+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 65 to 74 of 74

  1. #65

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Quote Originally Posted by Parcival
    One of the more interesting delusions of the lunatic fringe is that a description of a document X is more relevant to understanding X than X itself. It is as if, finding a copy of Huckleberry Finn with a dust jacket from Tom Sawyer, the fringe dwellers conclude that the book is Tom Sawyer despite the overwhelming evidence that is Huckleberry Finn with the wrong dust jacket.
    I'm sorry, weren't the REGULATIONS for both Title 26 & 27 made under the AUTHORITY given to the "Secretary" in Title 26?

    26 USC 6301. Collection authority

    The Secretary shall collect the taxes imposed by the internal revenue laws.

    http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/...01----000-.html

    26 USC 7805. Rules and regulations

    (a) Authorization
    Except where such authority is expressly given by this title to any person other than an officer or employee of the Treasury Department, the Secretary shall prescribe all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of this title, including all rules and regulations as may be necessary by reason of any alteration of law in relation to internal revenue. (rest omitted)
    http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/...05----000-.html
    Patrick in California

    http://www.travelpropower.com/paradoxmagnus

    "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done."--Peter Ustinov

  2. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    228

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Are you SAYING that Title 27 is NOT part of the "internal revenue laws"?
    No. Unlike you, I say what I mean. If I wanted to say that Title 27 is not part of the "internal revenue laws" or even that it was not part of the internal revenue laws, I would say exactly that. What I clearly said, and what should be too obvious to have to state, is that Title 27 is not part of Title 26. If that is too difficult for you to understand, I suggest you find a different hobby.

  3. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    228

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    I'm sorry, weren't the REGULATIONS for both Title 26 & 27 made under the AUTHORITY given to the "Secretary" in Title 26?
    I have no interest in discussing Title 27. This thread concerns Title 26. Try to stay on topic.

  4. #68

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Quote Originally Posted by Parcival
    I have no interest in discussing Title 27. This thread concerns Title 26. Try to stay on topic.
    It appears to me that Parcival has definitely studied the Thirty - Eight Ways to Win an Argument from Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy".

    "18. If your opponent has taken up a line of argument that will end in your defeat, you must not allow him to carry it to its conclusion.
    Interrupt the dispute, break it off altogether, or lead the opponent to a different subject.

    38 Become personal, insulting and rude as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand.
    In becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack on the person by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character.
    This is a very popular technique, because it takes so little skill to put it into effect."
    Patrick in California

    http://www.travelpropower.com/paradoxmagnus

    "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done."--Peter Ustinov

  5. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick in California
    It appears to me that Parcival has definitely studied the Thirty - Eight Ways to Win an Argument from Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy".

    "18. If your opponent has taken up a line of argument that will end in your defeat, you must not allow him to carry it to its conclusion.
    Interrupt the dispute, break it off altogether, or lead the opponent to a different subject.

    38 Become personal, insulting and rude as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand.
    In becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack on the person by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character.
    This is a very popular technique, because it takes so little skill to put it into effect."
    He has to go there Patrick. It's kind of hard to argue with black ink on white paper truth. :rolleyes:

    At which point, they are only left with the alternative of "deny, deny, deny".

    Namaste'

    Lady Mod

  6. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    228

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick in California
    It appears to me that Parcival has definitely studied the Thirty - Eight Ways to Win an Argument from Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy".

    "18. If your opponent has taken up a line of argument that will end in your defeat, you must not allow him to carry it to its conclusion.
    Interrupt the dispute, break it off altogether, or lead the opponent to a different subject.

    38 Become personal, insulting and rude as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand.
    In becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack on the person by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character.
    This is a very popular technique, because it takes so little skill to put it into effect."
    You can cut the irony with a knife.

  7. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    228

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Quote Originally Posted by sojustask
    He has to go there Patrick. It's kind of hard to argue with black ink on white paper truth. :rolleyes:

    At which point, they are only left with the alternative of "deny, deny, deny".

    Namaste'

    Lady Mod
    A truly bizarre comment from someone who has yet to back up any of her absurd assertions. Have you abandoned your assertion that wage income cannot be taxed? If so, make that explicit. If not, let's see the proof you claim to have.

    Remember, this

    The labor of a human being is
    not a commodity or article of commerce...and therefore cannot be made
    subject to any tax as though it were such.
    is not the law, just some wingnut's opinion. You claim to have found a statutory provision supporting the wingnut's opinion. Let's see it.
    Last edited by Parcival; 03-08-2007 at 07:03 PM.

  8. #72

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Quote Originally Posted by Parcival
    A truly bizarre comment from someone who has yet to back up any of her absurd assertions. Have you abandoned your assertion that wage income cannot be taxed? If so, make that explicit. If not, let's see the proof you claim to have.
    Are you referring to the PROPER English definitions?

    Are you referring to the standard LEGAL definitions?

