|
Games - Artwear - Wisdom Wall Art - Stationery - Homeschooling - Don't Tread On Me - Income Tax Truth - Comment - Home |
|
Make sure you visit www.losthorizons.com for the full story. If We Would All Stick To The Facts, We Could Win In A Month
I’ve had occasion recently to be reminded of the wealth of talent, energy, and commitment which, while sincerely dedicated to the rule of law in regard to the “income” tax, is nonetheless squandered on misunderstandings for which absolutely no supporting evidence exists, and which defy both the words of the law and the huge body of evidence which DOES exist as to the true nature of the scheme. Masterful legal pleadings, slick media presentations, and stirring, heartfelt rhetoric are vigorously and sincerely deployed by a host of truly outstanding and patriotic Americans addressing imagined elements and constructions of law which have never made an appearance in a single prosecution or civil action in connection with the tax, or anywhere else, for that matter.
Theories, such as that only foreign (non-American) nationals are subject to the tax, or that only receipts from non-American ‘sources’ are taxed under the law, are brilliantly promoted-- despite the fact that no American has ever faced an official assertion that his or her receipts were taxable because of being from a non-American source, or because (s)he was actually a foreign national. Is it conceivable that this theory could be correct, yet no indictment or information or civil claim has ever said, “John Smith, having received $xxx in earnings from France (or, “being a French citizen and having earned $xxx while residing in Ohio”), is thereby made subject to the income tax,” or words to that effect? Another popular and powerfully advocated theory-- that "income" only means "corporate profit"-- falls victim to the same question. Where are the cases in which any natural American has ever been alleged to actually be a corporation in order to bring the tax to bear upon them? Indeed, what of the vast number of occasions in which courts (and the words of the law) have unambiguously declared "wages" to be "income" and taxable as such? Are we to understand that "wages" are "corporate profits"?
The stubborn persistence of these theories astonishes me, particularly in light of the wealth of irrefutable evidence demonstrating the nature of the real "income" tax scheme. An enormous, vigorous and highly visible program to ensure that virtually every transaction in America is documented as having a connection to the federal government is underway at all times, with the resulting evidentiary documentation being relied upon in practically every criminal and civil action involving the "income" tax.
The simple fact
is, since 1862 there has been a tax upon federally-connected receipts.
Looking, for instance, at its application to work-related earnings,
it was first enacted as this:
Sec. 86. And
be it further enacted, That on and after the first day of August, eighteen
hundred and sixty-two, there shall be levied, collected, and paid
on all salaries of officers, or
payments to persons in the civil, military, naval, or other employment or
service of the United States, including senators and representatives
and delegates in Congress, when exceeding the rate of six hundred dollars
per annum, a duty of three per centum on the excess above the said six
hundred dollars; and it shall be the duty of all paymasters, and all
disbursing officers, under the
government of the United States, or in the employ thereof, when
making any payments to officers and persons as aforesaid, or upon settling
and adjusting the accounts of such officers and persons, to deduct and
withhold the aforesaid duty of three per centum, and shall, at the same
time, make a certificate stating the name of the officer or person from whom
such deduction was made, and the amount thereof, which shall be transmitted
to the office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and entered as part
of the internal duties;…
And then
re-enacted (in pertinent part) as this:
Gross Income Defined:
Section 213. That for the purposes of this title (except as otherwise provided in section 233 [Gross Income Of Corporations Defined -PH]) the term gross income- (a) includes gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, and compensation for personal service (including in the case of the President of the United States, the judges of the Supreme and inferior courts of the United States, and all other officers and employees, whether elected or appointed, of the United States, Alaska, Hawaii, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, the compensation received as such)…
Then it was
re-enacted as this: SEC. 22. GROSS INCOME.
(a) General
definition.—"Gross income" includes gains, profits, and income derived from
salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service, of whatever kind and
in whatever form paid,...
and ultimately
this:
Sec. 61. - Gross income
defined
(a) General definition
Except as otherwise
provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever
source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1)
Compensation for services,
including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;
...,
while subject to the specifications
in this law:
The term
"department" means an executive
department of the United States Government, a governmental
establishment in the executive branch of the United States Government which
is not a part of an executive department, the municipal government of the
District of Columbia, the Botanic Garden, Library of Congress, Library
Building and Grounds, Government Printing Office, and the Smithsonian
Institution.
