Tea Party has it wrong - There is no law!
It has been said at Tea Parties that about 1/2 of US Citizens don't pay "their" taxes, as if there is something wrong with or unfair about that. This is based on a "perception" and not on fact.
What's the beef? It's the law (so ruled by the Supreme Court many times), and it's a fact that there is no law requiring a U.S. Citizen to file a 1040 or for pay income tax on wages, earned in the private sector, within any of the 50 States.
Based on the rhetoric at Tea Parties, it would behoove Tea Party goers to get this one right. Most Americans that are not paying income taxes are not getting away with anything - you are being extorted.
Here is a brief that a Sheriff asked me to compile for review.
There is no law
A brief including case law, and videos, on the legality of income tax.
Honorable Sheriff __________,
I took some time to look up the most concise presentations (testimony) on the matter (that I could find in a timely fashion) of; is there is any law that requires a US Citizen to pay an income tax on wages earned in any of the 50 States?
I have included this information as evidence that Tom Cryer's case was not just a fluke.
I have made an attempt to present this as an Argumentative Thesis.
[All bracketed comments in this color are mine]
Thesis statement: There is no law requiring any US (State) Citizen working for wages in any of the 50 States, to file or pay income tax.
Proofs – Minimum of 3 proofs required concerning each position-of-proof .
[If you require further proof on any “position-of-proof” statements made in the videos or text, please simply request it; and I will attach my research as an Appendix to this Brief; and send the complete body with attached Appendix(s).]
Aaron Russo made the movie, “America – Freedom to Fascism”. He was a former candidate for Governor of NV and won 30% of the vote as a 3rd Party candidate.
[I will bring you a CD of the movie for your library.]
The short videos below contain excerpts from the movie focusing on the legality of “income tax” on wages. These are an overview of each of the positions-of-proof . Each of these positions-of-proof are separated for convenience of viewing, and for more information than in the overview.
Proof #1 - Overview
Proof #2 - What the IRS has to say
[Can't answer the question, Yes or No? Can't site anything in the IRS Code, whatsoever? These people are the Commissioners of the IRS; they wrote the IRS Code; they are obviously hiding the fact that, “There is no Law”.
Enforcement is based on deception and withholding of evidence, (that evidence being Rulings by the Supreme Court, and the IRS Code itself are excluded in trials?) in the lower Courts, that have and are rendering “decisions” that are countermand to that of the repeated Rulings of the Supreme Court?]
Proof #3 - Income Tax is Voluntary
Senator Harry Reid – Income Tax is Voluntary
[Either Reid and the IRS Commissioners need a dictionary for the meaning of the word "voluntary", or, they are purposely being evasive and therefore, deceitful.]
[The premise of this discussion is stated up-front, and is not rebutted. That income tax is voluntary is fully known by those perpetrating a fraud, backed by force.]
Proof #4 - What IRS Agents say about income tax
Proof #4 - No Authority of enforcement
[Listen to what is said at 8min 35sec to the end]
Key Enforcement Provisions Of The Internal Revenue Code Nullified
January 29, 2005
We the People
U.S. Court of Appeals Rules IRS Cannot Apply Force Against A Tax Payer Without A Court Order
Tax Payers Free To Ignore An IRS Summons
Queensbury, NY – On January 25, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that taxpayers cannot be compelled by the IRS to turn over personal and private property to the IRS, absent a federal court order.
Quoting from the decision (Schulz v. IRS, Case No. 04-0196-cv),
“...absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses apply no force to taxpayers, and no consequence whatever can befall a taxpayer who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order…[a taxpayer] cannot be held in contempt, arrested, detained, or otherwise punished for refusing to comply with the original IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons, or lack of reasons for so refusing.”
Without declaring those provisions of the Code unconstitutional on their face, the court, in effect, nullified key enforcement provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, stripping the IRS of much of its power to compel compliance with its administrative demands for personal and private property. The court characterized IRS summonses issued under Section 7602 as mere “requests.”
The court went on to say that the federal courts are there to protect taxpayers from an “overreaching” IRS, and that the IRS must go through the federal courts before force can be applied on anyone by the IRS to turn over personal and private property to the IRS.
In their decision in this case brought by WTP Chairman Bob Schulz, the court has expressly recognized that the IRS, ... routinely violates people's Due Process rights in their day-to-day administrative practices.
Proof #5 - What Congressmen have to say
[This is an important video - the statements made are accurate and correct. The 16th Amendment was not, in fact, PROPERLY ratified. Implicit in them is that the IRS is being given greater power to enforce unconstitutional enforcement of: a non-existent income tax law, misapplication of the portions of the IRS Code to wage-salary earners in the private sector. Those who work outside the 50 States, or that work for government incomes (wages-salary) are clearly taxed.]
