The Personal Income tax proves that you are a serf.

In the old world collecting tribute was more dangerous. Today the people actually think it is their duty to pay their masters.

In the old world collecting tribute was dangerous because the people were much more restless. Today the people actually think it is their duty to pay their masters.

Today, in honor of our annual tax tribute day, I am going to explain something very fundamental to you about your “income tax”.  And then I am going to make a modest proposal.

My argument uses their own rules. Thus, if the argument I make is not sufficient to carry the day for any change, then there is ZERO point going any further down the rabbit hole to discuss the difference between income and “wages”, or whether or not the code includes only foreigners, or whether it was properly ratified etc.  and on and on. The upshot of each of those types of arguments is that you somehow “don’t owe any tax” because of magic words and hidden meanings.  That is not realistic. 

The tax is owed, because the king says it is owed.  The subjects must pay the king because the king has the guns.  It is the height of absurdity to think the king will forego his tribute because of magic words.  

But this tax situation does provide a “teaching moment” to let you see where you really stand in this “free” country.  So I will do my best to make lemonade.

To understand my argument you need to understand a couple very fundamental tax concepts.  Gross income versus Net income, and the concept of how you get from gross to net which is basis and deductions.  Our rulers have set up the system, so those are the rules we will use.

If you’re already rolling your eyes at the terms I just used and are saying to yourself that this is going to be “too complicated” and “you can’t do math” then best of luck to you.  You have no chance.

I've started using common core math to calculate what I owe on my 1040. I love it!

I’ve started using common core math to calculate what I owe on my 1040. I love it!

Under the Tax code income is either gross or net.  Above the line or below the line in the vernacular.  “Income tax” is assessed on Net income.

Businesses are not taxed on gross income because they would all go out of business. Think about grocery stores, they operate on very slim “margins”.  Most make a net of roughly 2% of sales.  So for every 100k in sales, i.e. Gross income, they “net” after expenses, 2k.  If the taxable rate was assessed on their “gross income” then even a 2% rate would mean that there was NOTHING left over.  Because 2% of 100k is 2k.

The tax is assessed on the net, so even if the rate is 50% on the net, the tax owed is only 1k, because 50% of 2k is 1k.

If you can’t follow this example, then again, you can’t be helped.

So gross income is the amount that “came in” and “net income” is the amount you have left over after paying the “allowable deductions”.

The next concept you need to understand is basis. It has to do with what you own.  Here is what the IRS says about it.

“In most situations, the basis of an asset is its cost to you. The cost is the amount you pay for it in cash, debt obligations, and other property or services.”

Deductions are the basic expenses you incur in obtaining a profit such as the rent and salaries the grocery store paid. 

Now let’s look at a simple example of how these interact in practice to the very limited extent necessary to make my point as to the income tax on your wage.

Let’s say you have a business that makes money by letting people dump their “vote Hillary” signs into its holes after the election.  Clearly the first thing the business has to have is holes.  It can buy the right to use holes that already exist or it can dig new holes.  They both cost money.

I know it seems a bit extravagant, but my accountant said it was fully deductible, and a great hedge against a turbulent market. Plus the chicks seem to dig it.

I know it seems a bit extravagant, but my accountant said it was fully deductible, and I think it really “sets off the room.”   Plus the chicks seem to dig it.

Now whether the company hires men to dig the hole with shovels, or whether it rents a back hoe, either way it gets to deduct that cost.  It doesn’t matter if you purchase labor or capital.  They are both deductible.  That is important.

They both represent a cost incurred to obtain something of VALUE.  The company in effect turns some of its money (which has value) into another form of value, i.e. the hole.  It is simply an exchange.  In effect, it is a sort of mutation of the value the company already owns, from money to hole. 

Think of it like this.  If they have $1,000.00 of start up capital and they didn’t dig the hole or spend it then there is no taxable event because they own that money, i.e. they have a $1,000.00 basis in their $1,000.00.  Clear?

When they choose to dig the hole they exchange the $1,000.00 in money for the $1,000.00 in labor and thus there is no tax consequence because they have exchanged things of equal value.  They now have a hole worth a basis of $1,000.00.  I’m simplifying of course, but you should get the idea.

There are numerous other examples of exchanges where there is no tax consequence because the exchange is of things of equal value, i.e. where your basis is the same.

If I trade you my boat for your boat and both boats are the same value, there is no gain and thus no tax consequence. If I sell you a boat I already own for the same amount I bought the boat for, then again, there is NO GAIN and thus no income to tax.  When you buy a stock and it goes up in value.  You only pay tax on the difference between what you paid for it (your basis) and what you sold it for (your net profit). You don’t pay tax on the total price of the stock, only on the gain or loss.  Got it?

Those are simplified examples of the concept of “basis” as that term is defined in the tax code. You only get taxed on the gain or “income” over and above what you already own.

Now when someone pays to dump a Hillary sign into the hole, that is Gross income for the company.  The Net income is reached by deducting out what it costs to operate the company and the “basis” (or the value of the hole) is slowly eaten up as it is filled.  Of course all of this is necessarily simplified.

So now that we have the fundamentals lets look at how it applies to your “income” which is a wage or salary that you then have to pay “income tax’ on and I will show you where the problem is.

The genius behind the latest IPO called A**Holes is shown here in one of his early prototypes. Later perfected the company is now valued at 23 billion. This is how you do it in america. They are just smarter than you.

The genius behind the latest IPO called “Holes R Us” is shown here sitting in one of his early prototypes. He later allegedly perfected and patented his idea for a “cloud based hole digging system” the company is now valued at 23 billion.  He wrote a bestselling “business strategy book” as well  titled “do what you love and the money will come”.  Brilliant, according to the NY Times.   He responds to critics who say that nobody has ever actually built a cloud based hole yet by telling them that he is a visionary and that they don’t understand his vision. 

To the extent your wage or salary is “income” at all, it is simply “gross income”.  The IRS defines it as such.  “The Internal Revenue Code states that “gross income means all income from whatever source derived.”

Individuals have certain “allowable” deductions available to them.  Remember that distinction, it is critical.  “Deductions”, credits and “exemptions” are how congress controls individuals and businesses to make them do things they want and to not do other things, and to reward their benefactors and to punish their enemies.  The deductions are things like housing, medical expense, kids, interest, and on and on.

We are now ready to see the problem. So lets go back to the hole digging analysis. 

Say you were one of 10 people they hired to dig their $1,000.00 hole and they paid you $100. What is the tax consequence under the code? Simple, the company writes off the $100 as an expense, and you pay tax on the $100 you received as “income”.

Do you see the problem yet?

