Aww, c’mon now… the brother was just preachin’ and livin’ the slack.

Slater should be replaced. Anybody who’s been following this blog for some time recognizes the marked decrease in usefulness since Slater took over. The prior guy would have had document links. And this happens over and over and over — this blog has just become an aggregator of media clips, with only a very rare link to actual docs. The prior guy added huge value by constantly having doc links that made the blog something close to Smoking Gun. Slater has had enough time. He can’t do it as well as the prior guy. Replace him.

Really…is this important? Lets talk about all the corporations that willing exploit tax loopholes. When they do it, its alright because it is a loop hole, when the exploiting they do is more evasive, than tax reduction. And 99% of the time, corporate tax loop exploits have no business purpose. I think CEO’s and CFO’s must get kick backs, for avoiding tax.

Hey, Wings at 7:04 - Lay off Slater, alright? The LawBlog is as enjoyable and relevant as ever.

If this were a movie, Snipes would have told the Judge to “always bet on black,” and been sentenced to probation. Reality bites…for Snipes!

We all most pay taxes, no one is above the law in this country. Not even actors.

Right, Ruthie, but how many other people who get convicted of 3 misdemeanors spend three years in prison? He got the max. because he is famous. He should have gotten probation.

Three years? Let’s see: Snipes’ lie gets him three years; Lerach’s lies gets one to two. No, I think this is too much time for Snipes toi serve. Snipes isn’t being treated fairly. I think three concurrent 12 month sentences makes more sense, half to serve.

I wouldn’t go THAT far, but I think FromTheWings overreacted.

Cue the race card (Snipes brought it up first), and how all the black men in prison are innocent victims who have done no wrong in their lives.

f the race card. He didn’t have to. obviously should have gotten probation but the feds love to make examples of the famous. they couldn’t pass up the chance to send this message to the commoners. pay your taxes!!!

He got three years. I got off. That’s America.

some people are always trying to ice-skate uphill

The morale of this story is pay your taxes. Now, if we can just get them to crack down on other celebs for thier dirty dealing, drunk driving; cocaine snorting issues. Americans might then fell that justice is just for all no matter the size of your wallet or status.

…would end up playing in the Federal League?

The reason he got the maximum sentence is that the feds and the judge were upset that the jury refused to convict him for tax evasion, so he got the most he could for the failure to file charges.

As a white man,
I have enjoyed Wesley Snipe movies to include but not be limited to the Blade Trilogy, Unstoppable, Undisputed, The Art of War, U.S. Marshals, Murder at 1600, The Fan,Rising Sun, White Men Can’t Jump, etc…
The guy is a respectable admirable actor who is was going to continue to do well until now, and why? Failing to pay taxes! I am disgusted and shame on Wesley Snipes for not paying his taxes! I pay my taxes, you pay your taxes, so who is he to not pay his taxes! He lives in a free country who pays him well and the very American soldiers, white and black, pay their taxes, as they fight in Afghanistan and Iraq. Shame on Wesley Snipes and he deserves his 3 year prison time!

William Terrell Hodges and idiot with know brain he needs to think about the many people besides snipes that do this every year. he’s just trying to get his 15 min of fame. what a looser!!

Time for Mr. Snipes to be put away bustin’ rocks.

Nice try on the “I don’t have to pay taxes” scam…

Corporations should be paying a lot more, too - but that’s a topic for another day…

I liked Peter, no doubt, as he did a commendable job pioneering this blog. That said, I also think Slater is doing a good job in taking over the oars.

OJ - you gonna get it in Las Vegas…might be bustin’ rocks there for a while…

My tax law buddies say you can be aggressive as you can afford to pay your tax lawyer to be, as long as you don’t: 1) neglect to file yearly returns (and pay the disputed tax before pressing your case); 2) hide income; and 3) make up expenses or deductions. If you’ve ever sat through a District Court calendar call and heard a tax cheat sentencing hearing, you’d get the overwhelming impression that few excuses are brooked for cheating the taxman.

All the judge had to say to justify his sentence is that he had seen Snipes’ Blade movies. Instead, Senior U.S. District Judge Hodges first says that deterrence serves a useful purpose, then says Snipe’s celebrity status has no bearing on giving him the max. Those words of the Judge Hodges at sentencing may come back to haunt him, sure you target famous people for tax evasion charges for the publicity value, but you don;t admit the fact as you give someone a sentence of 3 years incarceration for misdemeanor tax evasion.

If the news report about Judge Hodges sentencing statement is correct, Snipe’s lawyers now have a basis for appeal and will request Snipes be allowed out on bond while he is appealing the sentence.

Snipes has a decision to make, whether he wants to pay the price and use the “go to” appeals attorney of the rich, Maureen Mahoney. Hopefully, she hasn’t seen any of Snipes’ movies lately.

Looks like I got off pretty easy by comparison.

Where are the filings? Why can’t we get links to actual, useful information instead of simply lazily linking to prior Law Blog posts? “Here here and here” is ever so helpful, too.

3 misdemeanors and 3 years in jail.

Sorry.

For a person who has no criminal history, Snipes should appeal.

Wesley buddy, don’t drop the soap.

this guy made tens of millions of dollars making horrible movies and then got cute with tax deniers of america. gotta new script — go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $100. thought you were above it all. have fun.

