Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 258

Thread: Tax Expert Says Employers Withholding Federal Income Tax is Illegal. Here’s Why.

  1. #1

    Tax Expert Says Employers Withholding Federal Income Tax is Illegal. Here’s Why.

    Those of us in the Tax Honesty Movement has been arguing this for years, for years, for DECADES!

    Tax Expert Says Employers Withholding Federal Income Tax is Illegal. Here’s Why.

    The productive spirit of the American worker dies a little bit every time he looks at his pay stub and sees a healthy portion of his wage go down the black hole of Federal Income Tax withholding.

    Yet millions of Americans are not aware that Chapter 24 withholding is not required by private-sector employers. With the proper declaration paperwork provided to an employer’s payroll department, there should be nothing taken out of an employee’s paycheck for Federal Income Tax.

    The Internal Revenue Manual 5.14.10.2.2 (2004) (IRM) states:

    “Private employers, states, and political subdivisions are not required to enter into payroll deduction agreements (meaning Form W-4). Taxpayers should determine whether their employers will accept and process executed agreements before agreements are submitted for approval or finalized.”

    Shocking to many Americans is the existence of those who are lawful American non-taxpayers as stated by the Federal Appellate Court case in 1972: “They (the revenue laws) relate to taxpayers, and not to non-taxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law.” Thus, the IRM section only applies as a ‘procedure’ for those who are legal U.S. Taxpayers and does not apply to Americans who are lawful nontaxpayers.

    For private-sector employers, withholding exemptions presented by employees must be accepted, according to 26 USC 3402(n) which explicitly states:

    “Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, an employer shall not be required to deduct and withhold any tax under this chapter upon a payment of wages to an employee if there is in effect with respect to such payment a withholding exemption certificate (in such form and containing such other information as the Secretary may prescribe) furnished to the employer by the employee certifying that the employee:

    (1) incurred no liability for income tax imposed under subtitle A for his preceding taxable year, and

    (2) anticipates that he will incur no liability for income tax imposed under subtitle A for his current taxable year.”

    The IRS Form 8233 is the mechanism to accomplish this exemption from withholding. It is filled out by the employee and must be accepted by a private-sector employer. The form is available for download here.

    “Many people may gloss over this form since it mentions terms like ‘nonresident alien,’ ‘personal services,’ and ‘United States,’ ” says Adele Weiss, founder of Weiss+Associates, a European-based consultancy firm specializing in the Federal Income Tax. “Once people understand the definitions of these terms, they know that Form 8233 applies to them if they work in the private sector in the 50 states of the Union.”

    The existence of this form, coupled with the fact that it is up to the private-sector employee to fill out and hand it to the private-sector employer, reinforces the fact that the Federal Income Tax is voluntary as do many other laws and federal documents. Additionally, the Social Security Administration clearly states that a Social Security Number is not required to work in the Constitutional Republic:

    “The Social Security Act does not require a person to have a Social Security Number to live and work in the United States. … However, if someone works without a Social Security Number, we cannot properly credit the earnings for the work performer, and the worker may lose any potential entitlement to Social Security benefits.”

    As Weiss aptly points out, Americans need to know the definitions of terms, especially ‘United States,’ which has two definitions. The first definition is the colloquial term used in the Constitution meaning the 50 states of the Union. The second term is a legal, statutory expression meaning the corporate entity consisting of the District of Columbia and U.S. territories like Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. When the IRS uses the term ‘United States,’ unless specifically defined otherwise, it means only the statutory definition (Federal Zone). Weiss expounds:

    “Once Americans realize this singular fact, then they also realize that there are two very different meanings of the term ‘U.S. Citizen.’ The first is the constitutional U.S. Citizen — people born in the 50 states and protected by the U.S.Constitution and Bill of Rights — and the other is a statutory ‘U.S. Citizen,’ which describes people born in D.C. or its territories. These people do not possess constitutional rights and are essentially subjects of Congressional monarchy.”

    Constitutional U.S. Citizens are termed by the National Government as ‘nonresident alien individuals,’ as they are nonresident to the District of Columbia/territories and are alien to its municipal rules.

    ‘Personal Services’ is a unique term and is addressed at IRC 861(a)(3): “…labor or services performed in the United States shall not be deemed to be income from sources within the United States if — (C) the compensation is for labor or services performed as an employee of or under a contract with — (i) a nonresident alien … not engaged in a trade or business within the United States.” The term ‘trade or business’ means “the performance of the functions of a public office” per IRC 7701(a)(26), which is another way of saying: one who works for the federal government. Weiss adds:

    “Simply put, if any American does not work for the government, their labor or services performed in the 50 states of the Union are not taxable. This is fully supported by the 16th Amendment’s omission of the Rule of Apportionment.”

    In putting this all together, it’s easy to see that Form 8233 is a tool for sovereign Americans living and working in the private sector in the 50 states to eliminate any Chapter 24 withholding for the Federal Income Tax.

    “Unfortunately, a few employers are still very uninformed when it comes to the Federal Income Tax and their role in it,” remarked Weiss, who has over 25 years’ experience with the Federal Income Tax. “It’s up to the sovereign American National to educate their employer if they insist on withholding when withholding is not required. In this case, employers are actually breaking the law in what constitutes forced labor.”

    Of course, a key element in clarifying an American’s true status is filing a Revocation of Election, a document Weiss’ firm provides to qualified clients to remove them from the U.S. Tax Club for the current tax year plus all future years.

    The completed Revocation of Election, a legal process provided to all American Nationals by the U.S. Congress, provides the proof that the American National did not have any income tax liability for the preceding tax year, and that American National does not anticipate having an income tax liability for the current year. (See text at the top of this story regarding 26 USC 3402n [1] and [2]).
    http://constitution.com/tax-expert-e...-forced-labor/
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Not having money withheld towards taxes does not mean the IRS won't want their cut at the end of the year. Just means you have to come up with it in one lump sum.

    From the article:
    For private-sector employers, withholding exemptions presented by employees must be accepted, according to 26 USC 3402(n) which explicitly states:

    “Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, an employer shall not be required to deduct and withhold any tax under this chapter upon a payment of wages to an employee if there is in effect with respect to such payment a withholding exemption certificate (in such form and containing such other information as the Secretary may prescribe) furnished to the employer by the employee certifying that the employee:

    (1) incurred no liability for income tax imposed under subtitle A for his preceding taxable year, and

    (2) anticipates that he will incur no liability for income tax imposed under subtitle A for his current taxable year
    .”


    "How To": http://budgeting.thenest.com/tempora...eck-24349.html

    How to Temporarily Stop Withholding from a Paycheck

    You can stop withholding from your paycheck by completing a new Form W-4 -- "Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate." This will stop income tax from being withheld from your check, but not Social Security and Medicare taxes, which are mandatory and cannot be stopped by you or your employer. Some states impose other mandatory tax withholdings, such as state disability insurance. If you live in a state that has required deductions other than income tax, the mandatory withholdings may remain in effect.


    Step 1
    Download Form W-4 from IRS website.

    Step 2
    Complete lines 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the top section of the Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate. Don’t complete the personal allowances worksheet. That section is necessary only for calculating the number of allowances you wish to claim. When you stop withholding, no allowances are used because you have no income tax withholding to calculate.

    Step 3
    Write “Exempt” on line 7 if both of the following statements accurately describe your situation: -- For the previous tax year, you had a right to a refund of all federal income tax withheld because you had no tax liability. -- For the current tax year you expect a refund of all federal income tax withheld because you expect to have no tax liability.

    Step 4
    Sign the form and give it to your employer. If your state also imposes income tax, ask your employer if you need an additional form to stop state withholding. Most employers use your Form W-4 form to calculate state withholdings, so it is possible that another form isn’t necessary.
    Also note I found at another link describing this: http://www.geeksonfinance.com/how_20...ng-income.html

    However, to qualify for exemption, you cannot make more than $850 annually.
    Warnings
    If you reduce your withholding by too much or stop it altogether, you must pay quarterly estimated taxes the IRS.
    Or you can try to declare yourself a private contractor. You are still liable for the taxes though (and now 100% instead of half of the Social Security taxes).
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 04-12-2016 at 12:36 AM.

  4. #3
    Not having money withheld towards taxes does not mean the IRS won't want their cut at the end of the year. Just means you have to come up with it in one lump sum.
    Neither does having money withheld, in itself, make you liable for income taxes.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    Neither does having money withheld, in itself, make you liable for income taxes.
    About 45% of people who filed income taxes owed no net income tax this year. (can't get around the Social Security tax though)

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    About 45% of people who filed income taxes owed no net income tax this year. (can't get around the Social Security tax though)
    Yes you can, so far as employees are concerned, FICA are voluntary entitlement programs.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  7. #6
    Wasn't withholding originally implemented as only a "temporary" WWII effort, to help with the government's cash flow challenges?