Does your employer pay you more than you are worth? No.  By definition if he did that it would be a GIFT.  He is paying you for the VALUE/basis of the work you provided.  That value/basis IS YOUR WORK.  Do you not own your own labor and thus that $100 of value you provided??

Ahh, that’s the rub.  The “allowable” rub.  Who gets the benefit of “owning” the labor you provided??  The STATE.

You see the government tax code does not “allow” you to deduct out the value or “cost basis” of the labor you provided.  It “allows” the business to deduct it when it has to pay for it, but it does not “allow” YOU to deduct it when you sell it!

Think about what that means.  You created the value with your time and life and expertise, just like every other piece of work you perform.  It is YOUR LIFE. But the State, in effect,  claims that value for itself and makes you pay tax on it!

How? Through the POLICY DECISION to not “allow” you the deduction. It is not a mistake. It is not a misunderstanding.  The state knows exactly what it is doing!  

Think about it.  If you hadn’t worked and had chosen instead to simply sit at home and play a video game the business would not have paid you because the work value would not have come into existence.  There would have been nothing to tax you on because there would have been no exchange.

I found that digging holes was a lot more satisfying than practicing law. And I could actually use the hole when I finished. So win, win.

I found that digging holes was a lot more satisfying than practicing law. And I could actually use the hole when I finished. So win, win. Here my partner and I test our custom holes. 

But you did work. You spent your time and effort and life, and it had a value of $100.  You EXCHANGED something you own, part of your life, for the $100.  The basis you have in the labor expended is set when you are paid for it.   It is boat for boat! They are identical. By Definition!

Just as the business had equal basis in the money it paid you and it was simply an exchange for equal value labor and therefore they get to deduct the paid amount.  On the flip side the labor you provided, which YOU OWN, was an exchange for something of EQUAL VALUE, the $100 they owned and paid you.  Boat for boat.

Do you see it yet?

There are only two possibilities of how to analyze this transaction UNDER THEIR OWN RULES and each of them produce a zero tax consequence exchange for both parties

One, you have a basis of $100 in the labor you provided and so it is an even exchange, boat for boat.

Or two, you received $100 in gross income for your labor, and you  should be “allowed” to deduct out that same amount because you chose to produce $100 of labor that YOU OWNED.  Thus the net income SHOULD BE zero, no tax consequence either way.

If you still can’t see it then think of it like this.  A business must pay salary to employees in order to make a profit.  They get to deduct out the cost of that labor they buy and the employee sells because it has value. The exact same analysis applies to you when you work for yourself.  You own and provide the value that is exchanged for an equal amount of money.  There is no net income left over, by definition.  

In the past I spent a lot of time talking to my fellow citizens about the inequity of the system. But they seemed to think I was the problem. A trouble maker I think they said. They used to tell me to stick to the mud, the mud is your friend. I never did adapt.

In the past I spent a lot of time talking to my fellow citizens about the inequity of the system. But they seemed to think I was the problem. A trouble maker I think they said. They used to tell me to stick to the mud, and the mud will stick to you.  I never did understand why anyone would seek that outcome. 

 The logic is unavoidable.  The only reason it isn’t the same in practice, is because the government does not “allow” you the deduction for your own time and life. 

By not “allowing” YOU the deduction, the government is telling all of its subjects that they do not own their own life and labor. That the State owns your life and labor.  There is NO OTHER EXPLANATION USING THEIR OWN RULES.

We know that it has value, because they “allow” the business to deduct what it must pay for it.

If it had zero value, then the businesses could NOT DEDUCT THE WAGES AND SALARIES THEY PAID YOU.  But they do allow them to deduct them because they do have VALUE.  The exact amount of value you received is the amount you gave and the exact amount they deduct.

They just don’t allow you to benefit from owning the value YOU CREATE THROUGH  YOUR WORK.

Do you finally see it?

It isn’t complicated and the logic is inescapable. 

It matters not whether you call the money received from your labor a wage or income.  It is still just GROSS income.  The government denies you the right to the value of your own labor, which it grants to the businesses who get its benefit.

Once you understand this you will see how the government actually views you. You are a serf.  Serfs and peasants pay a tax on their wage because they are owned and bound to their master and do not own their own labor.  You are taxed just like a serf. 

If and when you finally understand this simple concept you will take a big step in understanding what your government actually is and who it actually serves.

You may need to read it several times but the concept is simple, elegant, and the conclusion is unavoidable.  And once you see it you will be amazed you never saw it before.

She knew the law. She made it clear that I was only "paying for her time" what happened between us was consensual. So I went with it cause she was really my type.

She knew the law on entrapment, she wasn’t about to take any chance that I was “L.E.”  She made it clear that I was only “paying for her time” what happened between us was consensual. So I went with it cause she was really my type.

The solution I propose does not deprive the government of its precious “revenue” it claims to need and that the duped peasants all imagine is “necessary”.  That would be pointless.  They are going to take whatever they want. 

But it could ease our burden. And if nothing else, once you see how simple it is, and how they will not even do something this simple and fair, perhaps you will take another step to understanding what your government actually is.

Now back to the hole.

Remember, you can hire 10 guys to dig the ditch or you can rent a back hoe.  Purchasing labor is no different than purchasing capital.  They are the same.

When you buy an item the purchaser pays the tax.  That is always the case. Even in a “sales tax” all the seller does is collect the tax for the government. The buyer pays the tax.

So, here is my simple solution to the sort this problem out.


Make the labor buyer pay the tax like the buyer always does. No more keeping track of anything. No more complex deductions etc. to try and get.  You just get a check for the amount you agree to work for. And if you hire labor you pay the tax for hiring that labor.

It is that simple. “Justice” is restored and their system of rules is now consistent.  We the people are no longer their serfs.

If you employ someone for 100K then they get a check for 100k.  Period.  The employer “wage purchaser” is on the hook for whatever the additional amount of tax the government demands on the 100k purchase.

If the employer can only afford a total outlay of 100k for “the job”, then he can only pay your whatever is left over from the calculation of what he will pay you plus whatever is owed as sales tax on that labor purchase.  If the taxable rate on 75K is 33% then he can pay you 75k.  Because he’s on the hook for another 25k on top when he pays the tax.  So 75k plus 25k is 100k  Got it?

I scored big on my last case and I went a bit over with the selfies. I was so proud

I am normally paid in cash for tax purposes.  I keep a record of course.  Here’s my last case. Not bad for 2 years.  Not bad.

It is simple. It doesn’t prevent the government from collecting its tribute. But it frees the people. They then own their own labor.  It converts the “income tax’ into what it should be a “sales tax” on labor and wages, paid by the purchaser. I’m not saying I like the tax code and the rates, but at least this makes them make sense.