The documentary “From Freedom to Fascism”, which is available at most video rental stores, is a clear exposition of the foundational principle, recognized even by the supreme court, that taxes on wages is repugant to the rights of Americans. Wages are not income, they are an exchange for labor. If a man paints your house and you reward him with a saddle horse, there is no tax that needs to be paid. It is a barter. But if your barter with him is federal reserve notes–called dollars (whose value fluctuates daily and can be down to zero)–he must pay a portion of his notes to the State–called a tax. What lawful, or moral, rationale permits this? There is none, but anyone who follows this principle, rich or poor, will be jailed, his property forfeited, his reputation smeared, and his life ruined. The standard justification is that “I pay my taxes, why shouldn’t he pay his fair share?” There is a misundertanding of the settled principle that “income” is defined as money earned by investment, not by labor–in stocks, for example, or by gambling, or by inheritance, or by winning a lottery. Anything you have gotten by the sweat of your brow belongs to you exclusively, and you should not have to pay the State for earning a living by the sweat of your brow, however you do it, whether you act in movies good or bad, or mow lawns in cemeteries. We Americans need an education about exactly how our republican system is supposed to work. One can begin by seeing the above documentary.

Barter is considered income for tax purposes. It might be a pain to enforce, but it is considered income. Which is why if you want to stay out of IRS heat, you never join a barter club without complying with tax laws. The IRS watches barter clubs closely, since they have been used as tax dodges in the past.

Slater is a joke.

He got the max because 1) he was guilty of evasion, and everybody except the jury knew it (see the letters he wrote saying that he ignored his legitimate accountants’ advice-that should be game, set, match government) and 2) the guidelines put him well past 12 months (he evaded a boatload of $). The reason he got off is the First Assistant AUSA in MD FL (with the Tax Division’s assistance) tried the wrong case. If Snipes couldn’t point to the other idiots on trial with him as the “really” guilty ones, the jury could have focused on him, and would have likely convicted him of evasion, instead of the belt-and-suspenders charges of failure to file. But Monday morning quarterbacking is always easier.

I’m still trying to get my effing employer to pay taxes for 2006. She tried to 1099 everyone and even though the irs agrees we were all employees (2007 we received w-2’s), she doesn’t want to do anything about it. Any good tax attorneys out there?

As a white collar crime speaker and someone that has spent time in federal prison, I understand what Snipes is going through right now. Keep in mind, however, every choice has a consequence and Snipes is in the middle of the consequence phase.

There were inmates I served time with who were there for the same thing Snipes was convicted for and one thing is true - they all emerged changed. One thing that changed, they all filed and paid their taxes. The notion that somehow we, as Americans, didn’t have to file or pay just left their mind on release from prison. http://www.chuckgallagher.com

Lesson one, is that if you are a wealthy black man in America you better pay your taxes.

Lesson two, if you are a black man who is arrested for not paying your taxes retain John Keker as your attorney.

Maybe the US government should just imprison everyone. Then we’d all be safe from terrorists and evildoers like Wesley Snipes.

Did anyone catch Denzel Washington’s quote in the NY Post about Wesley?:

“Wesley is like a tree, a mighty oak,” Oscar winner Denzel Washington wrote in an appeal to the court to keep his “Mo’ Better Blues” co-star out of prison.

“Many who know him have witnessed the fruit of his labors, have sat in his shade and even been protected by his presence. I am proud of him, proud to call him a fellow thespian and most importantly, proud to call him a friend.”

Gibberish.

The US government has mutated into a system for stealing from the productive elements of American society and passing the loot on to favored constituencies. Real money (gold) was outlawed and confiscated long ago, so that government could access additional resources through the stealth tax of inflation. It is the duty of every freedom-loving citizen to cheat on their taxes any and every way possible. (That said, try not to get caught.)

But recent efforts by the Fed to aggressively bail out the Fat Cats on Wall Street while the poor schmuck on Main street gets a foreclosure notice have revealed just what a fraud our government is. The citizenry is starting to wake up, and I predict fewer and fewer juries will be willing to convict. The income tax is a socialist tool whose days are numbered.

@9:09—I don’t understand why the first half of your comment accuses the government of “passing the loot to favored constituencies” and “bail[ing] out the Fat Cats on Wall Street,” but the second half claims that “income tax is a socialist tool.” Which is it? Plutocracy or socialism? They’re not the same thing.

Call the IRS and look into a qui tam action. Could lead to your employer going bust, though.

I agree with you Wings-I’m dropping off the Law Blog-it’s BOOORING since Slater took over, there’s less law, more irreevant and uninteresting media articles, and NO LINKS to the court documents, which was really useful when Lattman was around. Slater-you’re NOT CUT OUT FOR THIS JOB-GO WRITE WSJ COPY.

The problem isnt that Slater is a moron, its that the wsj is toast since murder-doc took over. Call it the wall street post. if you want news start reading IBD or better yet, Financial Times.

Hey, wsj, if you just added color, the newspaper could pass for a comic book.

And your stupid internet policy is what killed you. If you werent so arrogant thinking that people should pay for the privilege of reading the declining quality of your reporting, you could have ruled the net. But alas, you were sorely mistaken…As the market has taught you already.

The saddest part is that the WSJ could have been google if they had management that knew anything about technology, or the internet or even media… and now, sadly, you can add content to that list.

[Read this post quickly, i am sure i will be edited out under the totalitarian lack of free speech this board also evidences]

that’s one for you, nineteen for me and three for Wesley

Chuck Gallagher is a joke — a felon joke. Go away, Chuckie thief.

Sniping Snipes’ Arguments: Why Wesley Snipes Was Wrong
http://resipsablog.com/2008/04/25/breaking-news-celebrity-tax-protestor-wesley-snipes-sentenced-to-36-months-imprisonment/

Hey all, since you are also dicussing the U.S. tax system, check out this book. “Perfectly Legal : The Covert Campaign to Rig Our Tax System to Benefit the Super Rich–and CheatEverybody Else” by David Cay Johnston.

