You could make the case in court while on trial for tax evasion that the income tax in unconstitutional, but the jury will still find you guilty and court would still sentence you to prison.
Further, good luck ever getting SCOTUS to ever take a case on this, or getting the backing to spend at least $100,000 plus in legal fees.
Yes, though it's true that Lowell Becraft used this argument successfully and this may allude correctly to that event, there is zero chance this is a real CIR memo, as it has no authentication and is not written from an IRS POV but from that of a Becraft sympathizer. Becraft's work was of the best quality but like others he rarely received remedy.
Individuals using the nonratification argument only succeed in spite of the argument. There is no "many" getting off not guilty; there is mostly just Gaylon "Whitey" Harrell (featured in A:FFTF) who was ruled not guilty because the jury decided his belief was sincere, not because they believed as he did.
The Supremes have already weighed in that the tax is Constitutional because in the nature of an excise, and they've even ruled that to say too much more would be "precarious" to collections. This means it's not theft under the Constitution because technically evitable and noticed and voluntary. It is left to all sovereign citizens to deign how to deal with the expensive machinery attempting to trick them into paying more than they might necessarily owe. Hundreds of millions are required to decide for themselves the definition of "income" because the government refuses.
Hello Agent Smith. Many have gone off Not Guilty per Jury Trials by using this as evidence and other things too that we don't have to pay taxes. Taxation is theft. Is theft legal?
Many have gone off Not Guilty per Jury Trials by using this as evidence and other things too that we don't have to pay taxes.
OK, then there should be detailed step-by-step 100% working howtos around. What exact preconditions necessary, what exact documents, witnesses, arguments, code articles numbers you need, how exactly properly apply all that in the court so judge could not arbitrary dismiss your stuff, how to answer to any questions prosecutor and judge could ask and so on.
Not fucking youtube videos, not fucking forum posts about somebody somwhere once upon a time, but straight detailed step-by-step instructions written in human language without juridical yddish.
I'm not an US citizen, but it will be very interesting for me to study basic principles and strategy of fast and guaranteed winning such cases in courts with judges and prosecutors whose salary depends on taxes I don't want to pay.
Taxation is theft. Is theft legal?
Anything that was legislated by legal authorities is legal. Theft, eating babies, fucking frogs, not fulfilling pre-election promises, usury, whatever shit those who write and pass the laws want to be legal.
You should never mix justice with enfocement of honest and morally apropriate ways of doing things and resolving disputes accepted by your people. Former is based only on what some not close to you people in power made in laws for people like you, latter is based on moral principles shared by people you live among. In courts you meet with justice, unfortunately.
Not being a US citizen by birth or naturalization makes a big difference, as you don't have automatic access to the sovereignty rights under the law for those who continue the population that created the governments by their sovereign citizenships.
Citizens have the right to pursue happiness (to work for pay) without interference. Noncitizens have their entry and stay regulated by the government already, so there is an immediate nexus to all money transferred that doesn't apply to the citizen. I haven't been asked recently to look into the laws for noncitizens to review arguments that noncitizens do not earn income, so I apologize for not having any quick takes for you there.
You are right that there should be step-by-step instructions, but since the ones who write (mammoth) step-by-step instructions are the IRS itself, which benefits from obfuscation, and the sovereign citizens are not similarly incentivized to publish but are in fact incentivized to be cautious in speech, the documentation you seek is hard to come by. There exist books that come close, but I'm not prepared to recommend one that applies to your case, and of course there are many more books that mislead or that are controlled oppo. But if you're interested in learning more about the tax fraud in this country, ask away. There would not be any fast or guaranteed path now because it would become commonplace if confirmed by courts; but recent years have allowed other surprising fast or near-guaranteed paths to materialize on other important fronts of sovereign expression, so there's always hope. Rather, we sovereign citizens have the responsibility to blaze our own pioneer paths, and those who succeed will be followed, even by noncitizens who take the additional steps of naturalization so as to share equally and responsibly in our sovereign status. Patient sovereigns decide justice ultimately.
Not being a US citizen by birth or naturalization makes a big difference
I meant I have Russian citizenship, not US one. :) I just trying that concepts on my reality. Things are pretty same really, just with some local specific.
