To educate the millions of Americans about the fraudulent nature of the income tax system issue, the recalcitrance of the government, and the urgency tens of thousands of concerned citizens place on the need for the federal income tax authorities to meet with the tax researchers in a public forum, we believe a "WALK-AROUND" the IRS headquarters building is necessary and would be effective publicity. |
Every unlawful act committed by the government -- whether at the local, state or federal levels -- is an act of tyranny, and we, as responsible Americans, have a duty to respond to acts of governmental tyranny in order to preserve, protect and enhance our rights, freedoms and liberties. |
Read the Facts and Judge the Truth for Yourself:
Read More Detailed Evidence at Our Website: www.givemeliberty.org
The Constitutional Argument
Bill Benson's research report, "The Law That Never Was" is based on thousands of court-certified documents from state and federal archives. It proves conclusively the 16th (income tax) Amendment to the Constitution in 1913 was fraudulently ratified.
His report says, in effect, that every individual in America can legally ignore the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code because it is well settled in American Jurisprudence that any law which is conflict with the Constitution is abrogated, i.e., it is VOID and can be IGNORED by the People.
Mr. Benson, a former Criminal Investigator for the Illinois Department of Revenue, has NOT filed federal or state tar returns or paid any federal or state tax on his income since 1986.
Unrefuted research by Larken Rose and John Kotmair say, in effect, that EVEN IF the Constitution authorized an income tax, the current income tax laws do NOT APPLY AND DO NOT REQUIRE most U.S. citizens to pay any taxes on their income.
Mr. Rose has not filed federal or state income tax returns or paid income taxes since 1996. Mr. Kotmair has not filed federal or state income tax returns or paid income tax since 1973.
Q: DOES THE CONSTITUTION PROHIBIT A NON-APPORTIONED DIRECT TAX ON THE PEOPLE?
A: YES! HERE IS WHAT THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION SAYS: "No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken." See Article I, Section 9, Clause 4.
Q: IS THE INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX A DIRECT TAX?
A: YES, ACCORDING TO THE COURTS.
The U.S. Supreme Court Has Declared the Tax to be a Direct Tax: "A proper regard for its [the 16th Amendment's] genesis, as well as its very clear language, requires also that this amendment shall not be extended by loose construction, so as to repeal or modify, except as applied to income, those provisions of the Constitution that require an apportionment according to population for direct taxes upon property, real and personal." See Eisner v. Macomber, (1920, 252 U.S. 189, 206, 40 S.Ct. 189. Editors note: Wages & salaries are property. See Sims v. U.S., (1959), 359 U.S. 108.
Federal Appeals Courts Have Declared The Income Tax To Be A Direct Tax.
State Courts Have Declared The Income Tax To Be A Direct Tax.
Editor’s note: For a full discussion see: "Long after Brushaber vs. U.P. Railroad and Stanton vs. Baltic Mining, the Courts Have Declared The Income Tax to be a Direct Tax." This article can be found on our web site. Special thanks to constitutional attorney Larry Becraft upon whose research our article is bused
Q: IS THE INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX IMPOSED "IN PROPORTION TO THE CENSUS."
A: NO! IT IS NOT IN PROPORTION TO THE CENSUS."
The individual income tax is not tied to the population, state-by-state. Notwithstanding the constitutional prohibition found in Article I, Section 9, Clause 4, the income tax is not apportioned among the States. Congress does not require each state to tax their citizens to collect the money the federal government says it needs, over and above what it collects under the taxing authority granted to it under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution (indirect taxes: excise, tariffs, duties and imposts).
Q: HOW CAN THERE BE A DIRECT, UNAPPORTIONED INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX IN AMERICA IF THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS IT?
A: THE GOVERNMENT RELIES UPON THE VALIDITY OF THE 16TH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION AS ITS AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE THE CURRENT, DIRECT, UNAPPORTIONED, INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX.
The 16th Amendment reads: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
The IRS says it is the 16th Amendment that gives it the authority to impose the income tax directly on the working people of America. The IRS is on record as saying: "The sixteenth amendment to the Constitution states that citizens are required to file tax returns and pay taxes." IRS Publication No. 1918 (July, 96), Cat. No. 22524B.
No less an authority than the New York Times says the 16th Amendment is the government's authority to impose the income tax directly on the working people of America. The New York Times says: "Congress's right to levy taxes on the income of individuals and corporations was contested throughout the 19th century, but that authority was written into the Constitution with the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913." The New York Times Almanac, 2001, The World’s Most Comprehensive and Authoritative Almanac, page 161.
While refusing to address the question of its fraudulent adoption, the federal courts have said the 16th Amendment is the government's authority to impose the income tax directly on the working people of America. For instance, Judge Paul G. Hatfield (United States District Court For The District of Montana) wrote: "The income tax laws of the United States of America are constitutional, having been validly enacted under authority of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution." See United States of America vs. Jerome David Pederson . (1985) Case No. CR-54-57-GF. In United States v. Lawson the court declared: "The Sixteenth Amendment removed any need to apportion income taxes among the states that otherwise would have been required by Article I, Section 9, clause 4." See United States v. Lawson, 670 F.2d 923, 927 (10th Cir.1982).
However, Bill Benson's findings, published in "The Law That Never Was," make a compelling case that the 16th Amendment (the "income tax amendment") was not legally ratified and that Secretary of State Philander Knox was not merely in error, but committed fraud when he declared it ratified in February 1913. For a discussion of Philander Knox and his motives for fraudulently declaring the 16th Amendment ratified, see: "Who Was Philander Knox? Is It Credible That He Would Have Committed Fraud?" which can be found on our web site.
PROOF THAT STATES DID NOT RATIFY THE 16TH AMENDMENT:
In 1909, Congress passed the proposed 16th Amendment. It was sent to the states for ratification by the state legislatures. There were 48 states. Three-fourths, or 36, of them were required to give their approval in order for it to be ratified.
Knox declared the 16th amendment ratified on February 25, 1913, just a few days before leaving office. He counted 38 states as having approved it.
Now the number is down to 33.
Twelve other states violated provisions in their State Constitutions, bringing the number down to 21.
Further evidence in Mr. Benson's research report make the list dwindle down much more, but with the number down to 21, fifteen fewer than required, this is a suitable place to rest for the purposes of this article.
For a more detailed state-by-state account, go to: "How Some States Failed To Ratify The Sixteenth Amendment," which is located on our web site. Special thanks to Bill Benson, upon whose research our article is based.
THE CONGRESS AND THE COURTS HAVE PLAYED "GOVERNMENTAL PING-PONG" WITH MR. BENSON'S CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE TO THE 16TH AMENDMENT
In 1985, Mr. Benson asked a federal court to declare the 16th Amendment to be null and void because it was fraudulently ratified. The court, instead, ruled the question to be a political question for the Congress to decide. It said, "[Defendant] Stahl's claim that ratification of the 16th Amendment was fraudulently certified constitutes a political question because we could not undertake independent resolution of this issue without expressing lack of respect due coordinate branches of government..." See U.S. v Stahl (1986), 792 F2nd 1438.
Mr. Benson then personally delivered a copy of his voluminous research report to each and every member of Congress. In response, the Congressional Research Service immediately issued a report, which declared that the CRS was not going to address the factual allegations of Mr. Benson's report and that the question of the fraudulent adoption of the 16th Amendment was a question for the Courts. For a copy of the CRS report, which was written by a CRS attorney (Ripy), go to our web site.
Mr. Benson has concluded that the 16th Amendment can be ignored, that Congress's power to lay a DIRECT (income) tax on the People is, therefore, limited by the original Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 4), and that because the income tax has not been laid in proportion to the states, he has a fundamental right to ignore the income tax laws. He has not filed an income tax return or paid income tax since 1986.
