Income tax was found unconsitutional in the early 1800s.
The IRS is a private Corporation owned by the Rothschilds. They aren't part of the Gov at all. They act as henchman to take people's money for the Rothschilds.
The income tax system is designed to pay for the money the US illegally borrows from the banks to use as daily currency. The Constitution says the US must make its own money and cannot borrow it. Borrowing it comes with a large interest rate which eventually bankrupts the whole Country transferring the Country's wealth to the Rotshchilds. Income tax is there just to pay the interest on the money borrowed. We don't even have to borrow it. We aren't even legally allowed to borrow. We have to make our own money system in house but since Gov will never do it (Lincoln and JFK tried), then we can simply jump to barter for precious metals, goods and services. We have a Right to work and trade so nobody can legally stop us unless we violate Common Law.
The money made from income tax is split up between Rome's Black Nobility, London's Windsors/Rothschilds and the IRS gets 10% commission. None of that money goes back to our society.
The heads of the IRS have admitted that income tax is 100% voluntary but if anyone signs the 1040 for that year, they must pay that year's income tax because if they don't, the IRS can get them for violation of contractual agreement for that year only.
Many who stopped paying got some letter in the mail asking where the payment is. Most of them either dump the letter or replied saying they won't fund child traffickers and the destroyers of Life, Liberty and Freedom and America. I recommend the 2nd option. It is a clear cut explanation and speaks the truth. I also recommend saying you know income tax is voluntary. At this point, they won't want to mess with you because cases can go public and wake up the entire Country and then nobody would pay. They simply move on looking for a scared beta-male to get taxes from. Easier on them. They consider you a loss.
Once the entire system is defunded, the deep state's power shrinks and one of the main power sources has been our tax payments. Don't like the deep state? Don't fund them because funding them nonstop is just pushing America towards the NWO system complete with Social Credit Scores and punishments for wrong-think. Trust me, nobody consents to this.
Lastly, whenever the Gov claims they don't have tax money to fund certain things, what they are saying is that they pocketed all the tax dollars and nobody in their group wants to pay for something that helps us unless it also benefits them somehow financially or politically. Trust me, with the income and other taxes plus fines/fees combined, they have enough money to turn the entire planet into Dubai.
Hey Flex, on this subject exact speech is necessary.
There was no finding of income tax being unconstitutional in the early 1800s, rather income tax was considered during the War of 1812 and Congress ruled that it would be more detrimental than to continue the tariff system.
There is no evidence the IRS is a corporation (some have used individual filings of corporations with similar names by people who did effectively nothing with them to argue this silly point). Rather, a Commissioner of Internal Revenue, George Boutwell, became an officer of the Treasury Department in 1862, and his staff became the IRS subagency in time. Of course the Rothschilds have overseen (much of) the flow of money, but it is done by pull rather than by corporate structure, and the money is distributed to their friends by legally authorized means rather than by decree via legal ownership.
You are right that the US cannot borrow from others so it invented a legal way to borrow from itself (with the taxpayers' labor as collateral). Washington and Jackson succeeded in creating sound-money systems (inspired by the Byzantine Empire which used sound money for some 700 years); I doubt Lincoln tried, but Kennedy and Trump have tried and the latest go is more successful than Jackson so far. We can also argue that Bernard von NotHaus has tried.
There is no evidence that there's an agreement for the IRS to get a 10% commission. The formal means by which the IRS is funded, an annual budget of $18 billion on collections of $2 trillion, is an effective 1% commission. If an effective commission is funneled to friends via other deals, that is hardly quantifiable.
Accurately, "income tax is 100% voluntary" self-assessment, but if you sign the 1040 you are testifying that you owe the tax you self-assessed and that all schedules and attachments are accurate. I always tell everyone to follow the law and to assess your income taxes if you earn income. The IRS cannot penalize you directly for interpreting the law differently than they think you should have, or for judging you do not have an assessment that year, because it's a self-assessment. They can only wait several years to exhaust other statutory processes before they have power, based on the testimony of others that you earned income, to create a substitute assessment in your name. This is why tax evaders don't get caught for several years, because the IRS doesn't have power to jump on them immediately. The signing of the 1040 does constitute an assessment and thus a contract including a promise to pay; so if you owe tax, pay it, and if you don't owe tax, say so when called on.
More important, if you self-assessed and didn't pay, IRS gets to pursue ordinary bill collection; that is only stopped by either paying, cutting a negotiation (very rare), or adjusting the assessment. Ignoring, or protesting conscience, or stating a dilatory fact of the law (tax is voluntary) do not work to avoid paying bills you owe. On the last, your legal status is that you say the tax is voluntary, they say you volunteered to self-assess, and you still owe the tax and nothing has happened except that you can now be accused of dilatoriness.
More important, if you do not have any outstanding self-assessed balance, there is no amount for IRS to ask about being paid. In this case the only problem is if the IRS operates on the testimony of others to "propose" an assessment or a fine. The strategies above still fail; notably, they say that by volunteering not to assess timely in the light of evidence against you, you had actionable legal knowledge that you could be assessed by them instead of yourself. If a proposal is made, you are called on to accept or reject it; such letters always have a clause "if you disagree". You can accept it (and owe the proposed payment), or you can reject it by giving a correct assessment and/or a demonstration that the activities proposed for fine did not happen.
It is true that the IRS uses triage in relation to people who use dilatory strategies. However, it's not that they don't want to mess with them, it's that they refer them to a department that will slap everything on them at once later. Thus being dilatory doesn't help in the long run. Being a small fish helps, because of the unlikelihood that you will become a target of a bigger slap; but people who want to structure their affairs at the upper-middle class level generally need to include preparation for anything the IRS can throw legally or illegally. So don't ever consider yourself escaped of IRS illegality, or of its legal powers, always be on guard; and, certainly, understand the legal structure of any letter the IRS sends and answer false charges and presumptions when legally called on to do so. This is another reason nonfilers believe they have "gotten away with" something, because justice in this country takes its time and does use triage for prioritization. If you've "gotten away with" it, your own conscience convicts you before God because you testify that you beat the legal system, and if you've gotten away with enough then the legal system will get you. If you've gotten away with little then God's system will get you. Better than either is to have a clear conscience by knowing the law, as the citizen whose public servants are the states and the fed and its agencies.
There are constant calls to defund the government by withholding taxes. The best chance the people had to force the government to change was actually during the Civil War, when so many people petitioned Congress for redress of grievances that the Supreme Court was compelled to reinterpret the amendment so that Congress wouldn't have to investigate it all. So it appears that the grassroots aren't going to cut it in this day and age. I believe promotion of the truth will prevail in time, but the truths about the tax scheme are both deliberately buried and heavily clouded by mistakes such as those in OP. Therefore what it looks like the powers have lately determined is for the tax to be graduated into something else, primarily the Constitutional use of tariffs in the hands of an emergency-claiming executive (for God knows how long), followed by stabilization via metal and blockchain labor. This is almost the best short-term scenario the proponents of tax truth can hope for, but much remains in public education and awakening.
It is correct to call Big Capital to continue their pursuit of truth in taxation so as to minimize their legal tax burden and their support of the evils of the state. The problem is, Big Capital got where it did by consenting to a negotiated amount of taxation to the leeches. The accounting and legal industries convinced them to settle cheaply rather than to insist on conscience, and the leeches branded many false starts as conspiracy theories to hide the truth of the nature of self-assessment from the biggest contributors. Everyone in this stratum thinks they get off cheaply if they pay less than the government's proposal of 40%, because in WWI the government proposed 90%. But when the tax was created in 1913 the government proposed 1%. Therefore it's thoroughly arbitrary, and becomes a negotiation for those with the power to structure their affairs consistent with the law so as to minimize income tax burden. All kinds of subdeals are cut into the law to protect billionaire investments in million-dollar tax writeoffs to hide the fact that trillions are being taken by this spread-around deception otherwise. Therefore Big Capital is unmotivated to pursue conscience because it believes that making lots of money helps them spread good conscience better. The widow, the one who gave up all, laughs at them.
Yes, the budgeting process is also a deception built on the deception; the government can freely do anything via amassing public debt, it's just virtue-signaling by creating, and sticking damnably to, rules that block new expenses. That is all politics and manipulation of pull. Getting the collateralization of the private sector going in the first place is the real game, and it took several deceptions and misdirections over 100 years to get there. The dismantling was never easy and now that Trump is undertaking aspects of it we may be able to see some good things, and even have some ability to spread awakening about other things. But for now we occupy until our Lord comes.
TLDR: Income taxation is a legal scheme involving misdirection and is thus a "legal scam". Though OP has mistakes, the revelation of the IRS and the federal government as a paper tiger is significant. However, one should still (especially since J6) be prepared for the wrath of the tiger, but that is done by accurate information and not by willful ignorance, protest of conscience, or dilatory argument. I have deliberately not elaborated on the details of the law because that was not the subject of OP.
Your past suggests you might be open to more on this subject. It would be appropriate to lay out your sources for the assertions I challenged, so that we can compare the written statutes and code against them. If you are interested in learning the income tax laws toward the understanding of compliant self-assessment that all citizens are asked to undertake, with the responsibility for error falling solely on them, then I can answer any questions.
Hi Agent Smith. Are you excited about the Holidays?
I don't think you took my meaning. Perhaps you thought that by my pointing out a couple missteps I don't have anything to offer in exchange.
Would you like to cite your sources and/or compare the statutes and code, or would you just like to tell althist stories? Because the forum likes both, but I like to rein in the stories to ensure they are accurate history. I provide details to those who are interested.