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Wasn't withholding originally implemented as only a "temporary" WWII effort, to help with the government's cash flow challenges?
    Yes
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Wasn't withholding originally implemented as only a "temporary" WWII effort, to help with the government's cash flow challenges?
    Yes
    Withholding was originally introduced in the Revenue Act of 1913, but it was repealed in 1917.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    Yes you can, so far as employees are concerned, FICA are voluntary entitlement programs.
    The person telling you that is lying to you. If you make over $600 per year, you are required to "contribute."

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    Yes
    the income tax as we know it was created to pay the fed reserve for their scam system.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Wasn't withholding originally implemented as only a "temporary" WWII effort, to help with the government's cash flow challenges?
    But not as a cash flow issue.

    It was used as a wage and price control.

    As defense contractors started bidding for the shrinking pool of skilled workmen during the war years, The FedGov became worried that the wage war would bid up defense prices too high.

    So they concocted this "temporary" measure to cut into your pay to make it worthless to work more overtime or at higher wage.

    That's why withholding is "progressive" and calculated on last dollar earned.

    That's also why employer provided "benefits" such as health care came into being, and thus monkey $#@!ed the health care and insurance markets into the mess we are dealing with now.

  14. #12
    It was also to force compliance and hide how much is being taken.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    It was also to force compliance and hide how much is being taken.
    Bring back door to door tax collections, all in one cash lump sum every year. Casualty rates for the collectors probably wouldn't be too high.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Casualty rates for the collectors probably wouldn't be too high.
    Is there a scenario where they would be?
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    Is there a scenario where they would be?
    All collections must be in pennies?

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    It was also to force compliance and hide how much is being taken.
    It's not hidden very well when it's spelled out on a person's paycheck stub.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    I have not filed, nor payed, a state or federal income tax in six years. I am a conscientious objector to the policies my income tax would bring about. I wish everyone would also do so. I do understand that not everyone is in my position. It is a hard and bitter pill for most to swallow given their particular situation. For me it took doing what I knew best which is handy-man work. I am not licensed. In today's world that can be an impediment, but surprisingly it can be liberating. I do not work for a wage. I trade for a living.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    The person telling you that is lying to you. If you make over $600 per year, you are required to "contribute."
    Negative, the people compelling you to "contribute" are operating solely by the decrees of the IRS' own Pub. 15/Circular E and 15-A/Supplemental. They are themselves obtuse and lack any legal background whatsoever. Only specifically defined classes of persons are "required" to either contribute or "contribute."
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    Withholding was originally introduced in the Revenue Act of 1913, but it was repealed in 1917.
    He means the constitutional scandal of 1942 (i.e., Current Tax Payment Act of 1943), and you know it. Moreover, $3,000 in 1913 is about $70,000 today, thereby only 2% of the population even paid the income tax at all during that period--and the rate was a small fraction of what it is today. Face it, the federal government is raging, spiraling out of control!
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    He means the constitutional scandal of 1942 (i.e., Current Tax Payment Act of 1943), and you know it. Moreover, $3,000 in 1913 is about $70,000 today, thereby only 2% of the population even paid the income tax at all during that period--and the rate was a small fraction of what it is today. Face it, the federal government is raging, spiraling out of control!
    Yep.

    http://www.dailyjobsupdate.com/publi...ng-tax-history
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    It's not hidden very well when it's spelled out on a person's paycheck stub.
    It is hidden in that it is silently taken from your employer (i.e., payer) on behalf of money never at anytime possessed or controlled by you--thus you are in-fact being taxed on a portion of money never intended for you to receive or even behold and thus violates the principles embedded in quid pro quo and your rights to establish private contracts. Dr. Adam Smith was clear on the correct procedure, such tact when implemented, is to be paid by the employer's pockets on the behalf of their employees.