    INCOME. The return in money from one's business, labor, or capital invested; gains, profit, or private revenue. Braun's Appeal, 105 Pa. 415; People V. Davenport, 30 Hun (N. Y.) 177 ; In re Slocum, 169 N. Y. 153, 62 N. E. 130 ; Waring v. Savannah, 60 Ga. 99.
    "Income" means that which comes in or is received from any business or investment of capital, without reference to the outgoing expenditures; while. "profits" generally means the gain which is made upon any business or investment when both receipts and payments are taken into account. "Income," when applied to the affairs of individuals, expresses the same idea that "revenue" does when applied to the affairs of a state or nation. People v. Niagara County, 4 Hill (N. Y.) 20; Bates v. Porter, 74 Cal. 224, 15 Pac. 732. —Income tax. A tax on the yearly profits arising from property, professions, trades, and offices. 2 Steph. Comm. 573. Levi v. Louisville, 97 Ky. 394, 30 S. W. 973, 28 L. A. 480; Parker v. Insurance Co., 42 La. Ann. 423, 7 South. 599. BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 612.

    WAGES. The compensation agreed upon by a master to be paid to a servant, or any other person hired to do work or business for him.
    In maritime law. The compensation allowed to seamen for their services on board a vessel during a voyage.
    In political economy. The reward paid, whether in money or goods, to human exertion, considered as a factor in the production of wealth, for its cooperation in the process.
    "Three factors contribute to the production of commodities,—nature. labor, and capital. Each must have a share of the product as its reward, and this share, if it is just, must be proportionate to the several contributions. The share of the natural agents is rent ; the share of labor, wages; the share of capital, interest. The clerk receives a salary ; the lawyer and doctor, fees ; the manufacturer, profits. Salary, fees, and profits are so many forms of wages for services rendered." De Laveleye, Pol. Econ.
    —Wage earner. One who earns his living by labor of a menial or mechanical kind or performed in a subordinate capacity, such as domestic servants, mechanics, farm hands, clerks, porters, and messengers. In the United States bankruptcy act of 1898, an individual who works for wages, salary, or hire, at a compensation not exceeding $1,500 per year. See In re Pilger (I). C.) 118 Ped. 206; In re Gurewitz, 121 Fed. 982, 58 C. C. A. 320. BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, page 1215

    Or are you referring to the DEFINITION of "wages" in Title 26? If so, which one are you referring to since there are AT LEAST TWO of them?

    And if you are referring to "income" as it is used in Title 26, since it is NOT DEFINED there, wouldn't it be wise look at what the COURTS have said on the subject?

    "As was said in Stratton's Independence v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 , 34 S. Sup. Ct. 136: 'Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined.'

    Understanding the term in this natural and obvious sense, it cannot be said that a conversion of capital assets invariably produces income...In order to determine whether there has been gain or loss, and the amount of the gain if any, we must withdraw from the gross proceeds an amount sufficient to restore the capital value that existed at the commencement of the period under consideration.

    This has been recognized from the beginning by the administrative officers of the government." DOYLE v. MITCHELL BROS. CO., 247 U.S. 179 (1918)

    http://laws.findlaw.com/us/247/179.html

    "Congress cannot by any definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.
    ...
    After examining dictionaries in common use (Bouv. L. D.; Standard Dict.; Webster's Internat. Dict.; Century Dict.), we find little to add to the succinct definition adopted in two cases arising under the Corporation Tax Act of 1909 (Stratton's Independence v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 , 34 S. Sup. Ct. 136, 140 [58 L. Ed. 285]; Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U.S. 179, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 [62 L. Ed. 1054]), 'Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined,' provided it be understood to include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets, to which it was applied in the Doyle Case, 247 U.S. 183, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 (62 L. Ed. 1054).

    Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing attribute of income essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word 'gain,' which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. 'Derived-from- capital'; 'the gain-derived-from-capital,' etc. Here we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being 'derived'-that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description." EISNER v. MACOMBER , 252 U.S. 189 (1920)
    http://laws.findlaw.com/us/252/189.html

    "'Income' has been taken to mean the same thing as used in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909 (36 Stat. 112), in the Sixteenth Amendment, and in the various revenue acts subsequently passed. ... In determining what constitutes income substance rather than form is to be given controlling weight. Eisner v. Macomber, supra, 206 (40 S. Ct. 189)." BOWERS v. KERBAUGH-EMPIRE CO., 271 U.S. 170 (1926)
    http://laws.findlaw.com/us/271/170.html

    “At the outset, we reject the Government’s breathtakingly expansive claim of congressional power under the Sixteenth Amendment -- upon which it founds the more far-reaching arguments it advances here. The Sixteenth Amendment simply does not authorize the Congress to tax as “incomes” every sort of revenue a taxpayer may receive. As the Supreme Court noted long ago, the “Congress cannot make a thing income which is not so in fact.” Burk-Waggoner Oil Ass’n v. Hopkins, 269 U.S. 110, 114 (1925). Indeed, because the “the power to tax involves the power to destroy,” McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 431 (1819), it would not be consistent with our constitutional government, and the sanctity of property in our system, merely to rely upon the legislature to decide what constitutes income.