I have studied this topic for a long time. I have never seen this simple solution presented anywhere else.  Not saying it hasn’t been, I’m just saying I’ve never seen it. I’ve also never heard it discussed.

Think of how much time and effort it would save you.  Think of the outrages and inequities it would save.

Now of course I know they will never do this because it would eliminate the real purposes for the tax code.  The control they exercise through the tax code. And the ability to strike fear into people.  That, and they get to sell favors to people and to punish those who don’t properly grease the wheels of justice.

But at least I hope you now see the concept.  The very simple undeniable concept that until they change the code, the government is making it clear that they own your life and time.  Period. 

And if you still think you are “free” and that this government is run of by and for the people, then honestly, you are so far gone into the patriotic delusion that you can’t be reached.   

By refusing to “ALLOW” the people the right to claim the value of their own work and life, the government, your ruler, is sending a very clear message to those who purchase and use government to exploit the people. And that message is this:

“We have our boots on the throats of the serfs we own and they are well under control. What do you propose to pay us for the privileges you seek?  We can do most anything you desire to the people for the right price.”

So that is all for now my fellow inmate. I hope you had a great tax tribute day and gave all you should and more to your lawful master.  I have given you simple but profound truths today.  Do with them as you care. I am done for now. 

Take care, move towards the light and tell someone the truth about the law.

And the truth shall set you free.

    And the truth shall set you free.


60 thoughts on “The Personal Income tax proves that you are a serf.

  1. Christopher Chapman

    Read 26 U.S.C. § 83, Here is the simplified version:
    If, in connection with the performance of services, property is transferred to any person other than the person for whom such services are performed, the excess of … the fair market value of such property … over … the amount (if any) paid for such property, shall be included in the gross income of the person who performed such services…

    1. Robert Holliger

      I totally agree with the conclusion reached, TAXING INCOME IS STEALING.

      I totally agree with the conclusion reached, TAXING INCOME IS A COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM.


      I conclude, since The 16th Amendment of The US Constitution states, “Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, …….”, THE ONLY WAY TO RIGHT OUR NATION’S SHIP OF STATE IS TO REPEAL THE 16th AMENDMENT OF THE US CONSTITUTION!!!!!


  2. SanityClaus

    They have no rules. They take what they want.
    Don’t make the mistake of thinking that vampires care what is right or reasonable. The money is fake. We are enslaved by the military that has pledged itself to the British Crown/N.A.T.O. . They are traitors. Federal reserve notes are military scrip.

  3. Jim

    Well written. Thank you. I would suggest there is another angle at work. Consider that prior to 1913 every supreme court ruling held that the income tax as we know it was unconstitutional. After 1913 they have put tax protestors in jail for using arguments that WON prior to 1913. The court listens, says: “that is all true, but you lose. Go to jail.” So what changed? Why are the same arguments no longer effective after 1913?
    I suggest to you it is because prior to 1913 Americans used real money. Gold and silver. However, beginning in 1913 we began using “Federal Reserve Notes”. “Notes” are in financial terminology, “Evidence of a debt”.
    So, in a completely bizarro fashion, the more of these Federal Reserve Notes you have, the more you owe the Federal Reserve Bank and it’s owners. You are using THEIR currency in commerce, so you owe them a rental fee. It is “fair” when you think about it, on a very primal level.
    So you go into the tax court arguing it is unconstitutional to tax us on our income! But all the prosecutor has to do is show the judge proof that you have USD bank account to prove that you owe a rental fee because you are using a privately issued currency which is clearly marked as a “NOTE”.
    You might make a great constitutional argument, but in the end, the judge hears you arguing something as silly as you should not have to pay rent to your landlord even though you are living in his house.
    You use the Fed’s currency, you owe them rent. Period.
    So, what is the escape, now that there is no real money available? No one owns gold and silver anymore? Barring a sudden introduction of gold and silver on a grand scale (unlikely), I suspect cryptocurrencies offer us our best exit strategy.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Yes Jim agreed there were many many changes around that time. And you’re right the validity of the arguments does not matter. They will be turned away. That’s why I don’t bother doing more on it. If you can’t win one as simple as the one I make, then you won’t win any. Lol. And we won’t win any. We are way too free to win any. Lol. — L

      1. Nicholas Landholdt

        Ten years before 1913, the traitors in Congress — probably many of the same ones who were around in 1913 — suppressed “the Militia of the several States”. So We the People were left w/o a means to end the coming tyranny. I’m running for Congress to assist in restoring 50 State Militias in order to end Usury. Like and Share my “Landholt for Congress” page on FB.

    2. Crocodile

      “…..Americans used real money. Gold and silver….”

      Jimmy, you forgot to mention gold and silver was the money of the Banksters. It always was. Go back in history and check it out yourself.
      Why do you think Germany needed to be smashed ?

      “Germany is getting too strong. We’ve got to smash her.” – Winston Churchill (1936)
      “We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not.” – Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)

      Why ?
      Because :

      “The prevailing financing system is no longer based on production capacity, and money as a mean of redistribution has become a commodity that can, like any other commodity, be bought and sold. Or, in other words: the disease that will cause the ruin of the world is called usury. France and England were allied to each other because both are built on the power of money and are under the domination of the international banking system. Germany has liberated herself from this international power and so becomes an object of suspicion. She is already working with the concept “value-labor” and that’s what we want to avoid at all costs. Already we are feverishly active in the destruction of this country. Financiers have nothing to lose in it and everything to gain.” – British General Fuller (1937)

      “Before the end of the year, an economic bloc of England, Russia, France and the U.S.A will be formed to bring the German and Italian economic systems to their knees.” – Paul Dreyfus, La Vie de Tanger (May 15, 1938)

      “Although Hitler may want to prevent this war, which can devour him, in the last moment, he will be forced to war anyway.” – Emil Ludwig Cohn (1938)

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        Whoa Crocodile third rail trigger warning on that. Lol. You know you must only speak of those things in the pre-approved way. Did you get clearance to go “off script” on that man? Lol. Of course everyone is welcome to investigate for themselves and to discuss any topic with any opinion. So long as you ultimately reach the conclusions that have been fully approved by the foundation of the entire post WWII world paradigm. This concludes our public service announcement from the ministry of truth. Enjoy the rest of your day comrades. — L

        1. Crocodile

          That message was definitely not approved by the ministry of truth, LegalMan.

          That’s because that kind of ideas are held by kooks only. LOL
          No serious people would consider this….. And you should not !

