No, you are wrong. I will summarily dismiss your answer because you are three ants short of a picnic.

…and yet I can and will answer ANY direct question you ask me regarding the tax code. You will summarily dismiss my answer because it won’t be aligned with the propaganda you were taught in Gov’t sponsored school.

I thank God each day that I have a mind of my own.

We aren’t tax-know-it-alls, you are a tax know-nothing!

…and Kevin, why is it that ONLY the laws, cases, etc. that you “Taxers” cite deserve consideration?

I cite laws and cases all the time and even try to get answers to direct questions from “you types” to no avail. Yeah, you are smart to stay out of conversations with people who actually understand what the tax laws say. That way you can hold on to your delusion of superiority.

Welcome to the site. Thanks for the kind comments. Good luck with your EA certification. If I can help you, let me know.

You are smart to stay out of conversations with tax protesters.

I just got turned on to your site today through a Facebook debate page in which I participate. I work as a tax preparer, working on my EA certificate, and seriously considering law school. Based on what I’ve seen, I’ll be more than happy to send any Florida clients I may ever have your way in the event they need local representation.

(And while I have very strong feelings about the current discussion, I’m staying out of it, as I agree with you that no matter how many cases you cite, legal principles you explain, there will always be people that think their opinion actually matters in a court of law.)

Seventy three days to go!

Kevin

The law is what the Supreme Court says it is.

“That people have a motive to cheat is not evidence of cheating.”

Of course it isn’t. It does, however, raise the possibility of cheating and then it’s the knowledge of what the laws say (which we are all supposed to be subject to), the court cases involving those laws and the blatant sidestepping, obfuscation and downright disregard of those laws by those in power that gives us the evidence.

That people have a motive to cheat is not evidence of cheating. Otherwise every wife of a husband who died with a big insurance policy is a murderer.

You can do better than that.

There it is. The tax-truth denier excuse not to answer a direct question.

Yeah, what was I thinking? Trillions and Trillions and Trillions of dollars are not enough reason for people to lie, to cheat, to CONSPIRE.

When you arise from the rabbit hole Peter, tell Alice I said hello.

There it is. The conspiratorialist cover up.

When a tax protester lacks evidence for his argument he dismisses it by saying the conspirators are hiding the evidence.

This is why sane people don’t argue with tax protesters.

Thanks for your suggestion about looking the actual case, I’ll most likely do that as I am NOT one to believe everything I read on the internet, even when the internet is only the vehicle and not the source, as is the case here. The source is a newspaper, which I don’t blindly believe everything in either. Unless you case have thoroughly investigated the case you don’t know why it ended in acquittal either, but I can guarantee you Cryer did NOT claim that the Federal Income tax is illegal. That’s a claim that you “tax-em-all’s”, including state tax agents and IRS, constantly try to attribute to us, despite how many times we say loudly “THAT’S NOT MY ARGUMENT!”

By the way, don’t forget (ahem) to answer my question please…about who you contend is a taxpayer.

There are thousands of court cases where taxpayers have prevailed for one reason or another. Usually, cases are dropped because of lack of evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, etc. The fact that Cryer is claiming that the IRS dropped the cases against him and he was acquitted because EVERYONE has no duty to pay income taxes is absurd and utterly meaningless. If that were true, the entire federal income tax system would have just been declared illegal and it would have been the lead story on every cable channel and in every newspaper in America. Don’t be so gullible and don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.

Tax protesters always point to cases where some fellow delusional tax protester either got acquitted or had his case dismissed as evidence that their wacko protest theories are accurate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I suggest instead of reading a short article on the Cryer case you study the entire history of the case. You can get everything by filing a simple Freedom of Information Act request. I think you will find that neither the IRS or any jury agreed with Cryer’s ridiculous anti-tax arguments. I can assure that he was acquitted of failure to file tax returns and had his tax evasion charges dismissed for reasons other than that the federal income tax is illegal.

For every case where the prosecutors drop tax evasions charges hundreds off tax protester types get thrown in the hoosegow. There are many tax protesters, like Irwin Schiff, rooming with Bubba as we speak. I recommend that you don’t construe Cryer’s case as license to stop paying your own federal income taxes or you might find yourself joining him.

You’re going to have to do better than this if you want to gain converts to your bird-brained cause.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20070713%2FNEWS03%2F707130321%2F1062%2FNEWS03

LOL. Okay, I will let you drive on my roads.

While indeed “taxes” pay for our roads, the “Federal Income” tax does not. The roads and highways and their maintenance are paid for by gasoline taxes which I pay each time I fuel up my cars.

See ya on the road Peter!

Because you didn’t pay for the right to use it.

“And incidentally, if you don’t pay your taxes, I better not see you driving on an interstate highway.”

Why not?

There is a third possibility: No matter what answer I give, Dale and you will not accept it therefore I choose to spend my time conversing with people who do not reside on planet Conspiratoria.

Again, and finally, the question has been answered a thousand times by better people than me and it still makes no impression on either Dale or you. Read the cases. Also, there are hundreds of tax professionals who have written blog posts taking apart these absurd tax protester arguments. These can be found by doing a simple Google search. If you really want the answers – which we both know you don’t – they are easy to find.

And incidentally, if you don’t pay your taxes, I better not see you driving on an interstate highway.

When someone goes to great lengths not to answer a simple question, it leaves the listener (reader) with 1 or 2 impressions: 1) the answer to the question is not known; or 2)there is something being hidden that a truthful answer would reveal.

…and why do you insist on bringing up the “federal income tax is unconstitutional” argument when Dale (in posting #28) already stated that he agreed that the f.i.t. IS constitutional.

Heck I’d almost be willing to pay you to answer his question regarding Article 1 Sec.9 Par.4.
It shouldn’t take more than an hour right?