Dodging income tax

Nate K

Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
1,009
Do any of you not pay it? I've seen in some films that there is no law, etc.

But i guess there is a law and the states didn't ratify and it's all scrambled up and nobody knows wtf is going on. So is there any way to not pay it, and if you don't do you get thrown in jail?
 
Nate,

The people who don't likely won't answer you in a public forum due to certain legal issues.

And yes, I believe that most people who don't get jail and stiff fines if they get caught. Not sure though.
 
You don't have to tell me if you don't then, just what method could you use?
 
My dad and mom pay them to avoid a court room and prison term.

Aaron Russo: Is there a law that requires people to file a 1040?
Ron Paul: Not explicitly, but it's certainly implied.
Aaron Russo: Well, implied by force?
Ron Paul: Yeah.
Aaron Russo: But is there a law?
Ron Paul: I can't cite a law, no. But, you know, if they think it's the law, and they have all the guns, it's an authoritarian approach.
 
You don't have to tell me if you don't then, just what method could you use?

There IS NO LAW [requiring the average person to pay INCOME TAX nor requiring them to FILE, the poblem lies in a duplicitus court and law enforcement agencies that don't realize the fact that they are helping enforce a "law" that doesn't exist. Kinda like Ron Paul said in his interview with Aaron Russo..."they have more guns". Part of the reason I'm sure that they have "laws" against extortion is help assure NO competition. So...except for Dr. Ron Paul, we know what the attraction, for most , to remaining in politics. As we know, most of them wind up giving in to the way things are done, and don't speak out against the corruption, for fear of having to actually go back home and earn a living. /I]
 
The 16th Amendmend of the Constitution authorizes the Congress to be able to institute a tax on income. Some people mistakenly believe that this amendment was not properly ratified, but the courts have upheld that it was. Legally you can avoid income taxes by earning below a certain level of income. Otherwise you have to join the rest of us in paying. Or as someone else suggested, work off the books and have whomever you work for pay you in cash or goods.
 
You can set your assets in a tax exempt foundation or work under the table.

All my businesses will be nonprofit. Heh. Nonprofits will be the only successful start up business if we get hit with high taxes and inflation.

Certain funds are tax exempt.

I believe you can also be paid in the face value of u.s. coins.

So if your 2 week pay is 1000 thousand dollars I would try greasing your employer's wheels about getting paid in a 1 ounce 10 dollar gold coin..

The key is legal tax avoidance.

There are books on tax avoidance. I've got to read them soon!

Can't decide which one though..
 
Last edited:
Few seem to understand what should be considered income. Working does not produce income. It is a simple trade of services for compensation, no income was made.
 
Few seem to understand what should be considered income. Working does not produce income. It is a simple trade of services for compensation, no income was made.

Maybe you ought to indulge us a bit and tell us what your definition of income is.

Not that I enjoy supporting the income tax, but what IS income if money that comes "IN" from working ISN'T?

Game show prize money? Money you find in a bag in the attic of a really old house you just moved into? Birthday card money?

I mean, how is money that comes in to you for work being performed not considered "income"?
 
Maybe you ought to indulge us a bit and tell us what your definition of income is.

Not that I enjoy supporting the income tax, but what IS income if money that comes "IN" from working ISN'T?

Game show prize money? Money you find in a bag in the attic of a really old house you just moved into? Birthday card money?

I mean, how is money that comes in to you for work being performed not considered "income"?

Income is what is derived from business. The 16th amendment was expressly made to collect a tax on the income derived from business, not the trade of work for compensation.

When you work, you are trading your time and skills for compensation.
When a business sells things, it gets an income from the profits it derives from that business.

There is no profit being made from trading your time and skills for compensation.

In reality, they should have called it a profit tax.
 
Income is what is derived from business. The 16th amendment was expressly made to collect a tax on the income derived from business, not the trade of work for compensation.

When you work, you are trading your time and skills for compensation.
When a business sells things, it gets an income from the profits it derives from that business.

There is no profit being made from trading your time and skills for compensation.

In reality, they should have called it a profit tax.

I see what you're saying. 2 parties agree on an amount of work to be performed, and what the worthwhile amount of money to trade for that work should be.

Don't get me wrong on me challenging you a bit there, I happen to agree. But most people don't think like that. Work is considered more of a mandate to live, and the money is just your income from doing that work.

What bothers me, is that you can tie money up in a Roth IRA for your whole life, and then cash it in at retirement and take a pretty nice profit TAX FREE. Now, why when that is profit, AND INCOME, is it not taxed, but the work I traded someone for Federal Reserve Notes IS?

The worst part about it is, if Americans as a whole woke up and collectively boycotted the income tax, it would all be over.
 
One could argue though, that profit is derived from work being performed.

For example, the typical local going rate to have your particular sized home's exterior painted is $5,000. You happen to get someone to agree to having it done for $7,000. You made a profit, because that work was PROBABLY worth less than $7,000.

Am I grasping at straws here?
 
One could argue though, that profit is derived from work being performed.

For example, the typical local going rate to have your particular sized home's exterior painted is $5,000. You happen to get someone to agree to having it done for $7,000. You made a profit, because that work was PROBABLY worth less than $7,000.

Am I grasping at straws here?

Then shouldn't the painter be charged tax on the $2,000 rather than the $7,000 he was paid?
 
Absolutely right, my friend. But it takes courage.

Not only courage, but getting the masses to do anything in whole is nearly impossible. Especially if they have been doing something else their entire lives.
 
Back
Top