The term
"position"
means a specific civilian office or
employment, whether occupied or vacant, in a department other
than the following: Offices or employments in the Postal Service; teachers,
librarians, school attendance officers, and employees of the community
center department under the Board of Education of the District of Columbia;
officers and members of the Metropolitan police, the fire department of the
District of Columbia, and the United States park police; and the
commissioned personnel of the Coast Guard, the Public Health Service, and
the Coast and Geodetic Survey.
The term
"employee"
means any person temporarily or
permanently in a position.
The term
"service"
means the broadest division of related offices and employments.
The term
"compensation" means any salary, wage, fee, allowance, or other emolument
paid to an employee for service in a position.
So, the
compensations of federal workers ("employees") are clearly and uniquely
classified in the law as being gross "income", and are taxed (after being
distilled down to taxable "income" by the claiming of available deductions,
etc.).
Now look at the specifications for creating the 100 million or so W-2’s stridently demanded from every company every year (1099’s amount to the same thing for contractors and others, by a different statutory scheme, which we will not explore here):
Sec. 6051. - Receipts for
employees
(a) Requirement
Every person required to
deduct and withhold from an employee...
...shall furnish to each such employee…a
written statement showing the following:
(1) the name of such
person,
(2) the name of the
employee (and his social security account number
if wages as defined in section 3121(a)
have been paid),
(3) the total amount of
wages as defined in section 3401(a),
...
and at what “wages as defined in section 3401(a)” are. (3121(a)’s definition is similar, but too complicated to go through for purposes of this summary):
Sec. 3401. - Definitions
(a)
Wages
For purposes of this
chapter, the term ''wages'' means all remuneration (other than fees paid to
a public official) for services performed by an
employee for his employer,…
c)
Employee
For purposes of this chapter, the term ''employee'' includes an officer,
employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any
political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or
instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term ''employee''
also includes an officer of a corporation. [A “United
States Corporation”, defined in Sec. 207 of the Public Salary Tax Act as,
“a corporate agency or instrumentality, is one (a) a majority of the stock
of which is owned by or on behalf of the United States, or (b) the power to
appoint or select a majority of the board of directors of which is
exercisable by or on behalf of the United States,” ].
THE TRUTH IS SIMPLE AND
STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE PURPOSE OF W-2’S (AND 1099’S) IS TO RECORD AND REPORT
PAYMENTS MADE TO FEDERAL WORKERS. THE CREATION OF ONE OF THESE FORMS ABOUT
ANY GIVEN AMERICAN CONSTITUTES A LEGAL DECLARATION THAT HE OR SHE IS A
FEDERAL WORKER AND HAS BEEN PAID TAXABLE FEDERAL COMPENSATION.
THAT’S WHY AMERICANS ARE ALLEGED
TO BE TAXABLE AND TAXED. THAT’S
WHY EVERY COMPANY IN AMERICA IS BROWBEATEN OR FOOLED INTO ISSUING W-2’S
AGAINST THEIR WORKERS, AND 1099’S AGAINST THEIR CONTRACTORS, GENERATING A
VERITABLE BLIZZARD OF EVIDENCE AS TO THE TRUE NATURE OF THE SCHEME! There
is, on the other hand, no effort of any kind to cause the creation of
evidence that every company is connected with a non-American country, or
that every worker is a corporate shareholder (or even that every company is
a corporation), or anything of either sort-- because the theories
involving these things are simply wrong.
There IS a tax on corporations-- an "income" tax on those corporations chartered as federal or federally-controlled entities, but it has nothing to do with (and is not applied to) natural persons (who are taxed on their "income" by other means, such as that discussed above). There IS a distinction drawn in the law between "income" from ‘foreign-located sources’ and "income" from ‘domestically-located sources’ in the case of "non-resident aliens" (and a few others), but these terms do not mean what the advocates of the foreign source argument understand them to mean, and the tax scheme does not rely upon the distinction at all, in the sense that those advocates suggest.
It is a great pity that the talent and energy that is devoted to these errors is thus wasted. It is worse still that many who are introduced to the idea of freedom from a wrongfully applied and hugely destructive tax for the first time thanks to the admirable and accomplished outreach efforts of these mistaken theorists will, upon perceiving the errors in those theories, simply be lost to the cause-- as once burned, twice warned.
I know that over the course of time the real nature of the "income" tax scheme will come to be understood by all, but it could happen a lot faster if overcoming misunderstanding was unnecessary. And think how quickly that time could come if all of the polished, practiced, and dedicated advocates presently defending the indefensible turned their prodigious talents toward spreading that understanding. We could win by April 16th.
© Peter E. Hendrickson |
Use the 'Back' button on your browser to return to the previous page