F.e. there was no any procedure of dismissing USSR citizenship for citizens. Formally, I'm a dual citizen of USSR and Russian Federation. So, theoretically I could just use my USSR citizenship to get out RF one. And since USSR is formally exist in form of Transnistria (the only region that never declared exit or whatever from USSR, so become an only and single USSR member and formally represent USSR today), my USSR citizenship is still valid and should be formally accepted by all other states. And since RF declared itself a successor on USSR obligations, includng before USSR citizens, this effectively force it to admit my USSR citizenship and rights. So I don't even need to somehow declare myself sovereign or whatever to do same juridical mumbo-jumbo. :)
sovereign citizens are not similarly incentivized to publish but are in fact incentivized to be cautious in speech, the documentation you seek is hard to come by
I think there is a reason for that. Person who dug so deep in jurisprudence have to understand, that if everybody began use their concepts, then authorities inevitably will change the laws to close all that holes. So it is in his interest to not share that information. :)
I can't verify fact or fiction on this, but this guy claims to have an exact list and detailed instructions of which forms to file and how to deal with local authorities after your license is de-registered and your only ID is your passport. The detailed info and step-by-step process is not divulged on the site though - one apparently signs up for the free course through email.
Interesting link, thank you. At least dude have some links to exact code articles and stuff. But still too many narrow places, so it is more the question of luck, than something solid.
One thing I didn't get really, is why a book named "Black's Law Dictionary" used as an argument for bureaucrats? As far as I found, this is just a dictionary of juridical terms, without any signs of official acceptance. It is not some legislated, voted, signed official dictionary, just some lawyer or juridical scholar tried to systematize words often used in laws and other judridical stuff. Or I missing something and this book is recognized by courts as official document, so definitions in it have power of law and have to be accepted by courts undoubtfully?
The tax scheme is not based on uniform commercial code as your link suggests; it has operated independently and defeated all UCC arguments, as Becraft noted long ago IIRC.
Filing a bunch of UCC papers merely mucks up a record but doesn't accomplish the testimony necessary to overcome mistaken presumptions of income. The site's going two years is no indicator of eventual success in actual goals. Find people who have been doing it for a lifetime. Herein I answered all the essential tax-related questions in one sentence, and this can be backed up with specifics from IRS instructions as I said. There are thousands hacking at the branches of evil without any effect.
You could make the case in court while on trial for tax evasion that the income tax in unconstitutional, but the jury will still find you guilty and court would still sentence you to prison.
Further, good luck ever getting SCOTUS to ever take a case on this, or getting the backing to spend at least $100,000 plus in legal fees.
Yes, though it's true that Lowell Becraft used this argument successfully and this may allude correctly to that event, there is zero chance this is a real CIR memo, as it has no authentication and is not written from an IRS POV but from that of a Becraft sympathizer. Becraft's work was of the best quality but like others he rarely received remedy.
Individuals using the nonratification argument only succeed in spite of the argument. There is no "many" getting off not guilty; there is mostly just Gaylon "Whitey" Harrell (featured in A:FFTF) who was ruled not guilty because the jury decided his belief was sincere, not because they believed as he did.
The Supremes have already weighed in that the tax is Constitutional because in the nature of an excise, and they've even ruled that to say too much more would be "precarious" to collections. This means it's not theft under the Constitution because technically evitable and noticed and voluntary. It is left to all sovereign citizens to deign how to deal with the expensive machinery attempting to trick them into paying more than they might necessarily owe. Hundreds of millions are required to decide for themselves the definition of "income" because the government refuses.
u/LightBringerFlex
^^ u/the-new-style ^^ u/ImBillCurtis
Hello Agent Smith. Many have gone off Not Guilty per Jury Trials by using this as evidence and other things too that we don't have to pay taxes. Taxation is theft. Is theft legal?
If there are many then it should be no problem for you to list a few.
I've heard about them off and on for decades. Just go look it up on youtube you lazy bum.
OK, then there should be detailed step-by-step 100% working howtos around. What exact preconditions necessary, what exact documents, witnesses, arguments, code articles numbers you need, how exactly properly apply all that in the court so judge could not arbitrary dismiss your stuff, how to answer to any questions prosecutor and judge could ask and so on.
Not fucking youtube videos, not fucking forum posts about somebody somwhere once upon a time, but straight detailed step-by-step instructions written in human language without juridical yddish.
I'm not an US citizen, but it will be very interesting for me to study basic principles and strategy of fast and guaranteed winning such cases in courts with judges and prosecutors whose salary depends on taxes I don't want to pay.