    1. You are only making that sum on paper only, but only actually receive a lesser sum in reality.
    2. You loose rights to establish interest on that sum until it is actually due at the close of the tax-year.
    3. This renders the process as unethical and immoral as it is demoralizing and sordid.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  25. #22
    Need more threads like this one, less MSM fluff.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    Negative, the people compelling you to "contribute" are operating solely by the decrees of the IRS' own Pub. 15/Circular E and 15-A/Supplemental. They are themselves obtuse and lack any legal background whatsoever. Only specifically defined classes of persons are "required" to either contribute or "contribute."
    Sigh. The statute you quoted, 5.14.10.2.2, doesn't even say what your cite say it says. Here's the manual: https://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-014-010.html#d0e64

    Here's what it actually says: 5.14.10.2 (01-22-2015)
    Payroll Deduction Agreements



    1. The use of Form 2159, Payroll Deduction Agreement, must be strongly encouraged when the taxpayer is a wage earner, particularly if the taxpayer defaulted on a previous installment agreement.
    2. Streamlined installment agreements with aggregate unpaid balance of assessments (UBA) between $25,001 and $50,000 require either a payroll deduction agreement or direct debit as the method of payment.

    Additionally, the form 2159 is not related to current income tax withholding.

    It is used by taxpayers with a large debt for previous years who agree to make automatic payments against that debt via payroll deduction. You, as an employer, have no obligation to service the employee's debt on behalf of the IRS though.
    Last edited by angelatc; 04-19-2016 at 12:22 PM.

  27. #24
    What if one is not a "taxpayer", angelatc? "Taxpayer" has a specific definition, therefore the text you quoted applies only to someone that is defined as a "taxpayer". Weston's OP specifically mentions this distinction.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    Negative, the people compelling you to "contribute" are operating solely by the decrees of the IRS' own Pub. 15/Circular E and 15-A/Supplemental. They are themselves obtuse and lack any legal background whatsoever. Only specifically defined classes of persons are "required" to either contribute or "contribute."
    So, what you're saying is that, even though the IRS requires people to do something, it may still be the case that they are not required to do it.

    Did I get that right?

  30. #26
    This is correct. The income tax for persons is bogus. But, don't tangle the irs. They are above the law without remorse.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by kfarnan View Post
    This is correct. The income tax for persons is bogus. But, don't tangle the irs. They are above the law without remorse.
    I agree. And the same can be said for the everything the state does. It is all bogus, but the state acts as an entity above the law. So doing what it tells you to is often advisable, bogus or not.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    What if one is not a "taxpayer", angelatc? "Taxpayer" has a specific definition, therefore the text you quoted applies only to someone that is defined as a "taxpayer". Weston's OP specifically mentions this distinction.
    Nothing I can say will convince you that the law exists. The entire argument presented above is wrong, because the statue it is talking about is not about income taxes, it's about collecting debts owed to the IRS. Stop moving the goalposts. Either address that point, or go away.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    So, what you're saying is that, even though the IRS requires people to do something, it may still be the case that they are not required to do it.

    Did I get that right?
    What is your definition of "people"?

    Requires some to do something. Others are not required. Words have definitions and in all things statutory/regulatory the definition of words is what matters. Your definition of a word may not be (and probably is not) what the legal definition is.

    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    Nothing I can say will convince you that the law exists. The entire argument presented above is wrong, because the statue it is talking about is not about income taxes, it's about collecting debts owed to the IRS. Stop moving the goalposts. Either address that point, or go away.
    That sound you just heard was the -point flying right over your head-.

    Carry on "taxpayer".
    Last edited by devil21; 04-19-2016 at 12:40 PM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    Need more threads like this one, less MSM fluff.
    Better MSM fluff than scammers like Adele Weiss.

    If you go to this clown's website you find that he claims that one who receives a Notice of Deficiency (a "NOD") from the IRS can use his methods (for a fee, of course) to use the Tax Court to win:

    "We accomplish our objective by securing a Court Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction — against the IRS and in your favor — from the United States Tax Court in Washington, D.C.
    What this charlatan doesn't tell you is that the only way to get the Tax Court involved is for the person who received the NOD to file a petition with the court. If the petition is filed too late (more than 90 days after the NOD) or if the filing fee isn't paid, guess what? The court dismisses the petition for lack of jurisdiction, which means the poor schmuck who bought into this snake oil loses. He loses his opportunity to contest the IRS's determination without having to pay the tax in advance, and unless he does pay he'll have his property levied on. It's no surprise that this outfit is based in Europe and refuses to give out an address or phone number.

    http://www.weissparis.com/
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast


Posting Permissions

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