    3. DeBranco

      Here is information on the federal reserve notes/money…?
      Modern Money Mechanics; A Work Book on Bank Reserves and Deposits Expansion.
      It says; “What Makes Money Valuable? In the United States neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper, deposits merely book entries.”
      Mine; a dollar bill is a note, a note is a promise to pay, when? in the future. Like the Legal man says, a note is a debt instrument.

      1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

        Yes Jim no intrinsic value. The masses don’t seem to get that it is our freedom bombs and liberty drones that “create the value” the holy dollar is perceived to have. To the extent there is any real exceptionalism it is our ability to coerce the other people of the world and to fool the masses in this country at the same time. Lol. Take care. I hope to see some of you in the twittershere. — L

  4. Granny Jay

    John W. Benson ( no1040tax dot com ) covers cost basis of labor and your labor purchase sales tax idea. Buy the book. His student Roger Sayles covers citizenship, which Benson didn’t, and offers his own good book worth buying.

    Taxation by Misrepresentation
    ISBN 9781620302286
    John W. Benson

    In America, in 1895, the Supreme Court declared the income tax that Congress had enacted to be unconstitutional….Nevertheless, in 1909, Congress began to debate and consider imposing another tax on income….

    Congress could tax corporations and use their incomes as the basis to determine the amount of the tax. Accordingly, that is what Congress did in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909 (36 Stat. 112), and that Act forms the basis of the modern income tax system….

    To understand the true nature of the tax in IRC § 1, we must understand a little about the feudal law, a subject we Americans, laymen and lawyers alike, think is an antiquated relic of the dark ages. Were that it was so!…

    …outside the experts in the office of the Treasury Department who have seized upon these odious relics of ancient English law and carefully crafted them into the IRC in such a way so as to obscure them…

    Today’s income tax is the modern version of a feudal-law tallage. Subjection to that exaction is a condition of public service or employment. However, those who derive their income from occupations of right must voluntarily obligate themselves to that condition of servitude by some other contract. That contract is the Form 1040 statute staple….

    Consequently, the government has argued in the courts and the courts have accepted the concept that a working American has no cost-basis in his or her labor. That can only be the case if your labor doesn’t belong to you, but belongs to another. Who is the “other” who owns our labor? That’s easy to determine. Who has the right to tell us how much we may keep and how much we must “return” to the government? Have you ever wondered why they call it an income tax “return”?…

    Thus, the income tax is neither a direct nor an indirect tax. It is a property right of the government, as a feudal-law lord and master, in the labor and ownership of its chattel-serfs. This is what the individual income tax mirrors in the laws of England in 1791 and, therefore, that is its true constitutional nature and cannot be altered or affected by the title Congress has applied to it.

    Of course, in the case of the income tax, it is, and must be, a voluntary servitude, because the 13th Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude. Therefore, the liability to the income tax and servitude one agrees to on the Form 1040 can only be lawful if the taxpayer enters into that condition of servitude with the knowledge and intent required by law….

    You see, the entire makeup of the IRC so perfectly mirrors the Exchequer revenue processes in use in 1791 as to make it extremely unlikely that such perfect mirror-reflection occurred by accident. It is my belief, based upon years of research, that there exists within the Treasury Department a group of professionals who know and understand everything I have set forth in this book…

    However, the knowledge that those experts in the Treasury Department possess and have craftily employed has never surfaced to the American People…

    It is abundantly clear…the Drafters employed the statute staple process…to allow individuals to volunteer…all their income, even that income that would not have been taxable by the Federal Government under the Constitution….

    We are right back under the feudal law and conditions of involuntary servitude imposed upon all Englishmen almost a thousand years ago…

    Thus, if you volunteer into a condition of servitude for a year on a Form 1040 statute staple, conveying title to your labor to the government, you are in a master-servant, employer-employee relationship and the government allows you to work for anybody you want to. During that employment you are called the employee of the third party employer, but the proceeds from your labor is the property of the government.

    The government could require the third-party employer to pay all of it over to it, if it chose to do so. The government could then pay your wage directly, according to the tax tables set forth by Congress. However, that would pretty well reveal the “game,” don’t you agree?…

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thanks granny jay. I agree that they know what hey are doing. They know this whole scheme is laughable and can’t believe the people put up with it. They have contempt for the people it is quite obvious. They must feel that any group stupid enough to put up with the abuse they dish out has it coming.

      The only thing I ever disagree with in these kind of “voluntary agreement” arguments is that the agreements are not legally voluntary under any definition. All voluntary agreements must be knowing. And to the extent they are not they are not valid. And to the extent they become known and the person states they do not voluntarily agree then the “presumed agreement” disappears and the agreement is terminated. Since nobody is apprised of any right to refuse and in fact the opposite is clearly stated by the courts, i.e. That you must file and pay, the tax is not voluntary in any sense. So right back to he fact the fact that all of those elaborate arguments turn on being voluntary.

      But you can’t just make the word voluntary mean mandatory or intentionally concealed and keep calling it voluntary and have that “work” as a get around. So as usual I am in agreement as to 90 percent of the analysis but I differ with the way it is framed. That is the same for all of the organic constitution arguments as well.

      The tax is mandatory to the extent they can get other citizens with guns clubs and gas to break down your door and haul you off to hold you for show trials and punishment. So long as that group of citizens exists, and the other exploited group allows them to live among them at peace, well.. It is not voluntary. Lol. And it will never end as long as those conditions exist I see zero chance of that changing at this point. Law and order, so called, has been drilled into the serfs heads over centuries and the people in this country actually imagine that they are the height of freedom they are so deluded. So deluded in fact that they get angry when you suggest they are not free. So as usual we are back to step one. The only real defense is understanding and accepting reality and working within that.

      Thanks again for the info and the book references. — L

    2. O. Griffin

      Wow it is good to see other hard working who know the truth as well I will share this I unvolunteered in 1991
      and have not payed or filed 1040’s since both federal and state it wasn’t easy but doable.

  5. thedoctor

    I’m reminded of this quote, attributed to Edward Madell House, W. Wilson’s handler. Whether the he really said it beside the point. “

    [Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological
    property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will
    operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can
    compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a
    chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register
    or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They
    will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrup
    t and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their
    pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value
    designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a
    million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it
    out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all
    , this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form
    of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our
    wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or
    to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will
    insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will
    unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become
    helpless andwithout any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high
    office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against
    Every “dollar” BILL, says right on it, “Federal Reserve Note” and of course a Note is a debt. Why do rich people avoid cash, because it is DEBT, not Credit. Whose poor, people with a lot of cash… You dutifully pay back the “debt” with actual labor, true energy, in a manner which assures two things: The debt will never be paid off, ever, because the Banking Families do not accept Reserve Notes for debts owed and the paying back of the debt they demand keeps “inflation” in check assuring them monetary power as long as they keep these debt notes as the key note. I’ll say that again, the banking families DO NOT ACCEPT FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES FOR DEBTS OWED – you can’t pay an IOU with an IOU.

