The irony of 87,000 new IRS agents is that there is no law that imposes an income tax on sovereign citizens. Taxation is an attribute of sovereignty. That over which the taxing authority is not sovereign is not a suitable object for taxation. Our form of government is "guaranteed" to be a "Republican" form where People are sovereign. Ref. Constitution, Article IV, Section 4.
If a tax upon the labors of a Sovereign Citizen properly existed it would authorize the subordinate government to seize 100% of the Citizen’s earnings. ‘Reasonable’ is not a limitation for a tax. It is not a matter of concern to the court if the tax destroys the object being taxed. Such a law would authorize slavery. No such law exists.
Former IRS special agent Joe Banister, after repeated unsuccessful efforts to find a statutory income tax with the help of his supervisor, separated from the IRS.
LIBERTY, enshrined in the 5th and 14th Amendments, includes the Citizen’s opportunity to Pursue a Livelihood as a fundamental Right. Such Rights, similar to your Right to a trial by jury, are not suitable objects for taxation or fee. If it were otherwise, all Rights could be taxed out of existence. [87,000 new IRS agents are getting hired to harass ‘terrorists’. Ref 16A American Jurisprudence 2nd, Constitutional Law §§ 616-617 (2009).
26 USC §1 authorizes an income tax on the “taxable income” of an individual. ‘Taxable income’ is not legally defined. If you wish to donate to the government, they will take your money—and demand more. This statute is never alleged to be violated in an indictment and is therefore not submitted to contestation with the burden of proof upon the plaintiff.
26 USC §871 imposes an excise tax upon “non-resident aliens” for the privilege of being permitted into the USA. The government does not extend a privilege for the pursuit of a livelihood.
Violations of 26 USC §§7201-7215 are frequently alleged in indictments. The Supreme Court, relying upon the Congressional Record, has identified those penalty statutes as applying to all taxes in Title 26. They cannot allege violation of a “known legal duty” as required for a valid indictment. Ref. Sansone v. US, 380 US 343, 348.
The IRS relies upon a citizen signing a tax form, under oath, over the caveat of “taxpayer’s name” to identify you as legally responsible for a tax. You have just sworn that you legally owe a tax. The court accepts your affidavit. The income tax is a known scam enforced by a perfidious judiciary.
Lawyers who aggressively make this claim face lose of license and HAVE been sent to jail on bogus charges.
State courts have repeatedly covered up similar challenges to state income taxes, earnings taxes, and occupational licenses, to avoid an exempt precedent from becoming established.
IRS Exempt Tax form #4852 has been claimed by Pete Hendrickson as successfully recovering prior years’ income taxes erroneously paid to the IRS.
WARNING: The positioning of the “burden of proof” is critical. Due Process requires the Petitioner to prove the validity of any claimed authority. If the BOP can be shifted by the court to the citizen to prove the tax authority does not exist, they will require proof that there is no possible way the tax might be valid. Such a proof is impossible. This shift doomed the Springer case. Springer v US, 102 US 586, (1881).
The Supreme Court declared Springer’s claim the income tax was an unapportioned Direct Tax and therefore unconstitutional was not valid. The court added that the only alternate Constitutional tax was an indirect tax of either an impost, a duty, or an excise tax. Since a duty or impost relates to merchandise crossing a territorial boundary, by deduction, an income tax must be an excise tax.
Tax denier Sherry Peel Jackson was convicted of tax charges in 2008. A Opinion declares several tax protester theories by Jackson were denied by the court. There is no claim the court declared the income tax did not improperly infringe on Constitutional Rights. The court’s shift of the BOP doomed her case.An excise tax is based upon a privilege being received. This writer does not see any privilege being received by a Sovereign Citizen upon which the government of the United States can properly base an income tax.
The 16th Amendment attempts to expand the definition of taxable income; some federal courts have opined it removes all restrictions on federal taxation. In reality, such a concept would convert a Sovereign Citizen immune from taxation [except for an excise tax on a privilege received] into a subject that can be forced to give 100% of their earnings to the ruler. That would stand the Constitution on its head and is a coup that is currently obsessed with nuclear war-mongering against two of the most powerful nations of the world to compel submission to Great Reset. The power to tax is the power to destroy. Such an act would violate the judge’s oath of office and negate the jurisdiction of the judge. The prohibitive cost of appeals, and denial of certiorari, along with a lucrative self-interest, has prevented any review by the SCOTUS.
If the 16th Amendment is construed to authorize seizure of a Citizens’ earnings, it is in direct conflict with the Constitution. Article IV, Section 4 establish the federal government has a duty: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican Form of Government...” A Republican form of government rests Sovereignty in the People. If the political powers of a corrupt government can seize unlimited assets of its Citizens by taxation, under color of law, it is tyranny. A government that corrupts the election of representation is not different. The Constitution mandates a duty to judicially review any alleged infringement of the Citizen’s Sovereignty.