1 There are several reasons why a person is not required to file.

2 One reason may be that their income level is too low, which is not to say they do not make a satisfactory living or have earnings, just simply‚ -- their income level falls below a threshold level.

3 For people who are liable for the tax, usually in the first 10 pages of the 1040 instruction booklet is a section entitled "Do I have to file?".  This section relates to people who are liable for the tax and explains a few exceptions/exemptions.  For example this section will refer to an associated chart from which a person can identify themself and determine if their level of income is sufficient to exempt/except them from filing.  Each year this level changes to relate to the standards of the economy.  Hence, a person will follow several calculations starting with their receipts/earnings set against their expenses, and a few other considerations, to determine their income. If their income is below the threshold level, they are not required to file.

4 Another reason may be that there exists no law or statute whereby most individuals are compelled or required to file, assess or pay federal income tax.

5 Most people are mis-informed about the nature of the federal income tax and therefore easily slip into trouble or volunteer into the system.  But many, many cases each year are decided, though not published or written in the various registers.  Theses cases are decided in favor of the citizen/defendant and are indicative of the fact that there exists no such law or statute.

6 A few of these cases would be ...

7 There is the 1992 case of U.S. v Long, (cite) in Chatanooga, Tennessee, with attorneys Larry Becraft of Huntsville Alabama and Russell L. Leonard of Solonee (sp?), Tennessee, represented Mr. Lloyd R. Long of Deshod (sp?), Tennessee.  Mr. Curtis Collier, assistant U.S. Attorney and Micheal Geasley, special agent of the IRS presented the case for the prosecution.

8 The government declared that Mr. Long had gross income in excess of 49,000 for each of the years 1989 and 1990, and that he had "willfully" failed to file income tax returns for those years as "required by law".

9     The defense (Mr. Long) admitted that he did have income in excess of 49,000 for each of the years in question.  The defense proved that he (and others similarly situated) was not liable for an income tax, nor was he required by law to file.

10    The defense presented the case of Bruahaber v Union Pacific Railroad, (cite) wherein the U.S. Supreme court unanimously decided that the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any new power to tax any new subjects; it merely tried to simplify the way in which the tax was imposed.  It showed that the income tax in fact is an excise tax on corporate privileges and privileged occupations.

11    The defense next presented the case of Flint v Stone Tracy, (cite) wherein an excise tax was defined as a tax being laid upon the manufacture, sale, and consumption of commodities within the country, upon corporate privileges.

12    The defense also presented the case of Simms v Arehns, (cite) wherein it was ruled that the income tax was neither a property tax nor a tax upon occupations of common rights, but was an excise tax.

13    The defense presented the case of Redfield v Fisher, (cite) wherein it was ruled that an individual, unlike the corporations, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege [right] of existing, but that the individual's right to live and own property was a natural right upon which an excise cannot be imposed.  Furthermore, the defense pointed to a couple of studies by the congressional research service that shows the income tax is an excise.

14    The defense presented other cases such as Jack Cole v Commissioner, (cite) and Corn v Fort, (cite) where it was ruled respectively that citizens are entitled, by right, to income or earnings, and that rights could not be taxed as a privilege, and that individuals have a right to combine their activities as partnerships; and that this is a natural right, independent and antecedent of government.

15    The prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute any of the arguments or the conclusions.

16    The defense gave testimony of the fact that nowhere in the entire internal revenue code was anyone actually made liable for the income tax.

17    The defense showed that in the IRS's own privacy act notice only 3 sections were cited and that none of these sections made anyone liable for the tax.  They also proved that this was not an oversite by showing that the alcohol tax was worded so clearly that no one could mis-interpret who was made liable for the alcohol tax.  The prosecution did not challenge or attempt to refute these points, nor were they able to show a statute which made anyone liable for the income tax.

18    Then the defense presented the mission statement of the internal revenue service stating that the income tax relied upon "voluntary compliance".  They also presented a statement from the head of the alcohol and tobacco tax division of the IRS which showed that the income tax is 100% voluntary as opposed to the alcohol tax which is 100% enforced.

19    Mr. Long was found "NOT GUILTY" on all counts.

a.  Voluntary: ... unimpelled‚ by another's influence; ... Proceeding from the free and unrestrained will of the person.  Produced in or by an act of choice.     Resulting from free choice. (Black's 5th)

1.  Impelled: urged. (Merrian-Webster)

a.  Unimpelled: not urged (extrapolation)

20    On point with this, you can find on page 3 of the 1040 instruction booklet (through 1994) in "a note from the commissioner", Margaret Miner Richardson, thanking people for cooperating in this system of "voluntary compliance".  “Dear Taxpayer, Thank you for making this nations system of taxation the most successful of voluntary compliance”.