Proof #6 - What Jurors say
[The Jurors felt betrayed, and 10's of millions of Americans are betrayed by deceit.]
[Not mentioned is that, the Judge abandoning the bench, symbolizes that the Court had no jurisdiction.]
[The last sentence in the video says it all - The truth is, There is no law.]
Proof #7 - What Judges say
[In the "monologue" video, at 5min 53 sec, is the Right to be left alone (4th Amendment). Since there is no income tax law on wages\salaries, any interference of one's peace, is a violation of the primary Law of the Land. And, upon inspection, the "official" documents presented to a Sheriff, requesting that the Sheriff lend the enforcement capacity to the IRS, not signed by a Federal Judge, but is what amounts to a foreign Stamp Act "request". It is not "official", it is not "legal", and it should not be followed: And, the person attempting to perpetrate an illegal act, to perpetrate a fraud, and violate the Civil Law Rights, and the Natural Law Rights of a US Citizen and an Oregon State Citizen and a Resident of _________ County, should be arrested and put in jail pending trial, for both criminal and civil charges.]
[In addition to illegalities of illegal enforcement of nonexistent "law", is that, any attempt to do so is a violation of the Uniform Commercial Law. That is not irrelevant in terms of the Sheriff arresting those perpetrating the fraud or attempting to enforce it. UCC - One cannot be forced to enter into a "contract" by coercion, or under duress, or by fraud.]
[CONCLUSION - There is NO LAW taxing wages, because it is a Natural Right, and because there is NO PROFIT or GAIN in trading time for money.
There is no law requiring most US Citizens to file an income tax return, nor is there any law requiring a US Citizen to pay income tax on wages earned (in the private sector) in any of the 50 States.
All decisions of the lower Courts, regardless of precedent that are countermand to the Rulings of the Supreme Court, are erroneous – and are “no law at all”, and are "null and void".
Any Judge that is not fully compliant Constitutionally orders are void, without jurisdiction, and are acts of treason. 124. U.S. 200 (1888)
The consistent rulings by the Supreme Court says any Judge that acts in violation of their Oath wars against the Constitution, and engages in acts of treason.
Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340,26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958)
Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) ]
[The point being, a Judge's ruling, or warrant, is not valid if it violates, The Constitution, or Natural Law.]
[Everyone knows that my consistent position is: Government according to the Constitution, adherence to The Rule of Law, adherence to the Order of Government, and that, the Sheriff is your friend.
I have attempted to present this without prejudice. Whether it be judged to be weighted by bias or not, I have yet to find anyone that can refute the basic understanding that, "There is no law taxing wages-salaries", "The IRS has no authority to enforce the collection of income tax, what more non-existent law", "To attempt to enforce income tax collection, against wages-salaries is criminal, carrying multiple criminal charges".
The people trust that the Sheriff is standing between them and usurpation of power, and illegal attempts at enforcing unconstitutional, "laws", or "nonexistent laws", et al.
The Sheriff is the Citizens'-Residents' safeguard against tyranny. That's why the Sheriff is elected; and it is why the Sheriff can call together a Posse (same people that are the militia), and why the Sheriff can convene a Grand Jury. And, if the Judges, District Attorneys, don't honor their Oath, or if the Jury disagrees with the Sheriff, that a particular "law" be enforced, the Jury may nullify the "law".]
Proof #8 - Appendixes of Case law
[preface: There are many cases besides Tom Cryer's that have received jury decisions of, Not guilty-innocent. WHEN, the LAW of the LAND, is admitted as evidence, or where a Jury requests the specific law violated, the decisions have consistently been, Not guilty-innocent.]
Appendix A - Tom Cryer - Case law
Appendix A.1 - Tom Cryer videos
[What Tom Cryer says here about income is entirely correct – It is straight from Natural Law. That is, it is a God given Right to work to support yourself, and trading your time for money or any other commodity, has no profit in it. One can not balance the books except by entering time as the expense against the amount of income from wages. One can not trade anything to get time back or buy it back.]
[There are 3 parts to the video below, the 2nd and 3rd parts should play automatically in turn, but if not the link has the other two sections on it.]
[This video is for educational purposes only. Attorney, Tom Cryer, won a unanimous NOT GUILTY verdict in federal district court defeating the IRS's claim that Tom "willfully" failed to file federal income tax returns. Tom refused to file tax returns because the IRS could not show him any law making him liable for 'filing' a tax return.]
Appendix A.2 - Public information about USA v Cryer
[article titled, "Attorney Challenges Income Tax Law, Constitutional History in the Making."].
Appendix A.3 The documents on file in the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana