Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Taxes: Does one have to pay

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

http://paynoincometax.com/

This site details why the income tax system is a fraud, and how you legally don't have to pay income tax, because no law provides for it.

The author has a bet going with anyone. He will give $50,000 to the person that can find a law requiring anyone to pay income tax.

Be sure to read the testimonials.

Edited by softwareNerd
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

(I posted this a minute ago but it didn't show up?? strange <_< )

This reminds me of Thoreau in Civil Disobedience:

"But, if I deny the authority of the State when it presents its tax bill, it will soon take and waste all my property, and so harass me and my children without end. This is hard. This makes it impossible for a man to live honestly, and at the same time comfortably, in outward respects. It will not be worth the while to accumulate property; that would be sure to go again."

"Thus the state never intentionally confronts a man's sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest. What force has a multitude? They only can force me who obey a higher law than I. They force me to become like themselves. I do not hear of men being forced to live this way

or that by masses of men. What sort of life were that to live? When I meet a government which says to me, "Your money our your life," why should I be in haste to give it my money?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
thanks for that

I had never heard of this essay untill now

looks like an interesting read  :D

Never heard of Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience *gasp* :o

Well I'm glad to introduce you, certainly! I reccommend Walden too, if you haven't read that. Some of my favorite quotes are Thoreau's :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
http://paynoincometax.com/

This site details why the income tax system is a fraud, and how you legally don't have to pay income tax, because no law provides for it.

The author has a bet going with anyone. He will give $50,000 to the person that can find a law requiring anyone to pay income tax.

Be sure to read the testimonials.

I know a lawyer who made a career of defending tax protesters -- and trying to get their jail sentences reduced.

Link to post
Share on other sites
http://paynoincometax.com/

The author has a bet going with anyone. He will give $50,000 to the person that can find a law requiring anyone to pay income tax.

Actually someone did, click here. But of course he weaseled his way out of it.

The title of the NY Times article says it all. "Tax Evasion Guru Claims Insanity I think a better bet is 50k says following his ideas will end up getting you traded to someone named Bubba for a pack of Menthol Cools or Marlboro Lights in prison.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw something on 20/20 about people who didn't pay income tax on the grounds that it was a fraud. All of them were prosecuted and many of them went to jail. Schiff even pays taxes, although he encloses a letter of protest along with his money. However, he's fighting a losing battle because he isn't attacking taxes on a moral basis, but getting into a petty argument about the definition of income.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm guessing that noone visited the site. Very disappointing, although not entirely suprising since it isn't recommended at ARI.  :P

I've seen his site before. It was a part of risk management training for spotting loons that try to defraud people and financial companies. He's right there with people who insist that they don't have to give banks or brokerages their social security number. Or don't have to pay taxes becuase they create "pure trusts" etc.

His sight is reminiscant of this presidential candidate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know of a guy that didn't pay income taxes or social security taxes. There was a coarse he spoke of that referred you to the documents that chartered the Federal Gov't, including the Post Office. The charter that extablished the Post Office stated that it could never charge more than 2 cents for a stamp and he said that he never paid more than that for a stamp. A bunch of people challenged his statement, so he took their addresses down and, within a week, they all received a letter in the mail with a 2 cent stamp on it! As far as income taxes, it has to do with the Federal I-9 form you fill out with a new employer. You have to claim yourself as a "Foreign National" and not a US Citizen. US citizens were suppose to be only Federal Employees and we're suppose to be Foreign Nationals to the US Gov't. Other than that, last I heard, the Gov't found a way to get him on tax fraud; so, I wouldn't recommend trying to go head to head with Uncle Sam.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't paid income taxes since 1997. I always make sure all of my work is "under-the-table". I understand this technically is illegal but my question is: Is my action (not paying income tax) immoral since it is a law to do so? In other words should I pay so as to avoid anarchy in a sense? I think no because it is immoral for the government to steal my money as taxes and I withdraw my sanction of its immoral action by not paying. I would like to know the "official" Objectivist thought on this if any.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't paid income taxes since 1997.  I always make sure all of my work is "under-the-table".  I understand this technically is illegal but my question is: Is my action (not paying income tax) immoral since it is a law to do so? In other words should I pay so as to avoid anarchy in a sense?  I think no because it is immoral for the government to steal my money as taxes and I withdraw my sanction of its immoral action by not paying.  I would like to know the "official" Objectivist thought on this if any.

The "official" Objectivist position is that you should act in your own LONG-RANGE self-interest and according to the facts of reality.

It is a fact that tax evasion is illegal and that it can expose you to penalties that include property seizure and jail time. It is a fact that you have to spend a lot of time and effort trying to avoid being found out and prosecuted. It is a fact that if you work under the table you cannot have a good credit rating, a public career, and all the long-range values (like a home and family) they can get you.