21    Do not mis-understand, the income tax as a whole is not voluntary, it is mandatory for those to whom the law applies, for anyone else it is voluntary.  The income tax only applies to non-resident aliens, foreign corporations, foreign tax-exempt organizations and U.S. citizens living abroad in a country where a tax agreement exists with the U.S.. (26 USC 1441, 1442, 1443 & 1461)  Liability for the income tax is established in 26 USC 1461 on the witholding agent.  If a person is not one of these people the law does not apply to you. Refer to 26 USC 7701(a)(16) for definition of a witholding agent which refers to the above mentioned code sections.

22    Currently the only "privileged" occupations (liable for the income tax) are those involving the sale and/or manufacture of alcohol, tobacco and firearms.

23    In 1991, was another case of  U.S. v Sanders, (cite) in Memphis, Tennessee, with attorneys Larry Becraft of Huntsville Alabama and Jeff Dickstein represented Mr. Franklin Sanders, Jr. and 16 other people.

24    The government charged all defendants with conspiracy to impede the IRS and many were also charged with failing to file returns.

25    The defense was similar to the previously discussed case in that they (and others similarly situated) were not liable for an income tax, nor were they required by law to file.  They presented the case basically through a theory that #1: wages are not income, and #2: there is no statute that makes anyone liable for the income tax.

26    Mr. Dickstein, counsel for the defense, repeatedly handed the government witnesses the tax code and asked them to show the law which it requires a person to file.  Each agent objected and never touched the books.

27    All 17 people were found "NOT GUILTY" on all counts.

28    Other cases and their stories are included at the end of this writing.

29    Reportedly, various departments of the government admit to at least 60 million people in the united States of America not paying income tax.  Most because they are not so required.

30    Simply because this information does not get broadcast by the mainstream (controlled) media or taught in law school, does not make it not so.

31    The Law prohibits direct taxation of the people, but provides direct taxation of the states.  Direct taxation is probably easily explained as a “head” tax (because you exist).

32    Now to that ever present response which goes something like "But, the government needs that money to operate" or "Without that money the government could not function".  The very utterance of these and statements like them is evidence that the person saying them is unaware of how the government is supposed to work or where the money truly goes.  Those unaware are unaware that they are unaware.

33    A light investigation reveals that for the federal government to perform its lawful functions requires about 1.5 - 3% "contribution" from everyone, not the 40 - 70% currently given as tribute.  This smaller amount can and was received from the people via lawful taxes such as gas tax, tire tax, import tax, export tax, commerce taxes, direct taxing of the states and others.  Circa 1913, with the advent and expansion of many programs like the income tax and the Federal Reserve, many people wrongly believed such tax applied to them (no one in government stood to correct this mis-conception, and why should they?) and therefore increasingly volunteered to contribute (the tax).  The forces of government have thus been able to give monies to foreign countries and groups, to loan monies to foreign countries and groups and then forgive the debt without prejudice, to provide socialized services which are not the proper function of government.

34    Basically, the monies you tender as income tax are not used to support this country or to perform governmental functions.  If this is what you were taught and thought, maybe someone has been lying to you. Maybe you should have eyes to see and ears to hear.

35    It is not an issue of "fair share" for that is simply socialism, but rather it is a matter of the people and government functioning pursuant to the rule of Law.  If it is Lawful and it applies to you, obey it. If not, give wide berth.  Laissez-faire.

36    Read carefully -- A little research reveals that basically only four (4) categories of peoples who CAN BE REQUIRED (note this is not the same of “are” required) to file and/or assess and/or pay a federal income tax - by Law, statute, code or whatever.  They are ...

a -- incorporated entities > and/or the officers of same;

b -- stamped industries > stamped industries are those which use stamps to prove the tax was paid (evidence of tax paid) no stamp on the product, then presume no tax has been paid (ie - alcohol, tobacco, firearms - ever heard of the ATF?);

c -- government employees; > this should be self-explanatory, military, elected and appointed, bureaucrats;

d -- those living/working in/on government territories > ie - Guam, American Samoa, Virginia Islands, Puerto Rico, District of Columbia and/or;

e -- VOLUNTEERING > this is the one that gets MOST people

37    Most people, without realizing it, are and have been volunteering.  Have you?

Additional cases

  >> begin the Harrell case

Logan County Jury Acquits Harrell 5-26-00

Lincoln - Gaylon "Whitey" Harrell of rural Latham was acquitted by a 12 person jury of the 4 count criminal felony charges of willful failure to file an Illinois State Income Tax form. The actual trial began on Wednesday May 24th in the Logan County Circuit Court room, presided over by Senior Judge David "Slick" Coogan ("Slick is how the judge identifies himself) and closed on Friday after four hours of deliberation when the jury returned with four consecutive "not guilty" verdicts.