Amazon/Publishers Weekly said about the book, “..Since he began writing about taxes for the New York Times in 1995, Johnston’s investigative reporting has earned two Pulitzers. The journalistic legwork informs every page of this expos‚ of the ways in which, he says, America’s taxation system is stacked in favor of the wealthy. Johnston evades the imposing abstractness of the tax code by keeping the story focused on individuals, from working-class parents facing audits to Internal Revenue Service officials desperate for the resources to revamp their procedures. Chapters addressing the inability of the IRS to go after the worst tax cheats, thanks in part to opposition from grandstanding members of Congress, are particularly effective in putting a spotlight on the problem, but there’s plenty of space given to revealing how canny tax attorneys come up with legal (and barely legal) ways to get around the system. And for those who can afford it, he reports, there’s always a new dodge available once the law has caught up to the latest tricks. At some points, dealing with numbers becomes unavoidable, but even here Johnston displays a knack for breaking the story down into easily grasped components. Though the tax cuts engineered by Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush receive most of the criticism, Democrats come in for their fair share of opprobrium. Genuine reform, he suggests, will require serious and sustained attention from the public, not just reflexive griping. His book is a thoughtful overview for any citizens willing to educate themselves on the issue…”

Dear “FromTheWings” (and conies or aliases): This is not a news site. This is a Blog, on which lawyers can (civilly) share thoughts and ideas about the practice of law.

Slater does an admirable job. His posts stir conversation. If you just have to have something negative to say, kindly go whine elsewhere.

KS Trial Lawyer — I had dropped the thing, but you dredged it up for reasons unknown. Elementary logic: The fact that it’s a “Blog” rather than what you call a “news site” has nothing to do with whether it was a BETTER blog when it frequently included links to actual documents relevant to the subjects being discussed. Can you understand that? Now, if you you prefer not to have the kind of links that Lattman regularly provided, you’re free to say that, and although you will sound like an idiot if you do, you would at least be focusing on the criticism, rather than mouthing a non sequitur about a perceived distinction between a “news site” and a “Blog.”

Snipes go’n need The Blade where he go’n now.

From The Wings, I can see that you’re the smartest. Thank you for restating your point in “elementary” terms so that my feeble mind can “understand.”

You see, I stupidly thought that when you wrote, “huge value by constantly having doc links that made the blog something close to Smoking Gun”, that you could access Smoking Gun, or that your Google button worked as well as mine for finding documents … which you deem “valuable”. Please excuse my ignorance.

Thanks to your explanation, I can see that I was totally wrong, and that all you really want is Slater (or Lattman) to be your secretary, and provide more than three links in this story (to what?). Sorry.

First off, argue the quality of the site but leave names out. Stick to the facts. Personalizing serves no one. The fact is in the last few months, the WSJ has gone to more “gotcha” news (Wesley Snipes, Hillary Clinton) and less “Wall Street” news. I didn’t renew my WSJ subscription. Hello IBD.

As for Mr. Snipes: 3 years for first offense misdeamenor? Sounds like a sentencing out of Moscow.

It’s taught me next time on jury duty, if I don’t want to convict on any count, I’ll vote not guilty on all counts. Otherwise, I may end up with some “nullification” judge who sentences a guy to life for stuff he wasn’t convicted of.

Mr. Snipes may not even have a college degree, let alone a Master of Taxation. It’s nuts to expect him to know when to overrule his tax “experts.” That’s why they are “experts.”

It’s also nuts for the judge to admit to giving him a harher sentence because he’s famous and can therefore be made an example.

Want to know where the govt.’s priorities are: not filing a tax return gets a harsher sentence than a teacher sleeping with her underage student.

I thought this was America. Maybe I was wrong.

3 years on misdemeanors? Are you kidding me? That is grossly unfair. Just grossly unfair. The jury acquitted him of the felony charges, and now the court basically gives him a felony level sentence anyway. I am so disgusted with our federal criminal justice system it makes me sick to my stomach. Those people treat us like subjects, not citizens. Seriously, it is like the US Atty and the judge said “How dare those peons, I mean jurors, acquit him!! We’ll show them by giving him a felony sentence anyway!! Damn the jurors!!”

Nobody was crying when Leona Helmsley did time for tax evasion.

Anonymous at 3:38, that’s because white people want to protest Wesley Snipes’s prison sentence and vote for Barack Obama to prove that they are not racists.

Protesting Leona Helmsley’s sentence of 16 years does not cure white guilt.

Yes We Can is so right.

332. i didnt read the court transcripts, but my understanding is that he participated in a tax avoidance scheme following the advice of tax aviodance scheme morons who he was advised, by real CPAs, to avoid. He simply was not paying taxes. Finally it caught up to him.

Wesley was quite the oak, until they chopped him down, turned him into mulch and pressed him into some low quality plywood which they then nailed.

Lattman would have linked to some of those 39 testimonials, giving the post a usefulness beyond just piggybacking on others’ reporting.

Mr. Snipes may not even have a college degree, let alone a Master of Taxation. It’s nuts to expect him to know when to overrule his tax “experts.” That’s why they are “experts.”

Have you ever heard that nothing in life is certain except death and taxes? You don’t need an “expert” to tell you to pay them. And why has it taken so long for anyone to mention Leona? Or Survivor’s Richard Hatch? Maybe the white guilt theory is correct…

Does anyone remember when Al Capone, one of the most notorious mafiosos of all time went to jail because of tax evasion? It is a crime that is visible and blatant and the perpetrator of it must do the time. Gangster or great movie actor, in the eyes of the justice system all are equal when it comes to tax evasion. It is premeditated, it is willful,it is deliberate and the injustice to those that do pay must be satisfied. Our system is not perfect, it needs revision, loopholes do exist. But to live in a country where you have a right to speak out as those above have done and be heard across the world, and enjoy the freedoms that we all have known does come at a price. It is called taxation with representation. We all have choices, and Mr. Snipes had his. He chose to rise above the scourge of the working classes and truly consider himself better than us all, and not be held accountable to the law that prevails in this country. It is that law that allows all of us to be a part of a greater good. Has anyone above ever followed through what would happen if everyone were of the same mindset as Mr. Snipes? There would be no Defense for this country, there would be no public education, libraries, clinics, medicine, health care and… Each one of you who has commented could each fill in the above without any repetition of the other if you allowed clarity rather than emotions rule you.

Freedom is not free.

In China they execute people for failing to pay their taxes. 3 years isn’t so bad.

I wish the IRS would crack down on all the people who evade taxes. I pay, they should too.

The comments left by VIGILANTee, SiliconValleyLawLibrarian, and to some extent Long Live Freedom need to be carefully examined because they are actually telling the truth. If any of you take the time to research the 30% of your labor earnings “Federal Income Tax” you will be shocked to find it’s not only illegal, they money collected through it doesn’t even go to any Federal faction or division of the US government. The money goes to a privately owned BANK called “THE FEDERAL RESERVE”. The bank is a partnership of several powerful banking families who had worked a deal out to “fund the US government” years ago when Woodrow was in office. Powerful players such as Rockefeller, JP Morgan, and a few select other bankers made that “TAX” into law when originally it didn’t even exist. Most of the people who have posted here seem intelligent but I notice that almost everyone has overlooked what these guys are saying. They are saying Snipes doesn’t have to pay that tax anyway and no working man or women in America should have to pay that 30% income tax either. The money doesn’t even go into the countries upkeep, military, school system, or anything like that anyway. It goes to a few private banking tycoons… Stop and think about what that means even if you think I’m stupid and don’t know what I’m talking about, stop holding a sarcastic rebuttal in back of your mind, stop thinking about how your going to reply to this comment and tell me I’m wrong and just think about the 1st thing I said and do some “WORK” to research this stuff. Then tell me I’m nuts…

You guys need to wake up, this isn’t some conspiracy, hippy, “I have long hair and drive a Volkswagen bug” bulls**t, I’m talking about real legitimate enslavement of the American people. I think everyone has been told from childhood that you must pay the Government whatever tax they impose on you or bad things will happen to you. Everyone has been taught that paying ridiculously high taxes is part of being a good civilian and that it’s “just a part of life that everyone has to deal with”. No! actually nobody in America has to deal with it, which is why some people out there have deliberately refused to file their income tax and challenged the court to present that law that says a person has to pay an income tax on their labor! Well NOBODY in history has ever been able to find such a law, and every tax evasion prosecutor has failed to present this “law”… and you know what, those people who made that argument before the jury were found not guilty in almost every case I’ve herd of. In fact the only time I saw a man still found guilty of income tax evasion, even after presented that argument above, was an instance where the judge refused to allow the defendant to reference “the written law”! (However that was also a very old case when judges could still say that type of thing and not end up in the 6′oclock news)

There is nowhere that it is written a US citizen must pay an income tax. Not an income tax of 30%, not an income tax of 5%, nothing. There are some people out there that haven’t payed income tax in YEARS. They aren’t going to jail because there really is no law that says they have to pay it. The money doesn’t go to the Government and therefor it doesn’t go back to the people. Taxes such as the gasoline tax, and property tax (allegedly) are used to pay for certain things that eventually go back to the people, such as road work, public education, war, etc and that’s cool. There’s nothing wrong with that, but there is something very wrong with this income tax that the funds disappear and congress never sees where these billions and trillions are going.

Now I’m just a video gamer who happened to click into this blog while surfing and aye I’ve said my part. I’m not going to respond back to anything because I will probably never see this blog again once I get back to warcraft but I’m suggesting you at least do the research and dig up the truth for yourself because channels 2 through 13 aren’t going air this type of thing for you to hear about on the morning news…

“That right John, Paris was in fact caught driving while drunk again, Bonds was busted for popping a pill and in less important news every resident in America has been swindled out of half of their paycheck so that a few billionaires who even own this new station can get richer, and now back to Tom with the weather report.

“nowhere that it is written a US citizen must pay an income tax.”

Oh really? Ever hear of the IRS Tax Code. Check that our on your next space flight. It may not be in the constitution, but neither is anything about picking up your garbage or providing roads to drive on. You may notice lots of things are not written in the constitution, but in this country we have laws that were written by Congress. You may have heard of Congress, they write all kinds of laws that you probably dont like.

Anyway, this ranting above sounds to me a lot like the nonsense that Snipes bought into, and look where it got him.

Cit 8,005… why not post your name and admit that you dont pay taxes if you are so certain about what you are talking about.

Hello Group,
I am a caucasian man and I was a former Wesley Snipes fan. I have paid alot of money to see Wesley Snipes’ movies because he was in them and also his DVDs. I have tremendously enjoyed his work and think he is a smart and talented actor. I helped pay his salary in a sense paying for me and my family to see his movies and buying DVDs. I am saddened he will be going to jail, but I go to admit, I work hard everyday to make a living and support paying taxes for the freedoms we all have in the U.S. I am dissapointed in Wesley Snipes for not paying his taxes and agree that justice has been served. Again, I am saddened he will be going to jail, but he is rich and does have high taxes, but man, pay them!!! I hate to say this but he deserves jail time for not paying his taxes for 3 years in a row and he has let me down as one of the actors I have always admired tremendously.

