The Fair Tax

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

The Fair Tax

And what’s wrong with it!

Here are the main problems I have with the proposed Fair Tax.

1. Those in favor of passing this legislation claim that it first requires that we repeal the 16^th Amendment. This is a false notion fueled by ignorance of the law. The Supreme Court said in Stanton Vs. Baltic Mining Co., 240 US 112 (1916), that the 16^th Amendment does not change Article I, section 8 of the Constitution, and “confers no new power of taxation.” Therefore repealing the amendment will change nothing and will not, in and of itself, eliminate the IRS. Therefore, even if one could successfully repeal the 16^th Amendment, the proposal is doomed from the onset. Other Supreme Court case law as in Brushaber Vs. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 240 US 1 (1916),  is being used as the legal backdrop for the authority to continue the fraud known as the Income Tax, so repealing the 16^th Amendment will not be enough.
2. The proposed sales tax claims to be “revenue neutral”. This means that it will do nothing to change the amount of money going into the coffers of the federal government. This does absolutely nothing to make the feds more fiscally responsible, which is what they claim to be trying to do with the Fair Tax proposal.
3. Because this is a sales tax and is “revenue neutral”, it’s too easy for everyone to lose track of how and where they are taxed, thus allowing the government and the public at large to easily forget that there is a tax being levied in the first place, and;
4. This makes it too easy for the tax to be increased by fiat, any time they feel like it. And don’t tell me that it will have to be voted on, because when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul. In other words, those constituents who benefit from government giveaways will always vote in favor of increased taxes. Eliminating giveaway programs is first and foremost at the heart of the problem, not eliminating the IRS. And:
5. Wasteful spending by the fed will not change just because the money comes from a different place. Reform needs to be based in correcting the problems that we know exist now, not in changing the source of revenue.
6. In addition, there must be serious reform of the corrupt cycle known as lobbying. When a politician can be persuaded to vote in favor of passing a law for a particular corporation to receive money based on the amount of begging and influence peddling they engage in, this is a problem. The Fair Tax will not change this.
7. Also, the government is in the habit of ignoring the will of the people in the first place, so what will stop them from simply printing more fiat money any time they feel like it? The answer is NOTHING. And:
8. Last but not least is the fact that taxes, like the economy, trickle down to the bottom. When corporations are taxed, industry wide, they do not actually pay the taxes directly. They either move the operation to a tax free environment, thereby eliminating American jobs, or they simply increase the cost of the end product to cover the increased taxes and the CONSUMER pays a higher price at the end of the line. So poor people end up paying the increased taxes levied against the “evil rich and competition will not keep corporations from raising the price of their products, due to the fact that the regulation or tax that increases those costs for a product are levied against an entire industry all at once, in order to make it “fair”. Some perfect examples are cigarettes, alcohol, beef, milk, etc. You name it, the fed has found a way to tax or regulate it, INDUSTRY WIDE. They don’t just tax or regulate one company, they tax them ALL, and the CONSUMER PAYS THE BILL. The Fair Tax WILL NOT CHANGE THAT. That’s trickle down economics 101. If you need proof, check the latest tax returns filed by Goldman Sachs, AIG, etc. You’ll see that not only were they able to differ an income tax liability of TWO BILLION DOLLARS by shipping jobs over-seas, they actually qualified for a TAX CREDIT of over ONE BILLION DOLLARS MORE, on top of that! We must eliminate the IRS AND STOP THE PAYMENTS. Not change the way they get the wealth.

In conclusion,

It is safe to say that the Fair Tax will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to change what’s wrong with our federal government in terms of how they borrow and spend and print new FRN’s (Quantitative Easing), anytime the Fed says it’s the right thing to do. Not to mention the Fair Tax does nothing to address the fact that they routinely ignore requests now for freedom of information and Redress of Grievances in regard to taxes and other issues. The fed will not change their attitude until “We The People” force them to.

Stop the "voluntary compliance" with the misapplication of the current Internal Re-Venue Codes. This would immediately cripple the fed and wake them up. The Fair Tax WILL NOT! Instead, it will bury the issue of an overblown and corrupt government and put it on the back burner of the American conscience. People will continue to fund a corrupt, wasteful, SOCIALIST government. That’s why I don’t like the Fair Tax.

Comments?

[Osceola Renegade]

[Wayne Bachmann]

I don't have those markings on my BC, which was donated by Pet Milk Company, but I have been told the trust account will exist anyway, if I check with the State of Oregon.

[Wayne Bachmann]

I have said it before and I'll say it again. Taxes are voluntary, unless you work for the government, which may include other corporation employees. That should be a good incentive for people to not work for the government, which in and of itself should be a good process of lowering taxes. I have spent most of 35 years not paying the IRS diddly squat, and I will starve to death before I will ever contract with them again. If there is no contract (1040, 1090, 1099, etc.), no signature, there is no binding agreement to pay them one red cent. I refuse to fund their wars, or any other criminal activity they use the taxes for.

[John Gaver]

Wayne, I wish you well in continuing to get away with not paying the government their pound of flesh. Unfortunately, that only works for those whose income is low enough that it's not worth the government's effort to go after them. The last time I read anything about it, a few years ago, there were more than 8000 people in federal prisons for effectively being a TP (Tax Protester). By TP I mean, 1) refusing to pay income tax AND 2) when prosecuted by the IRS, claiming that they didn't owe any taxes because taxes were unconstitutional.

I live in the real world.  TPs may get away with not paying income tax for a while and if you don't make any waves and don't earn enough to make it worth their effort to come after you, you may get away with it for the rest of your life. But if the government takes aim at a TP, legal or not, he's going to jail (period). That's the real world.

The genie is out of the bottle and it turns out, he's a tyrant. So rather than risk all that I have, on a vain attempt at showing my moral resolve, I'm focused on putting the genie back in the bottle. Once the FairTax abolishes the IRS, we won't have that evil genie to deal with.

So, while I wish you luck in your continued efforts to deprive the government of that which you believe they are not entitled, I will continue to try to put the genie back in the bottle. I live very well, though I haven't always lived this well. I drink 40 year old scotch and 100 year old cognac. I roast my own Boquete coffee. I fly huge 8-rotor drones. Somehow, I don't think I could get all those things in s prison cell. Furthermore, if I were to try to stop paying tax, I'm in precisely the income level that the IRS would go after, to make a point.

Speaking of living well, I just realized that it looks like the girls golf team is practicing on our course today, so I need to sign off and pay attention to the important thing in life. Good Luck.

[Wayne Bachmann]

I'm not getting away with anything. It is right in the IRS codes that unless you work for the corporation (IRS) it is voluntary. IRS is a corporation, is it not? I have a copy of their corporate registration papers from Delaware to back it up.

File # 0325720

Incorporation Date 07/12/1933

Section 1, Subtitle A of the IRCode......

Section 7701(a)(16)

Section 1461

Section 3403, Subtitle C

Section 7809

Section 3402(n)

There is also a clause somewhere that I have read that says that if you do not have a Zip Code you are not to be audited. I don't recall the reference on that one, but it has to do with if you have a Zip Code you are giving evidence of operating a Federal Post Office. Put brackets around your zip. That is making use of the Escobedo Rule. You also need to not use the 2 letter state abbreviation. You need to spell the state out in its entirety.

Think about this for a minute: If you do not work for McDonalds corporation, do you need to do what their administrators and executives tell you to do? IRS is just another corporation. If you do not work for them, if you do not contract with them, do they have any authority over you? If you work for the government, which is not a government but another corporation, they have a right to tell you how to conduct your business affairs with them. But if you do not work for one of their corporations they have absolutely no lawful say so in how you conduct your business affairs. You have a constitutional protection in the Constitution to contract in an unlimited manner. You do not have to contract with anyone you do not want to contract with. I choose to not contract with them anymore, now that I know what is going on. W. Cleon Skousen is the individual who exposed this process to me when I took a class from him while I was in the Air Force in 1976. Once I got out of the Air Force, I have seldom contracted with the IRS, primarily when I was working on government jobs. Unless I am working on government jobs, I am not required to contract with them.

Google up 31 Questions and Answers about the Internal Revenue Service. You will find your answers on page 4, question 7.

The government itself is just a corporation, registered as a non-proffit religious organization, if you can imagine that!

Don't work for the corporations, don't contract with them and don't sign their paperwork unless you do it under duress and there are no laws forcing you to bow down to them.

[Wayne Bachmann]

The people who do get into legitimate trouble with the IRS are those who sign the contracts, then sneak around trying to get out of it. You may want to listen to Aaron Russo's video; AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM. He will show you they are nothing but one big bully organization operating on intimidation tactics. They are not part of the government. You also may want to get a copy of G. Edward Griffin's book CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND.

I refuse to ever register or contract with them again, now that I know what is going on. I will starve to death first. I would consider myself a traitor to our Founding Fathers if I were to contract with them now that I know what is going on, especially after having been beaten, tasered, unjustly accused and convicted of crimes I am not guilty of, having to spend time behind bars and pay fines for those crimes I am not guilty of. I was prosecuted to protect Deputy J. Schwartzmiller of Snohomish County, Washington from his criminal conduct. They need not think I will ever contribute to their salaries ever again if they willfully violate my rights.

It was after all of that happened that I have vowed to never contribute to them ever again. That in itself was a good learning experience, as I interviewed other inmates while I was locked up. That is part of how I found out what is going on. 40% of the other inmates were also there because of lies and false accusations, so the govt. can charge the naive taxpayers for the beds being occupied. It is the government's motel service(?).

They charge roughly $100 per night per bed. Now, go find out what regular motels charge per night, and tell me the government is not operation a money making racket, and that just might be why it is the fastest growing business in America, with most jails and prisons being owned by corporations!

[Wayne Bachmann]

John,

Having said all of that, it is true that I am living on peanuts. But I would rather do that than feed the hands of the corporation who have violently bitten me and violated my rights without any just cause whatsoever. If they wanted my tax dollars they should never have violated me.

[John Gaver]

OK. I can get back to the computer. The girls golf team finished up their practice a while ago.

All of what you said above is well and good, as long as you aren't in a high income bracket. But back in 2005 there were more than 8000 TPers behind bars. When that report talked about TPers, they were talking specifically about people who used the exact methods that you described above, to claim that they owed no tax. The only difference between them and you is that all but a few of them had enough money to make it worthwhile to prosecute them. Of those TPers who had little money, all were known for being extremely vocal about not paying taxes. That latter group was probably targeted, in order to send a message to others who might get too vocal.

Was their imprisonment legal? Maybe. Maybe not. That's not what's important. What's important is that the government has proven that they can and will do that to anyone who uses those TP arguments, if you either have enough money to be noticed or make too much noise about not paying tax. The TP movement only works for those who have little money and don't make headlines for their not paying tax.

I can't afford to be a TPer. I have too much to lose. I take every legitimate deduction and I still pay more than any reasonable person would think fair. That's why I push so aggressively for the FairTax. It will give me more control over my taxes. Under the FairTax, a billionaire could become a legal TPer, by simply choosing to live at the poverty line and getting all or most of his taxes rebated each month. But in reality, Paul Allen will probably buy another mega yacht to go along with the yachts he already owns and Donald Trump will probably buy another jet. But at least under the FairTax, paying tax is partly choice.

[Osceola Renegade]

Wayne, I agree:  And for ni on 30 years I cross out the UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY Statement, marks as N/A I am A volunteer Taxpayer, and Without Prejudice, UCC 1-308.

The 1-308 is still within the criminal court system jurisdication but it reserves your right to not give away all of your rights UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY.

O, what the hell.  All 50 States hold nomination certificates notarized by Villargossia the DNC Chair in 2012 which are perjured.  Obama has been proven that he is criminal and without origin.  Only the CIA knows who the hell he is.  These two things GOVERNMENT KNOWING BUT NOT TELLING, and his failure to show are the crime yet Villargossia Notarized (UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY), and Governors and Supervisor of Elections suck up to the OBAMA Administration.

And we sit here talking about fair taxes.  THERE is no Stinking Fair Tax.

Take your FEE SIMPLE TITLE ON YOUR PROPERTY.  Study that phrase.  When it is paid in total, do you get al ALLODIAL title which means FAIR TAX?

[Robert Holtzclaw]

There is a great deal of support for the Fair Tax.  There is a great deal of anger and displeasure around the Income Tax.  With only a choice between the current Income Tax and the Fair Tax, which would you choose?  Overriding both choices are the 90% ignorance and apathy of the public, hence we are stuck with the Income Tax and the IRS.  Short of a revolution, I see no way out of the current system.  Under the current system the government has all of the control and the public remain ignorant sheeple, heads in the sand, and happy to grovel in their chains.  Offer me a choice ... I choose the Fair Tax ... notwithstanding your well-thought-out remarks.  (As an aside, I am working my way through the SCOTUS income tax cases from 1796 (Hylton) through 1999(Bell Telephone.  As I read the decisions and the arguments in the two cases which you cite above, I am not certain that I agree with your conclusion.)

[John Gaver]

I agree with you to a point, Robert.

You say, "Short of a revolution…" I say short of a revolution or constitutional amendment. But then, a constitutional amendment is a sort of a revolution, since it requires a vote of the people and is "supposed" to bind those in Congress.

One of the reasons I'm out beating the FairTax drum is because the IRS scandals appear to have many otherwise apathetic people actually paying attention to the tax issue. If we can use this temporary attention that the issue is getting, to pass the FairTax, we can deprive the government of one of their primary tools against us. Interestingly, since the IRS is the enforcement arm of Obamacare, the FairTax would completely remove the teeth from Obamacare. So we could kill two birds with one stone. As I've said before, the FairTax isn't perfect. But I don't think I've ever seen a bill come out of Congress that was perfect. The FairTax will, however, rid us of the most despised government agency in our history and that takes from government the biggest hammer that they have used to beat us. Without an IRS and thousands of tax lobbyists, we the people actually stand a chance of taking our government back.

The FairTax is not a cure-all. But it is a cure-a-lot that paves the way for more legislation that will return the government to the people. The FairTax is a first step and it's within our reach.

As for reading court cases, I've read many. It's very difficult. Furthermore, even when I thought I had things figured out, I once had an attorney explain that a certain phrase used in the right place had the legal effect of completely reversing the meaning of the whole decision. I forget the exact phrase right now, but it's kind of like the term in a contract, "the above notwithstanding", which effectively nullifies everything that went before and starts the contract over from that point. Now, I read court decisions with a jaundiced eye.

[Robert Holtzclaw]

John, we are singing from the same sheet of music.  But slipping something by the "Masters" with an end-run, eg, an Amendment, will be difficult if not impossible.