Is all THAT in your long-range self-interest?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I emailed Irwin Shiff the followig and am waiting for a reply:

I emailed earlier in regard to Irvin Schiffs books, but i have some reservations. Actually I have a proposition: I will buy Irvan's books and do everything he says regarding zero income tax filing, IF he will state in writing that he will cover the cost of any fines that i may incur and the taxes i did not pay. If what he says is true, i don't think he will have a problem agreeing to this.

Thank you

James Hughes

Link to post
Share on other sites
The "official" Objectivist position is that you should act in your own LONG-RANGE self-interest and according to the facts of reality. 

It is a fact that tax evasion is illegal and that it can expose you to penalties that include property seizure and jail time.  It is a fact that you have to spend a lot of time and effort trying to avoid being found out and prosecuted.  It is a fact that if you work under the table you cannot have a good credit rating, a public career, and all the long-range values (like a home and family) they can get you. 

Is all THAT in your long-range self-interest?

Is it in my LONG-RANGE self-interest to violate a moral principle that I hold to be one of the most important? The principle that states that no one(including government) has a right to what I produce? While there are some disadvatages to my course of action. Even if I went to jail who would be 'morally' at fault, me or the state? Or should one refuse to sanction what he considers to be evil when it is convienient? Your approach smacks of Pragmatism not 'Objectivism'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it in my LONG-RANGE self-interest to violate a moral principle that I hold to be one of the most important?  The principle that states that no one(including government) has a right to what I produce? While there are some disadvatages to my course of action. Even if I went to jail who would be 'morally' at fault, me or the state?  Or should one refuse to sanction what he considers to be evil when it is convienient? Your approach smacks of Pragmatism not 'Objectivism'.

It is not in your long-range self-interest to hold your moral ideals as frozen floating abstractions while ignoring the real consequences of your actions on the only life you will ever have while becoming, in fact, a self-sacrificing martyr.

Objectivism, unlike altruism, does not disdain practicality and this world. It holds that the moral is the practical. If you find that you are, in fact, pursuing a course of action that is so impractical that it is causing you serious harm and making important values impossible to achieve, that is good reason to question whether your chosen actions are really all that moral.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm guessing that noone visited the site. Very disappointing, although not entirely suprising since it isn't recommended at ARI.  B)

I don't understand this statement. Could you elaborate -- first, perhaps, by explaining your purpose in making the statement?

I am asking because I notice that you have not answered hopeful's earlier question. Why haven't you answered?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually I have a proposition: I will buy Irvan's books and do everything he says regarding zero income tax filing, IF he will state in writing that he will cover the cost of any fines that i may incur and the taxes i did not pay. If what he says is true, i don't think he will have a problem agreeing to this.

Thank you

James Hughes

If he's capable of evading the reality of 50 years of tax law, I'm sure he'll find no problem in evading or finding a loophole in your "contract" you propose to him. And how can you imagine this guy would have the assets required to cover your damages?

Would you buy a book from someone who promised eternal life through suicide, just because it came with a money back guarantee?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it in my LONG-RANGE self-interest to violate a moral principle that I hold to be one of the most important?  The principle that states that no one(including government) has a right to what I produce? While there are some disadvatages to my course of action. Even if I went to jail who would be 'morally' at fault, me or the state?  Or should one refuse to sanction what he considers to be evil when it is convienient? Your approach smacks of Pragmatism not 'Objectivism'.

I believe Ayn Rand herself paid income taxes. She certainly didn't avoid it in order to make herself a self-sacrificing martyr. Her life's purpose was to portray (in literature) the ideal man. This she could hardly have done in prison.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderators:

I have noticed an anomaly on this thread without explanation. It appears as if the following Post has been deleted:

"NIJamesHughes @ Jan 12 2005, 09:33 PM

I'm guessing that noone visited the site. Very disappointing, although not entirely suprising since it isn't recommended at ARI."

It is referred to in Posts #9 and #10 with snapbacks that don’t work.

Later on NIJamesHughes admits to insulting behavior in reference to same Post:

NIJamesHughes,

Do you mean this as an insult, or am I misunderstanding what you're saying?

It is an insult if you commented without visiting the site. If you visited the site then it does not apply to you.

I would like for you to confirm whether the aforementioned Post was deleted or not. If it was deleted, by whom and for what reason?

Thanks,

Marc

Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderators:

I have noticed an anomaly on this thread without explanation. It appears as if the following Post has been deleted:

"NIJamesHughes @ Jan 12 2005, 09:33 PM

I'm guessing that noone visited the site. Very disappointing, although not entirely suprising since it isn't recommended at ARI."

It is referred to in Posts #9 and #10 with snapbacks that don’t work.

Later on NIJamesHughes admits to insulting behavior in reference to same Post:

I would like for you to confirm whether the aforementioned Post was deleted or not. If it was deleted, by whom and for what reason?

Thanks,

Marc

As a moderator I deleted my own post, and yes, I did inform myself via PM of that action. :pirate:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...