Anything that was legislated by legal authorities is legal. Theft, eating babies, fucking frogs, not fulfilling pre-election promises, usury, whatever shit those who write and pass the laws want to be legal.
You should never mix justice with enfocement of honest and morally apropriate ways of doing things and resolving disputes accepted by your people. Former is based only on what some not close to you people in power made in laws for people like you, latter is based on moral principles shared by people you live among. In courts you meet with justice, unfortunately.
frog fucking you say? sign me up.
Not being a US citizen by birth or naturalization makes a big difference, as you don't have automatic access to the sovereignty rights under the law for those who continue the population that created the governments by their sovereign citizenships.
Citizens have the right to pursue happiness (to work for pay) without interference. Noncitizens have their entry and stay regulated by the government already, so there is an immediate nexus to all money transferred that doesn't apply to the citizen. I haven't been asked recently to look into the laws for noncitizens to review arguments that noncitizens do not earn income, so I apologize for not having any quick takes for you there.
You are right that there should be step-by-step instructions, but since the ones who write (mammoth) step-by-step instructions are the IRS itself, which benefits from obfuscation, and the sovereign citizens are not similarly incentivized to publish but are in fact incentivized to be cautious in speech, the documentation you seek is hard to come by. There exist books that come close, but I'm not prepared to recommend one that applies to your case, and of course there are many more books that mislead or that are controlled oppo. But if you're interested in learning more about the tax fraud in this country, ask away. There would not be any fast or guaranteed path now because it would become commonplace if confirmed by courts; but recent years have allowed other surprising fast or near-guaranteed paths to materialize on other important fronts of sovereign expression, so there's always hope. Rather, we sovereign citizens have the responsibility to blaze our own pioneer paths, and those who succeed will be followed, even by noncitizens who take the additional steps of naturalization so as to share equally and responsibly in our sovereign status. Patient sovereigns decide justice ultimately.
I meant I have Russian citizenship, not US one. :) I just trying that concepts on my reality. Things are pretty same really, just with some local specific.
F.e. there was no any procedure of dismissing USSR citizenship for citizens. Formally, I'm a dual citizen of USSR and Russian Federation. So, theoretically I could just use my USSR citizenship to get out RF one. And since USSR is formally exist in form of Transnistria (the only region that never declared exit or whatever from USSR, so become an only and single USSR member and formally represent USSR today), my USSR citizenship is still valid and should be formally accepted by all other states. And since RF declared itself a successor on USSR obligations, includng before USSR citizens, this effectively force it to admit my USSR citizenship and rights. So I don't even need to somehow declare myself sovereign or whatever to do same juridical mumbo-jumbo. :)
I think there is a reason for that. Person who dug so deep in jurisprudence have to understand, that if everybody began use their concepts, then authorities inevitably will change the laws to close all that holes. So it is in his interest to not share that information. :)
https://www.onestupidfuck.com
I can't verify fact or fiction on this, but this guy claims to have an exact list and detailed instructions of which forms to file and how to deal with local authorities after your license is de-registered and your only ID is your passport. The detailed info and step-by-step process is not divulged on the site though - one apparently signs up for the free course through email.
Again, I cannot verify this isn't bonkers.
Interesting link, thank you. At least dude have some links to exact code articles and stuff. But still too many narrow places, so it is more the question of luck, than something solid.
One thing I didn't get really, is why a book named "Black's Law Dictionary" used as an argument for bureaucrats? As far as I found, this is just a dictionary of juridical terms, without any signs of official acceptance. It is not some legislated, voted, signed official dictionary, just some lawyer or juridical scholar tried to systematize words often used in laws and other judridical stuff. Or I missing something and this book is recognized by courts as official document, so definitions in it have power of law and have to be accepted by courts undoubtfully?
The tax scheme is not based on uniform commercial code as your link suggests; it has operated independently and defeated all UCC arguments, as Becraft noted long ago IIRC.
Filing a bunch of UCC papers merely mucks up a record but doesn't accomplish the testimony necessary to overcome mistaken presumptions of income. The site's going two years is no indicator of eventual success in actual goals. Find people who have been doing it for a lifetime. Herein I answered all the essential tax-related questions in one sentence, and this can be backed up with specifics from IRS instructions as I said. There are thousands hacking at the branches of evil without any effect.
Taxation is theft is a lolbitarian catch phrase that is meaningless in real life, albeit funny.
Even granted on its face that taxation is theft, it's still as unavoidable as death.