Its just too stupid for words for anybody to think they somehow don’t have to pay taxes.
Its even more stupid for someone to encourage their employees and others not to pay them.
If he’d kept his big mouth shut he might have got off more lightly, but he’s an actor and thats what they do.

Most comments are based on the assumption that Snipes broke some IRS Code. Public law must be public, specific, and understandable by the ordinary citizen. Can anyone cite any specific LAW that Snipes violated?

In regard to Wesley Snipes unlawful conviction for alleged failure to file I submit the following:

To whom it may concern,

It has been more than a year since I sent you the document below as a signed, sworn, and attested affidavit, and I have yet to receive any kind of response to the Lawful and Legally binding questions I have raised within it.

I have taken the liberty to modify some of the statements and questions that I sent before so that they would be more effectively communicative, I have also added some other information that more recent revelations have given rise to my personal concerns and I am resending it, again, as a signed, sworn, witnessed affidavit, sent certified to your Disclosure Office. I have accentuated specific words, phrases, and quotes so that there can be no misunderstanding as to their meaning or intent in hopes that doing so will bring a greater clarity to you, and I might actually get my questions answered after more than 15 years of trying.

Once again, you have been duly noticed and it is now, once again, your legal obligation to reply to me and answer all my questions which by law you have 30 working days to respond, 40 if you opt for the extension as you did last time, but then when you did respond you neglected to answer any of my questions.

I am not waiting for another computer at one of your offices to spit out yet another bogus request for my voluntary compliance or another one that threatens me with criminal prosecution or levy if I do not comply to requests which you refuse to validate with verifiable references to statutory laws.

Read what follows. Take notes. Answer EVERY question I have put to you and if, after doing so I am convinced that I have been in error I will comply to your past wishes.

To that end, in slightly modified form, I resubmit what I sent to you last year so that I will be able to keep a juries time to a minimum if it comes down to facing off against your organization in a court of law.

Dear IRS

I apologize for the untimeliness of my reply concerning my compliance to your “alleged” assessments. I underwent shoudler surgery at the VA in late January, suffered through a kidney stone, and now find myself as primary caregiver for my elderly Aunt who is home now from the nursing home she’d been in after suffering a fall and becoming injured - and I am still recuperating from my surgery and unable to
work.
Between the pain and the meds and the fact that I couldn’t use my favorite arm and hand, it has taken me until now to transform what I was able to discern from having “hit the books” into the written word as I told the IRS agent I’d called (at my own expense and from my own home) in good faith in an effort to discuss the differences we seem to have in opinion of applicable laws. And in regard to that conversation I would like you to cite the “Law” that specifically states that I am forbidden to record a conversation “I” initiated on my own phone when it comes to speaking with one of your agents, (be specific in this if you don’t mind, as I will want to reference it for use in court should the need arise). It seems to me that it lies well within the realm of probability that the agent is going to act not as a mediary between yourselves and myself, but has a vested interest in leaning everything in your direction so as to get maximum “voluntary compliance” as is referenced so often in your manuals, after all, it is difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary and promotions depends on him not understanding it, and given the scope and level of the IRS abuses I have assimilated to date it seems apparent to me that there is an atmosphere at or within your organization that allows for persons in your employ to be serial contrarians, therefore he could, conceiveably, either have lied to me or in some other way attempted to lead me to believe something that was not true and therefore violate my Constitutional Civil Rights.
Are you telling me then that I do not have the right to protect myself from what might be an overzealous agent whose salaries and promotions depends upon how well they are able to enforce voluntary compliance?
After having “hit the books” I am still unswayed in my contention that “Income Taxes” as you say they apply to me, do not. I fully believe in “good faith” that the “Income Tax” as you are attempting to apply it to me is not Constitutionally valid as it has to be written in as non-compulsory in order to retain said Constitutional validity.
So I have carefully studied what you seem to want to contend are “frivolous” arguments, and in some cases I could actually see your point, in others, however, and in good conscience, I could not, but putting that conflict completely aside I have sought out numerous sources to attempt to confirm or deny my original summations that have little, if anything, to do with the “frivolities” you mentioned earlier as I have no desire to waste mine, yours, a judge, or a juries’ time.

To that end there are questions I have and statements I feel the need to make regarding my newer findings that I would like you to answer for me so that I might have a clearer understanding of what former President of the United States, Jimmy Carter, once called a “disgrace to the human race” and what your own former Commissioner, Shirley Peterson, stated was “Incomprehensible, even to professionals in the field”.
Or in more specific terms, your organization, the I.R.S. Hardly a wonder since the Tax Laws as they were written in 1913 contained a mere 11,400 words. As of 1999 it (the I.R.S. Manual) is more than 7,000,000 words.
By comparison, the King James Bible contains only 773,000 words. So can you tell me, for a certainty, that any single I.R.S. Agent fully comprehends the enormity of the IR Code as it is so vaguely and convolutedly written?

Given that understanding I would like, then, to state why I feel I am (still) NOT a “taxpayer” as set forth in the terms described in 26 U.S.C., and I would like to ask you a series of questions that I feel certain you will not find “frivolous”.
Should you answer them satisfactorily I will be convinced of my “alleged” obligations and will comply without reservation as I am only trying to get to the truth of a matter that finds our entities in conflict.
Therefore, Sir or Madam, I trust that you will appreciably reply to my evidences and my doubts in a manner that will allow for what I am sure we both want amicably resolved.

Where to begin.
I shall try to be as concise and clear as I can, and I shall try to present them in an order that will make the most sense, but I only ever got a G.E.D. and I climb trees for a living when I am physically able, I’m not as well versed in these matters as a “professional in the field”.

I suppose before I begin I would like to once again request anything that may be on file in the Secretaries Office that records any alleged tax liability under Section 6203 as what I received from Kenneth Wilder, Disclosure Specialist, in a letter from the Department Of The Treasury, dated August 1st, 2005, concerning request for same he states that “There are no Summary Records of Assessments on file that Identify either myself or any other taxpayer by name”, but then I suppose that’s why we have “Social Securitiy Numbers”, so if you would, please have them look under my “Taxpayer Identification Number” so that we might clear this matter up once and for all.
Other than that he says they charge $17.00 an hour to search through what must be a mountain of information which, for all intents and purposes, should be at the touch of a button as long as he types my “ID” number in correctly, and for which, by law, they (you) are incumbent upon giving me at my request within a 30 day time frame given them (you) by your own Laws and Regulations (and without “charge”).
What’s more, in a letter signed by a different Disclosure Agent, a (Mr./Ms./Mrs.?) “C. Hardee”, in a letter dated June 2, 2006, on page 8 under “Summary Record of Assessments”, RACS report 006, Certificate Number 13320051006001, “Claims” that I “allegedly” owe $26,638,490,428.99 in unpaid “Income” taxes, $141,807,686.06 in “Penalties”, and $60,101, 827.60 in “Interest” for a total of $26,840,399,942.65 (assessment date 01/01/2005). So am I to honestly believe I am in debt to the United States Government to the amount of nearly 30 Billion dollars?
I like a punchline as well as the next guy, but this one tops them all.
Is this debt true or is it a real son-of-a-glitch? And if “it’s” a glitch, how then can I trust any other amounts you portend that I “Owe”, especially given what I consider to be non-frivolous arguments I still intend to make - and reference?
On the following page (9), however, there is a “Copied” signature of what appears to be “Debra C. Hennessey”, “Signature” (For Service Center Directors of Internal Revenue Service) that, after crunching all these ungodly numbers, goes on to state that the “Total” as is featured to the right of “Principal Taxpayers And Amounts Related To Jeopardy Assessments” is $0.00.
What’s more, I can find no reference to either my name or my Social Security Number on the pages that show that nearly 30 billion dollar assessment. Why is this? And why, if it doesn’t apply to me, was it included to begin with?
To say the least I find this confusing and would like to inquire directlyto Ms./Mrs. Hennessey, as is my 5th Amendment Right concerning full Disclosure, as to by what means and informations at her disposal did she come up with the figures she did, and then why they, on the next page, added up to $0.00.

Before I continue I would like to formally request (once again) a copy of my Individual Master File and full disclosure on the exact, step by step process that you have utilized in rendering your “assessments” against me so that said, required by Law, “Disclosure” is available to me as is directive in regards to the Disclosure Office who are “…responsible for providing any necessary information to counsel and securing testimony authorizations and providing guidance to subpoenaed empolyees” (”guidance” = “coaching”?).

As required in the condition precedent set by Shapiro Vs. Secretary Of State and as per your own procedural guidelines, by LAW, you are REQUIRED to send me form 17 or 17A if I (allegedly) “owe” a “Tax” that I have not paid. This, as you know, is the REQUIRED, OFFICIAL, and DULY DELEGATED “Form” specifically stating that it is a “Bill” for what is “Due and Owing” which I have never, to date, received.
I have received forms 5564, CP504, 806-A, 4549, 1040A (which, considering you have no ORIGINAL 1040A filed by myself you, by law, couldn’t possibly be in possession of [will reference at a later time]), and 1040 (see last parentheticals), but I have yet to receive the requiste forms that specifically states that it is a “Bill” for what is “Due and Owing” as is REQUIRED by LAW. Just as I have yet to receive the necessary (mandatory…) “Disclosure” that would allow me the opportunity to prove either of our points (reference 26 CFR 601.103 (a) if this simplifies matters for you).

I have been advised to formally request AINS/AMDIS printout (I found the copy of my Individual Master File and was able to decipher the code that effectively claims I have no filing requirement, but I did not receive this other printout and, literally, none of the questions I asked were ever addressed, I just got excuses and then, once again, I was ignored), I will expect it to be included (this time) along with a copy of my next Individual Master File documentation and any other information I shall make requests for that fall within my rights to ask for under the Freedom Of Information Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act. As of yet I have only a cursory understanding of the need for this (AINS/AMDIS), but am still in the process of assimilating and extrapolating all of the newer informations I have uncovered that seem to not be “frivolous” as you have seem to have deemed by (unsupported) case law, as I do not intend to waste any more of your time as well as my own, much less a judge and/or a juries. I would also like any and all disclosures due to me under the Freedom Of Information Act regarding wherein, exactly, does my “Tax Liability” and “Filing Requirement” might be fully and completely outlined in clear and unequivocal language. I have read the Code with more than due diligence and have yet to be satisfied with any reference I could find, therefore if you could expressly clarify this I would be most appreciative.

I am told I can request a local jury trial if necessary since what you contend I owe falls under a category that allows for same to be conducted here if it boils down to that (unless you think I really DO owe nearly 30 Billion dollars…) and that would be why I filed for no “Appeal”, as I still consider your attempts to attempt to collect monies from me as unlawful, as I shall continue to attempt to point out to our mutual satisfaction, but, please, feel free to truthfully and effectively answer all of my questions in the event you can make sense to me of the “alleged” liability and filing requirement you say I have, for if you can do so effectively, in good faith, then I, in good faith, shall file and pay as you suggest I do, and inasmuch as filing said “Appeal” (such as you offered to me at an earlier date), to me, would be akin to lending creedence to what I still consider to be an illegal act which I feel is completely unlawful at its heart, so I therefore opted out of your offered “option” as I felt that to conform to it would deny me my Constitutional Right to continue to seek a solution/redress in the manner that should, by my reckoning and understanding of the LAW, as it is expressly written, be available to me through you, especially considering the evidences I still intend to relate to you and what I consider to be your obvious ommissions regarding what I consider to be a blatant misuse of Code Sections that cannot possibly apply to me.

So, once again, and so there can be no misconception, can you show me, specifically, so we can both have a mutual understanding, which provision/statute within the I.R.S. Code that creates my “Tax Liability” and “Filing Requirement” as an American? I am aware that you lost your case against Vernice Kuglin on those very grounds, and I have numerous certified return mail receipts, just as she did, to show that I have answered every letter ever sent to me by your organization essentially seeking the same answers that Ms. Kuglin sought, so it is therefore most incumbent upon you to provide me with said provision(s) so as to prevent what her assessment agent, apparently, had not been prepared for, and I would prefer that, if such a provision/provisions/statute exists, that you make it immediately known to me for Full “Disclosure” purposes as is supposed to be guaranteed to me by the Constitution so I can make a carefully considered decision regarding your contentions that I “Owe” the I.R.S. and then file and pay if I deem your informations to be lawful and correct and mine have somehow been in error.

In an Internal Revenue Investigation, Hearings before a Sub-Committee of the Commission of Ways and Means, House of Representatives, 83rd Congress, 1st session, on the administration of the Internal Revenue Laws, Part “A”, states in relevant part that “Your Income Tax is a 100% Voluntary Tax and your Liquor Tax is 100% enforced, now the situation is as different as day and night”, tesimony given by Dwight E. Avis, then HEAD of the Alcohol and Tobacco Division (see also the Supreme Court decision in Flora vs. the United States where the justices declared that your “…income taxes are 100% voluntary and not based upon distraint” - meaning “not” mandatory).
I find this to be in complete contradiction to your allegations that I have both a “Filing Requirement” and a “Tax Liability” under the “Title” you say I am “Required” under which you claim to be Mandatory, and since he would be higher up in the I.R.S. food chain (and also taking into consideration the Supreme Court decision I just quoted) I would think he’d quite likely have a greater understanding of the true nature of things which, to most, are “Incomprehensible”, and which makes me wonder about and, essentially, doubt your “assessments” since they appear to me to have been rendered due to a willfull (or otherwise) and gross misapplication of existing Laws and Regulations.

But wait, there’s more. I’m just getting started.

Jerome Kurtz, in his Internal Revenue Annual Report, circa 1980, states that the I.R.S.’s PRIMARY task is to collect taxes under “Voluntary Compliance System”.
Therefore if, as you say, my compliance is “Compulsory”, I would appreciate knowing which Provision/Code Section makes it so and I would also like to know the exact nature, as outlined within the confines of the Code, of what “Voluntary Compliance” means because to the average person the word “Voluntary” means exactly that, “Voluntary” (not BASED upon DISTRAINT), meaning you have a choice as to whether you wish to volunteer or not, whether it be for military service such as I have done, or for taxes, which I had also done, at least until I learned what I consider to be the true nature of the tax as it applies to the average American.
From what I have been able to gather and understand if an American wishes to not “volunteer” his or her taxes that there is an IRS Code that allows for them to do exactly that. IRS Code 3402(n), which an employee must file annually with their employer and which states, in relevant part, that they had no tax liability for the previous year and that they expect no tax liability for the coming year and once submitted to the employer as a witnessed document they, the employer, are no longer liable to withhold said taxes.
True or false?
And why would such a provision be written into the code if it were not meant to be utilized by those who feel that it applies to their particular situation? Could it be that it is there so that the taxes you are attempting to collect are not abhorrent to the taxing clauses of the Constitution? Or is the “Constitution”, as George W. Bush stated in 2005 “…just a Goddamn piece of paper.”?

True or False, “Income” is specifically defined within the Internal Revenue Code?
If True, please provide me with where said specific definition lies as I cannot seem to find it anywhere within the confines of the Code. Simple question, one you should be able to answer rather easily provided that the Code posesses same and provided it is not “incomprehensible” to you.

Thus far I have been consistently denied “Due Process” by numerous agents and/or employees at your agency in regard to my 5th Constitutional Right regarding the hows, whys, and wherefores of how your “assessments” against me have come into being. I have NEVER been served with the “REQUIRED” forms demanding payment for what is “Due and Owing”, I therefore formally request that all aforementioned informations be furnished to me for further study and evaluation so that I can make a carefully informed determination of what you continue to “allege” that I “owe”, or that you immediately abandon your attempts to collect from me taxes I cannot/have not been allowed to fully examine or comprehend and which are in extremely serious doubt to me given what I have thus far presented and which I still intend to present to you.

Spreckles Sugar Refining Company v. McClain, 192 US 397 (pg. 416) ruled, in relevant part, that a citizen is EXEMPT from taxation unless same is imposed by CLEAR and UNEQUIVOCAL LANGUAGE” (see “Shirley Peterson” as quoted above and then see if you can tell me in that “clear and unequivocal language” wherein lies my “Tax Liability” and “Filing Requirement”, as I have asked for numerous times within the context of this communication so that there might be no possible miscommunication concerning my request for same, do so and I will happily comply to your requests).
Robert and Valerie McKee, 9th Circuit Court in San Fransisco won their case against the IRS and were repaid monies, plus interest, after your organization illegally siezed over $39,000.00 from their bank account, and they won their case on the sole arguement that the tax code is so convolutedly written that the average person cannot comprehend it.
It seems, then, that there is at least one precedent, therefore, for my assertions that the Code, as Shirley Peterson herself claimed, is “incomprehensible”.
However, if you can make sense of it for me, seeing as it seems to fall within your job description to do so, I would find it immensely helpful in gaining a better understanding of what I just cannot come to grips with insofar as your assertions are concerned as you are seeming to me to be making them without the lawful and binding references that fully substantiate your “alleged” claims.