"We were in a heated debate" reported one unnamed juror, "but when the court refused, after our specific written request, to furnish us copies of the actual statutes, (that imposed the obligation on the defendant,) it didn't take long for all of us to see that something was wrong with the State's case.   "That was not all the court refused to let the jury see," added Jerry Barringer, Harrell's attorney. "The court, at the request of the Illinois State's attorney, denied the jury access to evidence that already had been introduced and accepted." "Astoundingly, even the Bill of Indictment was denied to the jury." chimed in Barringer's legal assistant Lindsey Springer, "Also denied were jury instructions sanctioned by the Supreme Court and even a VCR recorder to play the video tape that Whitey had made of his meeting with the CID agent." "I've seen a lot of tyranny in the courts, but never anything so blatent as what I saw here over the last two days," added Bob Minark, an Indiana friend of Harrell's.

The 4 criminal felony charges had been brought against Harrell in 1997 and just came to trial this past week. Harrell had submitted numerous motions in a case that saw both assigned judges and assigned state's attorneys resign or recuse themselves. All Harrell's motions were denied.  The case started back in early 1997 when Harrell was approached by Illinois Dept. of Revenue Criminal Investigation Division (CID) agent Robert Craner, who asked him for an interview. The testimony was that Harrel refused until he had witnesses present and a video camera set up at the local library where he later video taped a 45 minute meeting with Craner. On the video, which was shown to the jury at the trial, Harrel specificlly pointed out that he could find no section of the Illinois statutes that obligated him to file an Illinois income tax return. He presented Craner with numerous documents which he identified as outlines of statutes and regulations and "administrative code" which he said he searched to no avail in finding any obligation that would apply to him. Craner accepted the documents. The tape showed that Craner promised Harrell at least five different times, to produce the statutes that made Harrell liable and get answers to Harrell's questions.

The testimony later showed that Craner didn't do that and instead went back to the Grand Jury to testify that Harrell was a resident of Logan County who failed to file Illinois state income tax forms. Unbeknownst to Harrel, at the time of the interview, Craner was also acting as a Grand Jury investigator. "He never told me," said Harrell, "He never read me a Miranda warning. He just promised to get me the information, but instead went back to the Grand Jury to get an Indictment." Grand Jury Transcripts show that Craner testified that Harrel, at the library meeting, had nothing to offer in his defense of why he didn't file a tax return, but the video tape brought Craner's credibility into serious question.

Harrell testified in his own defense and verified his many efforts to obtain the law that made him liable for the income tax or how his activity was privledged. The prosecution brought out on cross examination that Harrell had filed many law suits in the past and that those suits were dismissed in both the state and federal courts.  In an attempt to prove knowledge, the state also elicited that Harrell had previously filed tax returns previouslly. Harrell's Attorney Barringer likened that to believing in Santa Claus when you were a child and then gaining knowledge of the fact that Santa Claus is a fantasy as you got older and wiser. Barringer's questioning of Agent Craner as to his belief in Santa Claus brought an objection from the State's attorney which was sustained by the judge without any recognition of humor.  Harrel, 62, had worked for the United States Post Office as a rural mail carrier and also received a pension from Caterpiller from where he retired in 1990.  Asked if his case will set a preccedent, Harrel said, "Legally, No, but I certainly hope it sets the precedent that more people question the loss of their rights and property whenever government claims its the law. I feel sure this jury will be thinking twice."
 

>>>> this is not legal advice.  if you want legal advice, get an attorney or accountant (for all the good it will do you)<<<<

August 2000
revised January 2002
revised January 2004

mailto:  lawandrights@tellme1st.net
The above addresss is NOT correct.  For security reasons, the "#&" characters must be removed to be a correct address.  This reduces the possibility of a hacker autosearching for address links.
Simply copy and paste this address in your mail program, BUT remember to delete the "#&" characters.

goto top