REGARDLESS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL INFIRMITIES OF THE CURRENT INCOME TAX LAW, THE TAX LAW AS WRITTEN DOES NOT APPLY TO MOST AMERICANS LIVING AND WORKING IN THE UNITED STATES.
Some Evidence:
WHAT IF?
What if individuals were to stop filing and paying income tax and employers were to stop withholding the tax from the paychecks of their employers there was no new federal tax to take the place of the individual income tax? Would we be able to "fix the bridges and maintain a strong national defense"? Would we be able to avoid "chaos"? Would we be a stronger nation? Is a mechanism in place that would allow a peaceful end smooth transition from a society with an individual income tax to a society without one?
The answer to each and every one of these questions is a resounding "YES."
Here we are in the year 2001, and the federal government is preparing to adopt the federal budget for the next fiscal year. Let's assume that the Congress will come to the conclusion that it wants two trillion dollars in tax revenue next year. Let's also assume that Congress expects one trillion dollars to come from the taxes already in place and authorized by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution (excise taxes, tariffs, duties and imposts), and that those tax revenues were sufficient (as is the case today) to maintain a strong defense and to pay for the other federal programs needed and authorized by the enumerated powers found in Article I. That leaves one trillion dollars to come from someplace else to pay for everything else Congress wants to do. Assuming Congress decides not to increase the Article I, Section 8 taxes, Congress would have to get the other trillion dollars by taxing the People under the authority granted by Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, i.e., by laying a direct tax on the people, a tax that would have to be PROPORTIONED AMONG THE STATES. This means Congress would have to pass a bill and the President would have to sign the bill into law, requiring the states to come up with the money the Congress wanted. To be constitutional, the bill would have to proportion the one trillion dollars among the 50 states, based on the population figures of the last census.
This is the mechanism that has been in place since 1787, and which could very easily work today.
Of course, with this approach to funding the federal government, there would be a dramatic shift in power away from the federal government to the States and to the People.
It can be safely assumed that if given the choice, the States will use their power to influence the federal government not to adopt the law requiring the states to come up with the trillion dollars, deciding, instead, that they, the states don't need the middle man, i.e., that they will fund the development of communities of their states, and they will fund the education of the children of their states, without also funding the huge bureaucracies in DC.
APRIL 9TH: IRS WALK-AROUND. BE THERE.
What must a free people do when faced with a government that has stepped outside the Law and the Constitution? At 10 a.m. on Monday, April 9th, we will hold a peaceful "walk-around" of the IRS building in Washington, D.C. Your participation is required to send the message that the People will no longer tolerate the illegal operations of the IRS. Please see our website at www.givemeliberty.org for more information on times, agenda, hotel, etc. |
Freedom is NOT a spectator sport. These ads cost tens of thousands of dollars. If you want to see more of these PLEASE HELP. If every concerned citizen could contribute just a few dollars we can reach millions and end this tyranny. DONATIONS are: Confidential, protected by a bonded CPA firm, and are tax deductible. ADDRESS: 2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury, New York 12804 WEBSITE: www.givemeliberty.org WIRE TRANSFER: We The People Account # 324220020998, ABA route No. 021300077 BUY REPRINTS OF THIS AD: $50 for 500. Full-size, in color. PHONE: (518) 656-3578 |
Tax Truth Day on www.LibertyWorksRadio.com
Friday, March 23, 2001 • 6 AM - 6 PM Eastern Time One listen will change your life. Twelve hours of the facts ...twelve hours of the truth about the income tax. Bob Schulz of We The People and John Kotmair of Save-A-Patriot Fellowship as well as Ex-IRS agents, business owners and every-day Americans share why April fifteenth is likely meaningless to you. Listen to "http://www.LibertyWorksRadio.com/" or call loll-free (888) 999-1787 to have your question[s] answered You won't believe what you will hear. |