    Fortunately, we need not rely solely upon the wisdom and beneficence of the Congress for, when the Sixteenth Amendment was drafted, the word “incomes” had well understood limits. To be sure, the Supreme Court has broadly construed the phrase “gross income” in the IRC and, by implication, the word “incomes” in the Sixteenth Amendment, but it also has made plain that the power to tax income extends only to “gain[s]” or “accessions to wealth.” Glenshaw Glass, 348 U.S. at 430-31. That is why, as noted above, the Supreme Court has held a “return of capital” is not income. Doyle, 247 U.S. at 187; S. Pac. Co., 247 U.S. at 335.
    ...
    Albert Einstein may have been correct that “[t]he hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax,” The Macmillan Book of Business and Economic Quotations 195 (Michael Jackman ed., 1984), but it is not hard to understand that not all receipts of money are income." MARRITA MURPHY AND DANIEL J. LEVEILLE v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (2006), No. 05-5139

    http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/...8/05-5139a.pdf

    So maybe people should QUESTION how their EARNINGS which are a COMPENSATION for their labor could be "income"?

    Especially in light of this ADMISSION from the Illinois Department of Revenue.

    Nevertheless, even the court in Oliver stated, "compensation from labor is not profit." Oliver, 86 S.E.2d 859. The court in Oliver went further to say that "[t]here is a clear distinction between `profit' and `wages' or compensation for labor." Id. The court then quotes League Association of America v. The People ex rel. Thomas B. Needles, Auditor, 90 Ill. 166-- an Illinois Supreme Court Case--which held that "[c]ompensation for labor can not be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law. The word `profit', as ordinarily used, means the gain made upon any business or investment -- a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor."
    http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legal...8/ig980046.pdf
    Patrick in California

    http://www.travelpropower.com/paradoxmagnus

    "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done."--Peter Ustinov

  9. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    228

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Are you referring to the PROPER English definitions?

    Are you referring to the standard LEGAL definitions?
    I'm clearly referring to Sojutask's as yet unsupported assertion that wages can't be taxed. Try reading the whole thread before commenting.

  10. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    228

    Re: Shreveport, La Attorney Challanging Income Tax Law Charged With Crime

    Cryer's motion to dismiss has been denied. United States v. Tommy K. Cryer, Case 5:06-cr-50164-SMH-MLH, Document 35 (W.D. La. 03/19/2007).

  11. 08-02-2007, 10:37 AM

    Reason
    wrong refernce

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-18-2015, 08:46 AM
  2. f**gs beat f**G, charged with hate crime.
    By danrush1966 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-27-2012, 10:39 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-03-2009, 09:59 AM
  4. Attorney acquitted on federal income tax charges
    By sojustask in forum Government Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-16-2007, 09:38 AM
  5. GOP Crime Wave Chronicles: Bush Gang's Crime DuJour
    By dchristie in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2006, 05:42 PM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags
129, 2001, 302, abandoned, account, accuracy, acted, acts, address, admit, affairs, aid, alcohol, amendment, appears, ash, ass, atf, attorney, authority, authorized, authors, axa, bag, based, bit, body, books, brown, bunch, bureau, carefully, cash, caught, central, characteristics, class, clerk, clients, close, closes, code, collect, collected, collection, coming, commissioner, company, compensation, complain, complete, compliance, concealing, congressional, corp, corporate, corporation, couldn, counterfeit, county, court, courts, crank, day, declared, deep, defeat, delusions, department, description, destroyed, district, disturbing, documentation, doesn, dollar, dollars, dont, dot, ells, eme, ends, essential, experience, experts, expose, extended, extra, eye, fail, federal, federal reserve, financial, flaw, folks, fraud, freedom, friday, fund, future, gordo, government, grant, growth, hands, held, helped, helping, hidden, hope, html, huma, human, idiot, ife, illegally, imagine, impact, important, include, india, individuals, industry, interest, iowa, irs, islands, issues, jail, joke, lady, large, law, lawyer, league, license, limits, line, lis, lisa, listen, local, lol, long, lost, lunatic, mail, mama, maryland, master, mea, meeting, mental, mentally ill, mentions, method, michael, millions, misinformed, money, nation, national, needed, numbers, oath, obstruction, operation, ordered, orders, paper, part, passed, patrick, pay, payments, pays, people, person, petroleum, picture, pilger, policy, poor, pos, post, posted, posts, power, prepared, presiden, production, profit, public, pull, punished, questions, random, rea, reality, realty, reason, reasons, red, reduction, release, rendered, rent, research, respect, respond, restore, returns, revealing, reward, ron, roo, roy, sale, score, secretary, serve, service, services, shaw, shouldn, shows, solo, son, soo, source, specifically, stand, states, stealing, subs, supporting, taken, talking, targeted, tax, tax fraud, taxes, taxpayers, teach, tells, threats, times, told, top, trial, tribute, trillion, truth, united, united states, upper, usa, vehicle, version, vic, voyage, waiting, wanted, win, wise, witness, won, working, writer, writing, york

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •