As that monumental landmark date fast approaches, we are flooded with media references to tax problems that some people are faced with. It make me wonder sometimes if part of the Treasury’s budget is allocated to the tax services around the country as we are inundated with the many companies dedicated to helping us resolve these problems. The Treasury department has in the past, publicized prominent people as they drag them through the “justice” system and the media in order to scare a misinformed populace to keep pouring the “fruits of their labors” into the pockets of the federal government.
Remember, that unless you are employed in a “privileged” occupation you are not a subject. As a general rule, there are NO subjects only citizens within the Union. The 10th Amendment in the Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The reason we are not taught these principles is because it cuts into the power structure of the federal government and the legal profession and they do not like it. Having presented these principles to our friends, they have NEVER rebutted, or challenged them with opposing facts.
It is a scary situation. We want to keep what is lawfully ours, yet on the other hand support for the operations of the government is crucial. The challenge is to find the operational medium between the two extremes. It’s like trying the find the balance point between no government and total government. Now we did that in developing a Republic. Why can’t the same be accomplished with the support of government without draining the natural resources of the people or the country?
One of the problems we are faced with is that when we find the happy medium we have to implant individuals into the mix, and with our weaknesses we always drift to the extreme because we have made our “posts of honor, at the same time, places of profit”. The tendency we have has been warned about, to paraphrase; “We have learned by sad experience that once one has been placed in a position of authority, they immediately set about to exercise an unlawful dominion upon others.” We like the power. Akin to getting behind the wheel of a car, you become a different person. If you don’t like the way I drive, get off the sidewalk.
Ezra Taft Benson, in an address, said that there was nothing wrong with taxation, the problem is that government is to big. Almost from its inception, the Republic came under attack from the forces of democracy. The opposition began to infuse concepts into the Republic, however appealing to the eye and ear, slowly eroded the principles basic to the Republic. The people enjoying a great deal of success, the Nation expanding into new territories and then States. Then the government expanded its authority into areas and conflicts beyond its constitutional limits. Instead of being a servant to the people it has become a “big brother”. Instead of having a defensive posture in the world, it has become aggressive as it becomes involved in “tangled” alliances. Setting up a monetary debt system of currency controlled by a “federal” reserve which isn’t federal by any stretch of the imagination. And we reward our legislators and bureaucrats with enormous salaries and perks.
Now in order to feed the “monster” we, or those in control with authority have to devise a ways to conceal measures to extract money out of the people. Well, if we cannot tax the rights of the people, let’s change the language terms and start calling some of these rights privileges. This will enable us to tax the privilege, so you no longer have a right to work, it is a privilege. Now we will tax the privilege and use the income as a measure of the tax.
Now if the people come into court with the argument that the tax is direct which will have to be apportioned. The court will just say that the 16th Amendment made that requirement a moot point. Of course the courts won’t admit the established fact that the 16th Amendment did not change or add any new forms of taxation. Another counter argument of the court is that the the tax is not a direct tax, but and indirect tax on your “privilege” to work. A subtitle C employment tax. So you do your homework and go back into court and challenge the tax as indirect, and the court counters; No, it is a direct tax authorized by the 16th Amendment.
Now that the discussion is coming around about the difference between a “democracy” and a “republic” it causes the bureaucrats to regroup and take a look at their plan. We’ve been through the points found in a republic being a respect for the natural rights of the individual. The government is going to have to revaluate their approach to taxing and spending. The need for a balanced budget amendment has strong support in getting the Nation turned around and heading in the right direction. Put the “monster” back in the cage bound by “chains of the Constitution” and the light at the end of the tunnel won’t be a train. If not then the fears expressed by former President Franklin Pierce that we will see the “beginning of the end” will be our fate.
Another myth that I enjoy comes from one of my favorite States, Utah. Notwithstanding the clear language in the State statutes that liability for the federal tax is a prerequisite to State liability. In the face of this clear directive, the State Tax Commission, continues to advertise in their tax preparation instruction manuals that even if you did not file a federal return, you still must file a State return. Not true! I have written to members of the Utah State Tax Commission to explain their position, they have refused. The government has no answer for the first principles of taxation; the sovereign individual, delegation of authority and territorial legislative jurisdiction. The federal bureaucracy has no answer for it. Silence is equated with fraud.
P.S. 4/5/2011: To go along with my piece on balancing the budget, this time of year is ripe for all Americans to do their patriotic duty and stop filing their 1040. This will cut the purse strings of the federal government. There is enough pressure on Congress stop spending this Nation into debt. We have to strengthen the dollar, not by printing more paper, but back it with value, gold and silver, as was intended. Traitors to the economy of our country are the backers/creators and supporters of the federal reserve system.
As you examine the tax structure and your responsibility to comply with the demands of the federal government, remember to listen and learn objectively and do not throw the baby out with the bath water. As you read through the several articles I and others have written also remember that these principles are to many, new and will conflict with what you have been taught by the government. The government has directed our education in the area of taxation without presenting the facts or principles upon which this authority is based. The danger to the general public arrises when the facts are presented, that they will conflict with the theories we have been taught and therefore we tend to disregard the facts and base our decisions founded upon theory. This is very unscientific. Always do the genealogy when it comes to the government’s authority, keeping in the fore-front the fundamental principle that their authority comes from you. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY. Not from a group of THEM!
Unless you work for the government or a government licensed corporation (privilege) you own nothing to the government as far as your employment in the private sector. You have a “right” to work. To carry on a business to support your family. You owe nothing to government to exercise that right. The government can tax that enormous bureaucracy and as it exercises its duties under the Constitution, it can collect revenue for that service. As former Chief Justice John Marshall set in M’Cullock; “. . . the power of taxation is not confined to the people and property of a state. It may be exercised upon every object brought within its jurisdiction. This is true. But to what source do wo trace this right? It is obvious, that it is an incident of sovereignty, and is co-extensive with that to which it is an incident. All subjects over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; but those over which it does not extend, are, upon the soundest principles, exempt from taxation.” (17 U.S. 316, p. 429)
Granted, Marshall’s comments are directed to the States, however, the principle is applicable the federal government as well. Since we, for the most part, do not live within the legislative jurisdiction of the federal government, and they are not the sovereign over free Americans, they have no authority to tax our employment or the exercise of our inherent natural rights.
Maybe that is why tax day comes in April and who is the April Fool.
Liability for the Income Tax – Always Challenge the Jurisdiction
“It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority.”
Benjamin Franklin
Many pages have been written showing facts contesting one’s liability for the income tax. In fact this could apply to any tax which the federal government would want to impose upon an individual. (Individual used in its common law usage.) I would like to condense this into some what of a nut shell.
It appears that our “all seeing government” understands that the 16th Amendment confers a sovereign power upon the federal government over the property of the citizens. This can not be further from the truth. Then Chief Justice John Marshall, in his opinion delivered in M’Cullock vs. Maryland (1819), discussed the power of taxation conferred by the people upon both the States and the federal government. As to the authority of the individual States; “The sovereignty of a state extends to everything which exists by its own authority, or is introduced by its permission; . . .” State legislatures and governors, can you read english? Can you understand this? “The sovereignty of a state extends to everything which exists by its own authority, or is introduced by its permission; . . .” M’Cullock v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316
Given this principle as quoted, and going back to a previous declaration made by Chief Justice Marshall on the same page, puts this all in perspective; “All subjects over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; but those over which it does not extend, are, upon the soundest principles, exempt from taxation. This proposition may almost be pronounced self-evident.” Again, State legislatures and governors, can you read english? Can you understand this?
Returning and carrying this principle to the federal government he continues; “. . . but does it extend to those means which are employed by congress to carry into execution powers conferred on that body by the people of the United States? We think it demonstrable, that it does not. . . .” As the Chief Justice points out; “. . . Those powers are not given by the people of a single state. They are given by the people of the United States, to a government whose laws, made in pursuance of the constitution, are declared to be supreme. Consequently, the people of a single state cannot confer a sovereignty which will extend over them. ” (p. 429)
The last statement by the Chief Justice answers the question about the assumption by some today that the 16th Amendment conferred a ‘blanket’ authority to tax all the citizens, in all the unified States. To repeat it; “. . . the people of a single state cannot confer a sovereignty which will extend over them.” Meaning the other sovereign States. It will be remembered that the 16th Amendment was not passed by all the States. Because the citizens of State ‘A’ approved the 16th Amendment, does not mean that by their action that a sovereignty is imposed upon the citizens of State ‘B’ which did not approve the Amendment. When writing on these issues, I always remember the words of Chief Justice Marshall; ” The right never existed, and the question whether it has been surrendered, cannot arise.” (p. 430)
To understand more about the 16th Amendment and its purpose read the Brushaber case (240 U.S. 1), and the Stanton (240 U.S. 103) opinions delivered by Chief Justice White (1916). Considering these two landmark decisions, Chief Justice White makes clear that the contentions in the two cases; “. . . manifestly disregards the fact that by the previous ruling (Brushaber) it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, . . . .” (Stanton at p. 112) The Tax Court in Penn Mutual expressed this same opinion; “In dealing with the scope of the taxing power the question has been framed in terms of whether something can be taxed as income under the 16th Amendment. This is an inaccurate formulation of the question and has led to much loose thinking on the subject. The source of the taxing power is not the 16th Amendment; it is Article I, section 8, of the Constitution.” Penn Mutual Indemnity Co. vs. Commissioner, 32 Tax Court 659 Again, can you “lawyer politicians” understand english?
One other point raised by the Chief Justice on page 428, about State authority to tax, he lays out: “. . . a few considerations on the nature and extent of this original right of taxation, which is acknowledged to remain with the states. . . .” He goes on to state; “. . ., that the power of taxing the people and their property, is essential to the very existence of government, . . .” and I agree. Going on; “. . . and may be legitimately exercised on the objects to which it is applicable, to the utmost extent to which the government may choose to carry it.” What I wish to point out is the term “applicable” objects. And what are “applicable” objects? Again, he has answered that when he stated; “”All subjects over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; . . . .” And those objects are? “. . . [e]verything which exists by [the State’s] own authority, or is introduced by its permission; . . .”
Chief Justice Marshall addresses this opinion basically to the States, however, the principle of sovereignty as the foundation platform for government’s (any government) is its position as sovereign over the objects to be taxed.
“But to what source do we trace this right? (The right of taxation) It is obvious, that it is an incident of sovereignty, and is co-extensive with that to which it is an incident.” M’Culloch v. State, 17 U.S. 316, 429
“The power to tax is an incident of sovereignty and is coextensive with sovereignty.” Curry vs. McCanless, 307 U.S. 357; See also, 26 R.C.L., Taxation (1920), 12. Power of Taxation Inherent in Sovereignty.
The question always is and should be, in this Nation, in this Republic, who is the sovereign?
If we can agree upon this one principle, that the “sovereign” has the inherent right to tax its subjects, then we can proceed to determine by what actions can the American citizen be drawn into a relationship that would make them subject to the sovereign? The Constitution recognizes only one sovereign and that is the people. Before any proceeding can take place there are at least four categories that I can think of which the government must at least affirmatively show jurisdiction, or sovereignty, in at least one of them in their favor. They are: (1) Territory; (2) Privileged Occupation; (3) Contractual Agreement; and (4) Delegated Authority.
Any one of these would give the government “sovereign” authority over the party. Only if one finds that they are within one of the classes, do the other arguments then find a place.
1. Territory. As far as the federal government is concerned, Article I, Section 8, clause 17 defines the territorial jurisdiction of the federal government.
“To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;–”
2. Privileged Occupation. One must be an “employee”, as that term is defined under the civil law, that is it must be a “legal” relationship, one that is created by and under the civil law. “Lawful” employee relationships are one by natural right, not created by the civil law. Federal/State employees are privileged occupations, created by law (Constitution).
3. Contractual Agreements. When you take a trip on an airline, boat, train etc., you enter into an agreement to follow the rules of the conveyance. Under the law of Admiralty, of which the civil law is an off shoot, jurisdiction is given by entering into voluntary contracts (stipulations). When one voluntarily signs the 1040, it is an admission that they are subject to the income tax. The same goes for privileged employment with the government. You enter into an agreement under Admiralty rules and you have opted by your stipulation to ride with the circus.
4. Delegated Authority. There is a principle that is unique to our Republic, and that is the principle of delegated authority. It is well documented that from the foundation of this Republic that governmental authority comes from the people. “We the People . . .” It is an axiom of the principle of delegation, that one can only delegate what one has, conversely, one cannot delegate what one does not have. NO ONE has the right to take another persons life, liberty or property. The Supreme Court understood this principle when is said; “… The governments are but trustees acting under derived authority and have no power to delegate what is not delegated to them.” Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, page 370
“Whenever government is doing anything that is forbidden to the citizen, that function is illegitimate, according to our theory of government…. Our government is founded squarely on this ‘theory of delegation’. One cannot delegate what he doesn’t have.” [Dean Russell, Letter to Compiler, March 19, 1964] To conclude this principle; “The right never existed, and the question whether it has been surrendered, can not arise.” (M’Cullock vs. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, at p. 431)
In the final analysis, these principles, and others like them, come under the general category of the “sovereign” as that term has been defined by the Supreme Court; “The sovereignty of a state extends to everything which exists by its own authority, or is introduced by its permission; but does it extend to those means which are employed by congress to carry into execution powers conferred on that body by the people of the United States? We think it demonstrable, that it does not.” Coupled with Supreme Court Justice Marshall’s preceding declaration; “All subjects over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; but those over which it does not extend, are, upon the soundest principles, exempt from taxation. This proposition may almost be pronounced self-evident.” M’Cullock vs. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 429
Loral Glazier
governmentprinciples.wordpress.com 