using bogus arguments is not going to help.

For more info this line of thinking, check out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_arguments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_constitutional_arguments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_conspiracy_arguments

http://www.irs.gov/taxpros/article/0,,id=159853,00.html

jenab6

Mao tse Dong is famous for the following insight: "All political power grows from the barrel of a gun." Law is fiction. Bullets are the reality. Law is simply a way of telling people what they must do (or refrain from doing) so that the government's men won't kill them with bullets.

When governments get out of control, as they have a conspicuous habit of doing, they begin to cheat on their own laws. Their agents start breaking laws, using flimsy excuses to justify themselves, and getting their excuses confirmed and upheld by the government's courts, which became corrupt at about the same time. At some point, it becomes clear that the law only applies to "the little people."

Lon Horiuchi, an FBI sniper, murdered a woman named Vicki Weaver. He shot her through the open front doorway of her home as she was holding her baby. The father caught the baby as its mother fell down and died. Lon Horiuchi has never been brought to trial for murder, and, in fact, a federal judge ruled that the People of the State of Idaho may not try federal agents for the murder of their fellow citizens. (Idaho had sought only to try Horiuchi for involuntary manslaughter, even though murder is obviously the crime he committed.)

Now, to the point. What I know about US federal laws gives me the impression that the USC (subsequent to the Constitution) has the general character of concealed pits, baited traps, and poisoned meat - obscured in a jungle of very technical legal language. Your federal laws are meant to be hard to understand and easy to break unintentionally. And that implies that your government wants at all times to have some excuse to arrest anyone... anyone at all.

Answerer Bill Smith has identified the law that requires US citizens to file income tax returns. But there's a problem with 26 USC 6011: it violates the separation of powers principle in the US Constitution by giving legislative powers to an official in the Executive Branch of government. It is one thing for a Treasury Secretary to make regulations governing the conduct of Treasury Department employees. It is something else, namely legislation, when his "regulations" affect the whole of American society.

An employer's operational policies aren't laws because they apply only to his employees and because an employee who does not like them can escape their effect by quitting his job. However, 26 USC 6011 says that the policies created by the Secretary of the Treasury apply to all US citizens, most of whom do NOT work for the US Treasury Department. In other words, the Secretary's regulations ARE laws because they have the scope and the compulsory character of laws.

The Executive Branch of the US Government is not supposed to legislate. The only exception is an emergency wartime mechanism known as the Executive Order, which US Presidents have been abusing since the Administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Other than that, only Congress may legislate. That's what the first paragraph of Article 1 means: "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives." 26 USC 6011 is in conflict with that paragraph, and the matter becomes a question of which has the higher priority in US law.

That, by the way, is not the only suspicious diversion of pecuniary authority away from Congress. Congress is also supposed to have the sole power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. But in 1913 it gave that power to the Federal Reserve Board. Why? The Federal Reserve Act appears to be in conflict with US Constitution, Art. 1, Sec. 8, clause 5: "The Congress shall have Power... to coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures."

So, as with 26 US 6011, the legality of the Federal Reserve System depends on whether the US Constitution or the Federal Reserve Act has the higher precedence in US law. A pattern emerges in which Acts of Congress, federal laws, and executive policies have been used to circumvent the clear meaning of the US Constitution.

Now, to another point. Our corrupted central governments will tolerate a certain amount of yapping from plebs like us. There are so many of us that it is not convenient to them, just now, to round us all up, Soviet Purge style. Doubtless that time will come, but it has not come as yet. However, there are certain subjects on which our central governments will NOT tolerate serious dissent, and the legitimacy of its taxes is one of them.

In February 1983, in Arkansas, the US government stalked and killed an American named Gordon Kahl because he dared to air public dissent to the legitimacy of certain federal taxes.

They had tried to kill him on a previous occasion, about three months earlier, in an ambush near Kahl's home in North Dakota. The federal assassins did, in fact, wound Gordon's son, Yorie Kahl, with their rifles. But Gordon, a war veteran, proved too feisty for the government's men: he returned fire, killed two of them, and made the others run away. Gordon took his son to a doctor, and then he ran off to Arkansas to hide.

The US government found Gordon after the daughter of the man who was providing sanctuary betrayed him (and her father) to the federals in exchange for money. Gordon was murdered horribly. Government agents tortured him by breaking his bones with their rifle butts, then they lopped off his hands and feet with an axe, and then they shot him in the head to kill him.

When for a while it appeared that the US secret police had murdered the wrong man, they tried to cover it up by burning down the house with the body still inside, using gasoline (poured down the chimney) to get the fire started. But later it turned out that the murdered man was Gordon Kahl, after all, so the federals were happy.

So be careful how you approach the subject of tax legitimacy. It doesn't really matter whether you are right or wrong, or whether you question whether the US 16th Amendment was improperly enacted or ratified, or whether you think your government is disobeying the laws in regard to the amount or manner of collection. What matters is that they will kill you if you push the subject too vigorously. Your government might put up with it for a while, but you never know when you, too, will get "the Gordon Kahl treatment."

Bill Smith

That is a very good and valid question. The answer is as follows:

26 U.S.C. Â§ 6011(a): "When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information required by such forms or regulations."

luvz2puff

All be it the film is very interesting and there are a ton of points that really should be fallowed up on, I still could not stop thinking to myself, "There is a reason the USA is the most powerful nation in the world".... Freedom comes at a price.... Hopefully films like this will lend themselves to helping the situation....

fateridder

i agree see this -

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApR6RxMwsLDqHOwBWOP8YE4jzKIX?qid=20061217225516AAszmXz

Bruce H

Yada, Yada, Yada, bottom line, if you don't file sooner or later you will get caught and sent to jail. You will then become "good buddies" with a very large guy named Bubba. In the end I hope your principle is worth it, because that is where you will get it . . . in the end.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: