Monday, May 1, 2017

A letter to whoever processes a U.S. tax return

Hi!

Our Constitution was written to prevent our government from growing too big by limiting the ways in which it can collect revenue.  There are basically only two ways that only a government can do because if anyone else does it, it amounts to extortion.  The two ways are "direct" and "indirect."

Indirect TaxesIf it's possible for a citizen to avoid a tax by avoiding the kind of thing that incurs liability, then it is an indirect tax.

Direct Taxes
If citizens can only avoid a tax by not earning any money, or it's altogether impossible to avoid it, then the tax is called a "direct tax."

In 1916, the Supreme Court (Chief Justice White, in fact) wrote in the Brushaber vs Union Pacific Railroad, about an "erroneous assumption."  The assumption was that the 16th amendment authorized a tax which, though direct, was not apportioned.  He went on to point out that if that assumption were true, the 16th amendment and some other parts of the Constitution would be in conflict.  "Apportioned" means that the amount collected from each state of the union is proportional to its population.  Obviously, the income tax is not apportioned, so Chief Justice White's Supreme Court decision means that it isn't direct either.

In 1989, Larry Becraft was fined $2500 for pointing out, just as Chief Justice White had back in 1916, that the income tax has to be indirect.  He was arguing a case in the Ninth Circuit Appellate Court.  The appellate court called his argument frivolous.

Now, the decision is yours, and you can pick either side as correct - the 9th circuit, or the Supreme Court.  If you go with the 9th circuit, you're removing the safeguard written into the Constitution that prevents the government from getting to big.  As an IRS employee, you might like that idea, but as a human being, I think you're better than that.

If you decide to stick with the framers, Chief Justice White, and the Supreme Court that ruled on the 16th Amendment back in 1916, then you'll accept my sworn testimony here on this piece of paper (note the jurat at the bottom, which, if this is printed out, should have my signature under it) that I did, in fact, earn some money while avoiding the kind of thing that incurs liability.

You may have information from the people who paid me that suggests that I did incur liability, but that is because they don't understand these things that I'm writing to you.  I've tried to explain, but they ignore my arguments because they don't have time to do legal research, and they are not well-educated enough to know about "the two great classes of taxation" described in the Constitution.

An Error, or Some Mischeif
I am not including the normal form 4852 which has been used by many others to show IRS employees such as yourself that what they earned was not taxable.  The reason I'm not using it is that your work has been set up with a systemic error.  The error comes about because on your irs website (at https://www.irs.gov/irm/part25/irm_25-025-010r-cont01.html) there is a list of positions described as "frivolous" which is not accurate.  The accurate list is also on your website (at https://www.irs.gov/irb/2010-17_IRB/ar13.html) but I believe your search will turn up the inaccurate list first.

On the inaccurate list is "argument 44," which is a description of how a form 4852 will look for a person such as myself who has not engaged in activities that incur tax liability.  It's not really a position or an argument at all.  For those who do actually engage in taxable activities and submit a form like that without any explanation, they are committing perjury, not simply forwarding a frivolous argument.  Those who do not engage in taxable activity can be harmed by you simply doing your job without being aware of this internal error.

 The form 4852, for someone in my position, would indicate that I have zero gross income because the term "income" refers to proceeds from activities that incur tax liability, and I haven't done any of those activities.  It is not clear whether the error is intentional or a mistake. The dire financial shape of our federal government almost (but not quite, in my opinion) justifies it if it's intentional.  However, the financial problems of our federal government are neither your concern nor mine.  We should be honest with each other.  Can you do that for me?

If you need a form 4852 to override the information returns from the payers who claimed that I incurred tax liability, please let me know by replying to this letter or contacting me by telephone.

Thank you for your service!

No comments: