Ron Paul praises the criminal element...

[ratboy88]

Quote from Haroki:


Your buddy RP seems to think that a tax on indidual income derived from work IS constitutional :

let see what he actually has to say about the Browns, 4 days ago:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L1RQkhjV85M"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L1RQkhjV85M" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[drmarkan]

Quote from ratboy88:

show me the LAW that congress passed. you claim the 16th amendment gave them the power to lay and collect taxes. if so.. did they take that power and then pass a bill into law that makes the avg citizen responsible for an income tax? please show it to me. you have failed now for over 2 hours. whats wrong shorty?

now i do see where congress can tax non resident aliens doing business in the usa. i see where they can tax a us citizen doing business with a foreign corporation. and i also see where they can tax a citizen deriving income from an american possession. none of these apply to the browns. please show me where i am wrong.

This was the first income tax act passed by congress and signed into law by President Wilson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913

 

[Haroki]

Quote from ratboy88:

stick with one question at a time.. you are very confused now. the thread is in relation to the brown's assertion that there is no law that applies to them. that is the argument... stop trying to change what was said.

The Browns have repeatedly stated that they are willing to immediately pay any taxes lawfully owed - their only proviso is that the law be produced that says there is an income tax on earnings from "labor".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_constitutional_arguments

Cases where wages or labor ruled taxable

The provisions of the U.S. Constitution authorizing Congress to impose taxes, duties, imposts and excises contain no express exceptions for taxes on wages or labor, or for taxes on income from labor. The courts have consistently rejected arguments that "wages" or "labor" (whether denominated as "labor property" or not) cannot be taxed under the Internal Revenue Code. For example, see:

United States v. Connor
Parker v. Commissioner
Perkins v. Commissioner
White v. United States
Granzow v. Commissioner
Waters v. Commissioner

So it looks like the courts disagree with you and AJ.....

But if you have a few cases where 'labor' was ruled to be nontaxable, I'd love to read them......



But in case you missed my previous post, RP seems to agree about taxing labor.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/debt-and-taxes/

....Whether a tax cut reduces a single mother’s payroll taxes.....

Hmmm, maybe you need to reexamine who you're backing for prez, since you feel so strongly about the unconstitutionality of taxing labor......

 

[drmarkan]

Quote from drmarkan:

This was the first income tax act passed by congress and signed into law by President Wilson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913

Ratboy, I actually just posted the first income tax law passed, without addressing what you are actually arguing. The only code that establishes wages as income I know of is I.R.C. 61, and not a law passed by Congress. I thought you were asking for proof of an actual law passed by Congress regarding Income tax. However, the stipulation as to whether wages are legally considered income is not established in any law that I have seen to date.

 

[Haroki]

Quote from ratboy88:

let see what he actually has to say about the Browns, 4 days ago:

He says -

1-That we need to get rid of this monster - the IRS
2-The Brown's are brave to stand up to the IRS/govt
3-Others have paid the price for standing up to the govt

At no time does he say-

1- That HE believes there should be no tax on labor ( in fact, he seems to endorse a tax on labor when he talks about the desirability of lowering payroll taxes )


Did miss a point that supports the Brown's?

 

[Trader5287]

I think Haroki's got you anti-tax boys on this one.

And I have never heard of real lawyers and real tax accountants arguing this stuff in real tax courts.

Still, this is ET -

Sitting in lawn chairs around the Browns' long gravel driveway, the couple's supporters rail against Freemasons, the Illuminati, the Federal Reserve, the Vatican and the mainstream media.

 

[ratboy88]

if the congress has passed legislation "laying" taxes it would have to say who and what is taxable. where is this law? i have already stated congress has passed legislation laying taxes on certain individuals. non resident aliens doing business in the usa... that is taxable and the law is there. same with those doing business with foreign corporations or us possessions. that is covered... so tell me where they included citizens doing business domestically?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Hale-Bopp!

<img src=http://www.tomuphoto.com/nature/scenics/images/Hale-Bop%20comet%202.jpg>

Quote from Trader5287:

I think Haroki's got you anti-tax boys on this one.

And I have never heard of real lawyers and real tax accountants arguing this stuff in real tax courts.

Still, this is ET -

Sitting in lawn chairs around the Browns' long gravel driveway, the couple's supporters rail against Freemasons, the Illuminati, the Federal Reserve, the Vatican and the mainstream media.

 

[ratboy88]

Ron Paul states he can not find a law @ 00:05:20

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/styYIG-fiEc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/styYIG-fiEc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

From wikipedia:

The "IRS refuses to say what law makes U.S. citizens liable for income tax" argument

Some tax protesters argue that the Internal Revenue Service refuses to disclose the laws that impose the legal obligation to file Federal income tax returns or pay Federal income taxes -- and conclude that there must be no law imposing Federal income taxes.

The official Internal Revenue Service web site contains references to specific code sections and case law,[6] including 26 U.S.C. § 6011 (duty to file returns in general); 26 U.S.C. § 6012 (duty to file income tax returns in particular); and 26 U.S.C. § 6151 (duty to pay tax at time return is required to be filed)[19] and 26 U.S.C. § 61 (definition of gross income) and 26 U.S.C. § 6072 (timing of duty to file).[19]

The year 2006 instruction book for Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, on page 80, contains references to 26 U.S.C. § 6001 (relating to record keeping); 26 U.S.C. § 6011 (general filing requirement); 26 U.S.C. § 6012(a) (specific income tax return filing requirement); and 26 U.S.C. § 6109 (duty to supply identification numbers). The IRS web site includes a section on tax protester arguments with citations to statutes (including the 26 U.S.C. § 6151 duty to pay the tax) and court decisions and a 64-page downloadable PDF version of the data, entitled The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments[7] and a page with a link to the entire Internal Revenue Code as published by the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University Law School.[20]