One thing you regarded as “Frivolous” that I do have an issue with is best described in a Supreme Court Decision in Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R., 240 US 1, wherein their decision effectively ruled that the 16th amendment “…did not amend the Constitution, but established the Income Tax as an indirect excise tax”, meaning that said “taxation on Income was, in its nature, an Excise Tax and “Entitled” to be enforced as such and that the whole purpose of the amendment was to “relieve” all Incomes Taxes when imposed from apportionment from a consideration of the source whence the Income was derived”, in other words, completely contrary to the way it is currently being “Imposed” by your organization today where most Americans are concerned. Therefore I would like all the particulars of the laws that have made this High Courts’ decision null and void as well as whichever ones actually created the “Income Tax” as it is supposed to be lawful and within the parameters outlined by the Constitution today and as they apply to the average American, as it will take both for me to fully ascertain the liability you say, but do not seem to wish to prove to me that I “have”, and which informations are my Constitutional Right to have under the 5th Amendment Due Process Laws.

Merchants Loan and Trust Company vs. Smietanka, 255 US 509, (1921, pgs. 518, 519), (yet another Supreme Court Decision) states in relevant part that “Income” has the same meaning as the Corporation Excise Tax of 1909″, which is why, to my understanding, my “Taxes”, per se, fall under Sub-Title “C”, “Employment Taxes and Collections of Taxes at their Source” (aka, “Voluntary” taxes), and not Sub-Title “A” as you would seem to have me, and the rest of America, want to believe.
If this is not so please explain all the particulars to me so that I might garner a greater understanding of the “incomprehensible” nature of the Tax and the assessments you seem to have rendered against me utilizing a “Mandatory” Sub-Title rather than the “Voluntary” nature to which I believe MY alleged “Taxes” should apply.

Your “assesments” detail that Section 6020 (b) was utilized to determine my “Tax Deficiency”, yet the preceding aspect of said Section was, for some reason, deliberately ommitted from the information that you provided, so I looked it up. It (Section 6020 (a)) states, in relevant part, that “Preparation of a return by the Secretary if any person shall fail to make a return required by this Title as by regulations prescribed thereunder but shall consent to disclose all information necessary for the preparation thereof, then, and in that case, the Secretary may (not “must”, as a matter of LAW) prepare such return being signed by such person may be received by the Secretary as the return of such person.” (and what, exactly, makes me, as an American, fall under the distinction of those that are “REQUIRED” by this title?).
Therefore any “Return” prepared by the I.R.S. can contain absolutely no information whatsoever from which any “Tax” could be determined (see U.S v. Verkuilen and Schiff v. Commissioner U.S.T.C., 1984-223) unless the “Taxpayer” has filed an “Original” return, which I have not done (as I still continue to hold that I have neither a “Tax Liability nor a “Filing Requirement”), neither have I given my written (or otherwise implied) “Consent” in any way, shape, or form (no pun intended…), therefore your organization cannot possibly have the required information necessary, by Law, to render any kind of assessment against me under the letter of said Law.

Therefore, since we both know that I have filed no return because I, in good faith, believe that I am not subject to the “Tax” as you suppose it is applied to me, so, therefore, Code Section 6020 (b) cannot be lawfully enforced since there was no “Original” return filed by myself from which a lawful determination could have been made, and that, in no small way, is no small part of the underlying reason as to why I feel I am NOT subject to your “Jurisdiction”, your “Tax” or your “Revenue Laws” as they apply to Sub-Title “A”, as you attempt to apply them to me, and which, to my understanding, applies ONLY to Foreign corporations, non-resident aliens, and whomever draws a federal paycheck, such as yourselves.
None of what was mentioned above can possibly apply to me and that is why I must contest your, apparently, unlawful/illegal allegations that I “Owe” anything to the I.R.S., and especially not what amounts to nearly 30 Billion dollars.

Puhleeeeze…

Bill Gates makes more in a day than I will in my lifetime, but I doubt you’d even try to hand him such a “Bill” (but then since it’s not the “Requisite” form “Required” by Law then it’s not really a “Bill” at all, and 6020 (b) can’t possibly apply to my situation given the express nature of its preceding clause so I can only surmise that it has been grossly misapplied in your “alleged” assessment which you seem to have illegally rendered against me - AGAIN).

Section 6011 only applies when persons are “Required” to make “Returns/Statements pursuant to certain regulations prescribed by the Secretary”, and yet that “Section” fails, in specificity, by not directly identifying ANY of those specific “Regulations”.
If this is not so please advise me as to where I can find such references so that I may be better able to determine the true nature of the assessments you have rendered against me (by, apparently, misusing/misapplying Code Section 6020 (b)).

I can find nowhere in Sections 6001 or 6011 where it specifically states that the “Taxes” imposed in Section 1 shall (which, by LAW, can be construed as “May”, [Reference Fort Howard Paper Company v. Fox River Heights Sanitary district, 26 NW 2nd 661, also see Cairo and Fulton R.R. Company v. Hect, 95 US 170]…) be paid on the basis of a “Return”, such as is specified in Code Sections