Failure to File a crime?

[vanton57]

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_a...ts/00-1831.pdf

pp 5-6 lines 9-24

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-1831.ZS.html

The case...........


Verrrrrrrry Interesting..........

[charlene]

Search find these papers ,aware members can get them. "The Irs Pink Papers"

Charlene

[citizensoldier]

The case only upholds what the code plainly says - taxpayers must file a tax return. Non-taxpayers do not.

The only question that matters is who are "taxpayers" and who are not.

Originally Posted by citizensoldier

The case only upholds what the code plainly says - taxpayers must file a tax return. Non-taxpayers do not.

The only question that matters is who are "taxpayers" and who are not.

EVERY TIME YOU ASK THE IRS TO HELP YOU DETERMINE IF YOU'RE A TAXPAYER THEY NEVER ANSWER. THEY JUST SENT YOU MORE B.S. FORMS FOR YOU TO FILL OUT AND SIGN. THIS IS THEIR EXTENT OF THEIR RESPONSE.

Section 6011 expressly authorizes the Service to require, by Treasury regulation, the filing of returns. Section 6012 identifies persons who are required to file income tax returns. Under Treasury regulations, taxpayers who receive more than the statutory minimum amount of gross income must file returns. Taxpayers also are required to pay any tax owed

ALSO, HOW COME THEY DON'T ASK YOU TO HAVE YOUR SIGNATURE NOTARIZE WITH THE 1040 FILING? MAYBE BECAUSE THEY DON'T CARE AS LONG AS SOME ONE SIGNS AND ADMITS HE/SHE IS INDEED A TAXPAYER.

[citizensoldier]

Originally Posted by PJT04

EVERY TIME YOU ASK THE IRS TO HELP YOU DETERMINE IF YOU'RE A TAXPAYER THEY NEVER ANSWER. THEY JUST SENT YOU MORE B.S. FORMS FOR YOU TO FILL OUT AND SIGN. THIS IS THEIR EXTENT OF THEIR RESPONSE.

Section 6011 expressly authorizes the Service to require, by Treasury regulation, the filing of returns. Section 6012 identifies persons who are required to file income tax returns. Under Treasury regulations, taxpayers who receive more than the statutory minimum amount of gross income must file returns. Taxpayers also are required to pay any tax owed

ALSO, HOW COME THEY DON'T ASK YOU TO HAVE YOUR SIGNATURE NOTARIZE WITH THE 1040 FILING? MAYBE BECAUSE THEY DON'T CARE AS LONG AS SOME ONE SIGNS AND ADMITS HE/SHE IS INDEED A TAXPAYER.

I do not need the IRS's help in determining whether I am a taxpayer or not - how would they know. They only classify someone as a taxpayer when affidavites are submitted to them saying the man or woman in question is engaged in privileged activity of a taxpayer - those affidavites are known as W-2s and 1099s. Each man or woman, individually, only knows if they are a taxpayer - no on else can make that determination.

For example, if an employer submits a W-2 claiming you earned "wages" as defined in Title 26 USC, then it serves as an affidavite showing you are a taxpayer unless or until you rebut it. Unfortunately, the employer has broken the law by assuming the authority to claim you earned "wages" and are a "taxpayer" by simply trading your labor for something of equal value.

I am not saying the IRS isn't perpetrating a fraud on the millions of men and women of this country by tricking them into believing they are "taxpayers" - they are. What I am saying is - Title 26 of the USC does adhere to the Constitutional limitations on our government; however, its enforcement does not. Title 26 USC is only meant for those who exercise the privilege of earning "wages" off the government - a.k.a government workers, officials, and federal corporations.

[rushpat]

I think the KenG videos (www.showmethelaw.net) have repeatedly said to rebut the W-2/1099 forms with an affidavit and to bring that up on any and all occasions. I'm wondering though, if this only needs to be sent to the taxman or the company that filed the W-2/1099 originally.

[test]

Where I work I can state in the w4 (withholding allowance certificate) that I am tax excempt and I think they will not hold any federal income taxes, however, even if I do that, the company will still submit the w2 at the end of the year to the IRS and they say you will still be liable for the tax.

Also I don't know what to do to avoid withholding for the ssa.

So what to do in these cases?

[weishaupt1776]

Whatever your intentions may be, there is a chance that your plan might work & then catch up w/you later on w/the IRS on your case.

ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION

Thou shalt not have anything in thy name

[EnSabahNur]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

Whatever your intentions may be, there is a chance that your plan might work & then catch up w/you later on w/the IRS on your case.

ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION ASSET PROTECTION

Thou shalt not have anything in thy name

Rev Canada went after a property of mine that is under my numbered corporation, claiming that since I am the only director that they have the power to do it. More ****, I know, but they will try anything. Is there any merit to the trusts issue? I know nothing about them.

[rushpat]

Do you have the option of opening an LLC corporation in America while still in Canada? If so, a few states have very private corporations that wouldn't list you as director.