    As a side not, I find it Harriet Tubbman, slave, going on the 20. Each DEBT NOTE has the face of either a person who favored the Banking Families, or disfavored them. They have finally said their final FUCK YOU SLAVES to us all by putting an actual slave on the note. Glorious, because the slaves will cheer having on of their own on the very bills that have put them into serfdom.

    1. Alan Donelson

      I recommend celebrating Andrew Jackson’s demise from the fiat debt notes currently bearing his image.

      I have already ordered a commemorative poster, with a Jackson 20 signed by the artist, William Banzai 7, arguably in the top 5 of world class graphic artist and observers of current financial, social, and political planetscapes.
      WB7 to you: I already know this print looks spectacular framed. But my, wouldn’t it look great mounted with a Jackson FRN signed by the artist in a limited series? Inquiries:

      WB7’s work a great complement to Legalman’s essays!!

      I receive no kickbacks or other benefits from promoting this wonderful man’s work — which, I would dearly hope is familiar to each and all you readers already!!!!

  6. Absoluterights

    You have a new fan. I will come back often to read your thoughts:)

    Would like to point out that sales tax is laid on the retailer for the privilege of doing business at retail, not on the buyer. The retailer can increase his price to cover this expense (just like any other expense), but ultimately, the retailer is taxed and the responsible party.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      I’m glad to have you Absoluterights, and thank you. And yes you are correct that the way the transaction is technically structured is as you described. But explaining it for my purposes would be about as complicated as explaining the legal difference between “charging for using credit” versus “giving a discount for cash”. There are distinctions in the law for those concepts, but really almost impossible to explain to people.

      My only real point was to try and simplify the example down to the concept that the cost should be shifted, to the buyer. There is no reason in the world why the price of the tax should not be shifted to the buyer for labor. Especially since the outcome otherwise is unworkable, like we have. If shifted to the buyer it would simply be an invoice entry showing total price paid, and below that the tax for the labor that was added on and “paid” to the government. No need for withholdings of your wage. The “withholding” would be reversed and simply paid during the year as labor was bought. Quite simple. The king gets his money, and we no longer have to keep every scrap of paper to justify anything. And because it is simple and fair, we can be sure it will never happen. lol. And that was the real point of the article. To show people what the government really is. — L

      1. Absoluterights

        Another angle on why taxes prove we are owned:
        1) A tax is a non-consensual taking,
        2) The amount is decided by the taxer,
        3) The taxer has zero obligation to provide anything in return for the amount taken.

        Contrast this with fees:
        1) A fee is an amount charged for a consensual exchange,
        2) One can choose whether or not to buy the service,
        3) The party receiving the fee is obligated to provide the product/service in return.

        Totally different. One is robbery, one is a consensual exchange.

        On the same vein, government as a whole has ZERO obligation to provide anything to anyone.
        No obligation to protect,
        No obligation to provide infrastructure,
        No obligation to provide sustenance,
        No obligation to provide anything else the left and the right groan for. Yet it possesses this incredible power to take…as much as it wants, whenever it wants, however it wants.
        Disobey, and they will put you in a cage. Resist, and they will bury you in the dirt. And these entities are more than happy to do so 24/7.

        1. Alan Donelson

          Wonderful! I always liked this sort of thing in Geometry class in high school. More than one proof possible for a theorem! Like Common Core, but legit! Now that we agree on the basics, let’s proceed to the positive and solutions for the intransigent, contrarian individual.

          I recommend highly Jon Rappoport’s work — easily still found by searching the web. (For example, ) JR emphasizes the critical, essential role of the individual for self and others, the need to escape “The Matrix”, self-empowerment — no one here going to do it for you! I’d rather die creating (not just “trying”) than abjectly sacrificing for TPTB.

          1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

            I like Rappoport’s work too. He has a lot of passion. He seems to actually think we can turn the ship. I disagree of course. But I’m glad he’s a believer and out there pushing.

            On a separate note entirely, I see that the people who claim to have “beaten the system’ with magic words and who periodically pop up to accuse me of being all talk or merely “ignorant” of these simple solutions etc. since I don’t use these apparent fail safe systems, never seem to come back to offer any actual proof of their success when asked. No matter how much time they are given and no matter how much benefit of the doubt I offer them. You’d think that if there really were systems that worked to get people out of paying tribute to the government, that they wouldn’t need any promotion. THEY WOULD PROMOTE THEMSELVES. Who wouldn’t know about them if they actually had a system that worked? Surely that would pass with word of mouth as fast as any supposed pill, oil, or technique that actually made your “junk grow”. lol But alas, the dog who doesn’t bark raises his head again in these two areas to urge against anything that actually works. lol

            Of course all of the stuff the state does is immoral and illegal from a natural law point of view. But what the magic word people don’t seem to grasp is that the government has nothing to do with either of those things. — L
            — L

  7. sskids

    The tax on labor of the serfs was instituted in 1942? or so with the so-called ‘victory tax’ which is a levy of 5% on wages for no longer than two years to support the war.

    the government wanted to raise money for the war so they enacted the Victory Tax of 1942. This was to be a temporary two year tax supposedly authorized by Article 1 Section 8 clause 12 of the constitution which says that Congress has the power:

    “To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer Term than two years”

    Since the public was never told that the tax was rescinded we all became ‘volunteers’ when they failed to stop the withholding on wages.

    Or that could just be more horseshit, except I have personally known old people that told me the same, they thought it was supposed to be for two years only.

    Your logic is absolutely correct, the IRS claims that we have no basis in our labor, when obviously there is a value, why else would you be paid and short of union/government coercion the amount paid is the fair market value, no gain and no loss.


    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      That’s an interesting piece of history sskids. I was aware of the massive “rewriting” the code underwent right after the war and that was apparently where the real mischief occurred to “solidify” it into law. But I was not aware of the other. An excellent cover they created to bring it in. Just like they do with everything. Ease it in as temporary, then extend it, then “bless it” with the supreme court’s bs. And the people have such short memories and no idea what government is and are so busy buys busy and distracted that the game just passes them by. You are correct about your assessment. They are thieves. And robbers of course. lol take care. — L

  8. Rog

    What you say is true, so far as it goes. Back in the 30’s the government made the claim: all property rests with the state. It is a false claim. Why haven’t we rebutted it? We cower in fear of the monster WE created. They know who the creator is-believe me. They know the creator can dismantle the created. That’s why we are bombarded with the state as god propaganda. It could and should be very easy-get rid of all corporations. Eliminate them! Throw out the fiction. But their system IS fiction and sadly, will require the spilling of real blood to purge it.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Yes Rog, the state is simply force and threats of force. But then of course the state can do nothing without PEOPLE to act for it. And the ones who do the acting are the police, judges, jailers etc. Without them and the army simply “following orders” none of it is possible. There is no need for any violence. All that has to happen is that the people, the enforcers simply need to stop doing what they are told. End of game.

      I am not naive enough to believe that will happen. But it is all that is necessary. I don’t see any evidence anywhere that “revolutions” work. Unless the peoples’ nature changes, then it will remain the same. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. lol. Take care. — L

      1. Crocodile

        Larken Rose does explain this in his book :

        ……Children are taught that peace and justice come from authoritarian control and that, despite the flagrant evils committed by authoritarian regimes around the world throughout history, they are still morally obligated to respect and obey the current “government” of their own country. They are taught that “doing as you’re told” is synonymous with being a good person, and that “playing by the rules” is synonymous with doing the right thing. On the contrary, being a moral person requires taking on the personal responsibility of judging right from wrong and following one’s own conscience, the opposite of respecting and obeying “authority”.
        The reason it is so important that people understand this fact is that the primary danger posed by the myth of “authority” is to be found not in the minds of the controllers in “government” but in the minds of those being controlled. One nasty individual who loves to dominate others is a trivial threat to humanity unless a lot of other people view such domination as legitimate because it is achieved via the “laws” of “government”……

        This is basically what you are writing all the time, LegalMan.
        With your own words, of course 🙂

  9. Man in pain

    What about the property tax? Can you ignore the fact that upwards of 500,000 people a year lose their homes to a tax that they cannot lawfully owe? In a country where no one has a right to own a dwelling shelter from the elements without paying thousands of dollars a year in tribute, this issue must be addressed. This is far more serious than the alleged “income tax.” An income tax by nature may deprive someone of a portion of their property (money is indeed property), but a property tax deprives a family not just of a physical structure to be secure in, but a Human Right. Think!

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Of course the monopoly of land by the state is critical Man in pain. The monopoly of land has always been a heart of the scam that is the state. But I can see reasons why someone might want to merely rent a residence as opposed to buying one and being tied down. But I disagree, to the extent you imply, that a tax on “property” is far worse than a tax on your wage because the tax on your property is a violation of a human right, and by implication that a tax on your wage is merely a tax on money. If you don’t even own your own life and labor and whatever it results in, is that not a denial of the most basic human right of all? — L

      1. Man in pain

        A person can have his wages stolen through unlawful taxation, but if a person has no wages to steal because he has no income but still owns his home, that can be stolen from him under COLOR OF LAW, leaving that person utterly destroyed. From your reply I can see you pay your property taxes, perhaps out of fear, or perhaps because you lack the knowledge to successfully challenged the for-profit municipal corporations who are threatening you with the loss of your home. Fear has always been a great tool of extortionists.

        1. Alan Donelson

          @Man in pain

          I pay all my taxes because I do not want the rest of my life — about to celebrate (??) my 69th year on this seemingly GOD-forsaken planet — to be about my not paying my taxes. PRAY TELL: How have you fared with your prescription? Have you successfully challenged the for-profit municipal corpsies? If so, then GOD bless you. I look forward to how you prevailed!!

        2. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          Well Man in pain, I think we are in agreement on all of the material items. We are on the same side. As to not having and “income” and thus having nothing to “steal”. I think it is fair to remember that for most of human history there was only barter. But there was still “income” in the form of goods produced and traded, be they lumber, shoes, or food etc. The kings and governments simply came and took whatever the people had of value, such as food and other items. The tax collectors normally worked on commission and took a piece of the cut. So though there was no money per se, and thus nothing defined as “income” in the present code, the people still had the fruits of their labor to take, which is, at its heart, their “income”. And that was the form of the earliest “income tax”. It was taken out in kind. My point was only to say that the taxes are both onerous.

          It is also fair to remember that a home can be lost to destruction as well, which the government can impose. So taxing it, taking it, rendering it useless, or taxing all ability to live or trade are each and all violations of human rights, imho. — L

          1. Kram

            Well said Little Big Legalman. I stopped filing because I believed labor was meant to be left alone and chose voluntarily not to file as a non-taxpayer and the bear is summarily “poked”. I am not whining lol my dissonance is ‘Polly Anna Syndrome. if I kept my head down 17 years ago I would not have been able to direct the fruit of my labor where it counted “for my children” worked out great, they are on their own making their way believing in themselves. I was and am the yes man no matter how the dust settles… Peace Brother

  10. GeorgiaCracker

    Legalman, when you first made this argument, it Depressed me to realize how right you are. Now I just feel enlightened and helpless. With the education system today, there is no way to turn the ship of state around. Our language has been so corrupted, people can not truly communicate. As always, the truth is hard to hear, and much harder to accept.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Well GeorgiaC take comfort in the fact that the underlying problem of one group exploiting the other through the “state” is much much older than the problems with the edjumacation system. The point I try and make is that the State is the problem. And the idea that our state, because of some silly belief in this magical constitution, is no different than every other state at its base. Does that mean we have “no freedoms” and that we are “the worst” etc. Of course not. But I can guarantee that we will have fewer 5 years from now. And 10 and 20 and on and on until it collapses. People have to stop imagining that the system’s structure works. It doesn’t. It NEVER HAS. That is my point. Government is opposed to freedom. It doesn’t protect it. The constitution does not “protect our freedoms”. I know people will continue to refuse to accept this. That is fine. I know most people think I am “ameruurica bashing”. People will think what they are going to think.

      Facts don’t matter to people. They want feelings. They have a feeling about what they imagine the country is and stands for and that is all that matters to them. And THAT is why they get continually exploited. Because their rulers live closer to reality, and the duped serfs live in a dream. — L

  11. sully

    It is interesting, as I too have found that there was much amazing thinking going on right around 1890 to 1910 or so… just one of those fecund periods that spontaneously arise now and then. But some powerful ideas, and many very well communicated.

    I particularly like Orison Swett Marden and Wallace Wattles for starters.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Many brilliant men in the 19th century. If you like those authors perhaps you know William Atkinson and his book the arcane teachings and his book the kyballion. Very good. Fascinating. I would have laughed at them 25 years ago. But not in the last decade. My favorite author and book from that period is far and away Richard Ingalese. The history and power of mind. Of course again most people will laugh at it or not finish it. It makes quite a few statements that truly stretch the openness of ones mind. The truth of which each person must decide. For me, I found it compelling and have read it a dozen times. Like everything there is never the whole truth in any teaching. But that book is quite amazing. At least it was for me. Many many more from that era as well, like Oppenheimer. Most of the information now is crap. Intentionally crap to be sure nobody can compete with those running it all.

      We can’t expect anything else. Lol. Take care. — L

      1. opt out

        Legal man:

        Thank you for the book recommendation below.
        See Seven Years Probation Pg. 187

        Examples of Lucky number seven 7:
        Seven days of creation in the book of Genesis.
        Seven days of the week.
        Seven colors of the light spectrum.
        7 Chakras in the human body.
        Seven continents.
        Seven Seas [Oceans].
        Seven years of probation.
        Seven sided Chestahedron platonic solid, which is believed to be the shape of the human heart and based on sacred geometry.

        See “Your Will was Probated” below:
        Civilly dead: dead in the view of the law; the condition of one who has lost his civil rights and capacities, and is accounted dead in law.

        Perhaps born again brings forth the Man from the walking dead [civilly dead in law]

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          I’m glad you enjoyed The History and Power of Mind. It is quite powerful. Most people discard it out right. Kudos to you for doing your own thinking. And you’re right there are clearly a lot of smart people who have a lot of ideas about numerology and other alleged kookery. Of course like everything it is hard to ever get to the actual truth and most of what is produced for the public is both wrong and often intentionally wrong. But that doesn’t meant there is not information there to be found. We really do all have to stick together.

          I recently read a book from about 25 years ago that is quite well documented and academic called The conquest of the new world — American Holocaust. Pretty damned amazing information and references. The cultures that existed here before the slaughter were nothing like people have been told. And they reminded me of much of the strange occult history that Ingalese briefly refers to in his chapter on it.

          Much like the book “Forbidden Archeology”, the information contained is not permitted to ever be heard or seen unless it is labeled as kookery etc. The masses are simply fed a political myth about our county and everything else. The myths serve those in power. Nothing more. Take care. — L

  12. Carey Nottingham

    had not considered my time or labor to be something I owned – but how could it not be? such a fundamental concept. your conclusion is undeniable: slaves we are.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Lol yes, the truth is quite unavoidable. And this is why I laugh so hard when I hear the patriot drones imagining that we have “the greatest free-est blah blah blah”. They have no idea what they support. None. And all the blather on radio and tv and in print about constitution this and that. Lol. Nothing but snake oil salesmen taking advantage of the duped serfs, or duped serfs themselves. Oh they make tons of money. But they never think to connect the dots about why and how they are allowed to promote this supposedly subversive idea. Just narcissistic egos that that our rulers encourage behind the scenes to help continue he delusion of freedom.

      I find it quite hilarious to listen to hem and the poor fools who call in. Wow, so lost. Take care. — L

  13. opt_out

    Nice overview Legal man!
    The IRC is nearly 4 inches thick and contains 8 million+ words and allegedly is based on the ratification of the 16th amendment. The IRC contains words of art and the words of art are not that of common usage.

    Back in the 80’s Phil Collins sang I have a name and I have a number. The name of course is that of the registered organization on the B/C and the number is the account # on the SSA card. Below are the cliff notes to unravel the IRC.
    1. The IRC is divided into two sections. Income and ATF revenue. The ATF section begins at section 4181. There are two kinds of agents. Those that carry guns and those that don’t. The agents carrying guns enforce ATF revenue and the ones that don’t enforce income revenue. Income tax matters are civil in nature, ATF matters are criminal in nature. Guess what code sections they use to enforce income related matters? ATF sections. Reading the IRC is not like reading a novel. See section 7806 [Construction of Title] regarding statutory construction in the IRC. See arrangement and classification. Hmm maybe this should have been in the front of the IRC. The secret to understanding the IRC is that there is only one employer and that is the United States. The employees are that of the United States. Do you work for the Federal government? Despite being 10,000+ pages and over 8 million words, there are only 4 chapters that need to be read and understood. The chapters are 1, 2, 21 and 24. Chapter 24 covers the W-4, which does not impose a tax. Chapter 23 is for Federal Employees. Chapter 2 covers Self-Employed, but never imposes a tax on non-resident aliens. This leaves Chapter 1, which does not define who is subject to an income tax in statute. The secretary created a regulation to make up for the short coming in Congress in CFR 1.1-1. Who gave the Secretary the authority to create Law? Clearly the 16th Amendment did not. Only “The” Congress, under the Articles of Confederation, possess such power. Many a patriot claim that income is not defined in the IRC. A brief review of section 83 will reveal the definition, unfortunately most folks start in section 61(a). Income = rents, dividends, interest, profit, gain from dealings in property and from services. Before one can ascertain if the gross receipts = gross income, they must apply section 83 and 212 to the remuneration received for their labor/property [amount paid] to subtract the cost/basis. As noted the amount paid almost always equals the cost basis for the services in the exchange of property.

    Labor = Property. Labor is the most sacred property and inviolable right of man.
    Labor is property, and its value is determined through the terms of an arm’s length transaction.
    All property is cost. All property is an “amount paid”.
    The Law recognizes property rights and Due Process
    When the law says “any” or “any property” it’s construed as all inclusive.
    The Law is all about relationships.
    The Employer/Employee is a relationship. Transactions will result in a bilateral transfer
    of property. An Employee transfers property [labor] in the form of services. The
    Employer transfers property when remuneration is tendered as the amount paid.
    The secret to understanding the IRC is that the employer in the IRC is the federal
    government. Does the United States Congress have the judicial power over any other
    employer anywhere in North America or the rest of the world? The answer is no.
    For a full overview on the IRC and section 83 visit

  14. sully

    Yes, I think your point is logical, correct and valid. But like all the other arguments, of no use… sadly.
    There’s always some key faulty assumption way back at the base of all these government angles, isn’t there?
    I think that’s why they make multiple rules and complications- so people never think about first principles and only focus on the minutia.

    There’s another argument I like (that is of no practical use either). It is that I am a Man, made in the image of the Creator, and not a ‘person’, etc. IE, they have no standing over me.

    Personally, I like these (useless) concepts: I do not have a validly issued SS # (it was obtained for me when i was a minor) and they require one to file; There is no compensation schedule for my labor time to fill out the forms and they tell you right on each form the estimated time to complete; they compel signing under penalty of perjury- which means it must be a voluntary act; and a couple of others.

    My favorite: the IRS mission statement clearly states that their purpose is to work with TAXPAYERS (not citizens, etc.). So if i don’t pay, I’m not a taxpayer, therefore not subject to their agency, by their own definition. I’ve never heard or seen anyone use this argument.

    The rich care not about income taxes, as they concern themselves with building wealth via assets, and you might notice there is ZERO tax on the compound increasing value of these things when they are held and not sold: your business/corporation; your real estate; your stocks and bonds. That is how they get richer and richer and why you will notice the following: Warren Buffet advocating HIGHER income taxes; people like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs or Ted Turner and other billionaires paying themselves salaries like: $150k a year; $1 a year, or sometimes as much as $350k. But oligarchs avoid income and shuttle as many $ as they can into non taxed wealth building.

    But alas, as you point out, if the neighborhood bully is bigger and stronger than me, basically I do what he says the way he wants it. Unless I get bigger and stronger, or leave the neighborhood. Which is rapidly deteriorating anyway…

    “The Truth will set you free…”
    It does, if only in our minds.
    But that is where we truly live, isn’t it?


    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Yes Sully the situation is quite bleak regarding any kind of manifest freedom outside those of your own personal choices of conduct. We can do nothing about the general state of human bondage. And seeing that dilemma raises the most fundamental questions of all, namely what is the purpose and what is your obligation, if any, to any set of rules?

      I certainly don’t claim to have those answers locked down many far brighter than me have wondered on them through the ages and a whole host of answers have been given. But I would say that there is always a great benefit in greater clarity. Even though it normally brings a shock to the system initially, the closer you can move to the truth the more satisfying the answers are. And if even that is not true, well then there is really no point in any of it. Lol. Take care my friend it is quite a puzzle we have before us. – L

  15. Kram

    Bravo! I ate it up! I never said I don’t pay taxes I just couldn’t stomach the scam of an “income” tax. They are doing their best to coerce ‘voluntary’ compliance however, I still see that 2 + 2 = 4, they say sometimes it is 3 and sometimes it is 5. I may never be rehabilitated! I asked for more drugs but they said I was several times over the limit. Obama care will not pay for more…. too many tax dodgers I suspect. Well gotta go fill out some more applications for services and privileges..! woo hoo! Be sure to tell your friends to have more babies so they can fund the welfare state in to the future ad nauseum! Do not forget to get ur flu shot they say there is some spring thing goin around. free at the local drug store and a tube of floride when you use the discount phrase “Capitalism is dead” woo hoo! Seriously good smart piece. I will use it. Peace Papi..

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      I agree Kram. Regardless of the situation, I prefer the truth. Let me at least deal with the damned truth. Lol. What hope is there for any authenticity without at least a desire for the truth? The countless brain dead serfs run around telling me that “what do they care what the truth is if they can’t do anything about it”? They use to puzzle me and I would try and open their eyes. But I gave that up a Lon time ago. They are so lost, so so far away from any enlightenment that it is pointless.

      And the reality is They may be right, there may be no point at all to any of it. Lol. Regardless, I want to deal in the truth. I would prefer to know there is no point than to pretend that just being obliviously “happy” was “the point”. That is what cattle are. Sure I admire their natural state. Maybe even envy it at times. But I am not cattle and that is not my natural state. Lol I have a mind that questions that is my natural state.

      And as they say in “a streetcar named desire”. “Mendacity… I don’t tolerate it.” Lol. – L

  16. DeBranco

    Excellent argument and to the point, still not identifying who is “liable”. Like your explicit picture. With all due respect to your argument/brilliant explanation, comes down to one single question? Who is liable? Who are such persons as defined in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC)?

    26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(14) and 26 U.S.C. 1333 as someone who is “liable for” and “subject to” the income tax in the IRC Subtitle A.

    Who are the taxpayers? and who is liable? Arguments and amounts are irrelevant.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Debranco I disagree. I believe you have fundamentally mis-stated or misunderstood my argument. My argument does not depend upon nor does it lead to that question. It is wholly apart from it. My argument specifically takes pains to use their definitions and rules and then apply them. I show quite clearly that they have chosen to not “allow” individuals the deduction or basis for the opposite side of the transaction, However they choose to define individuals who are ” liable” for the tax.

      You’re still stuck on arguments like I mentioned about whether non- foreign citizen non- citizen distinctions are being made in double secret probation language. Mine is much simpler and uses their own stated definitions and rules. And since I know they won’t do what I point out they should, I have shown that the code is something very different from what is claimed.

      I think it is clear. And I think it is irrefutable. It shows a policy choice to not allow people the benefit of owning their own labor. And remember they claim a right to tax at any rate. So I think it is undeniable that they consider the people serfs whose labor they own and can tax at any rate. End of case. — L

      1. DeBranco

        To the contrary, I read your explanation and it’s contents, are well taken.
        My question to you is? What can you offer based on your knowledge of the (IRC) solutions to apply/read/demonstrate, that the (IRC) is correct/incorrect, in is entirety and misapplied against the American people, based on the usage of language and interpretations, and not as written prima facie evidence of law. Please explain the following, “taxpayer” v. “non taxpayer”.

        1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

          Well DeBranco then It appears you have failed to grasp the meaning of what I said.

          My answer is the same as I have written over and over. It means whatever they say. If they say up is down or blue is red or I am you, and the solemn and honorable Supreme Court finds that as well then that is that. Because at that point a large number of armed drones called “other citizens” will be showing up at your door to be sure you “do your part”. And those patriots will be taking you to a cage or if you resist their “doing their duty under the law” will kill you.

          It is all made up as they go. My gosh man what does it take to get through to you? Lol

          As to your last question. Tax payers are everyone they can force, trick, or who believe they should and do then “pay” taxes. Everyone else those who refuse, or are exempted, or cannot be found, and who do not then “pay” taxes, are non tax payers.

          They operate on a version of the saying “this is the whole of the law. Do as you will.” Or in their case might makes right. Everything else is just distractions. Either ones they create or ones that well meaning romantics create.

          All taxpayers are simply the entities who fall under that governments “authority”. And that means whoever and whatever they can exert control over through force or threat of force. — L

          1. DeBranco

            Bonjour Mr L. There is an old French/Latin term that goes this way. You have explained everything, (but not to the root).Thank you and au revoir.

  17. TerraHertz

    I love it. Very clear and to the point. Too bad _nothing_ will ever inspire the brainwashed ignorant serfs to rise.

    Yet another point is that the power to create the money supply was given away by governments to the bankers long ago. If the money was still created by government and injected into the economy as government spending, there would be no fundamental need for taxes at all.

    Oh, except as a means of controlling and monitoring the people, of course. Which is the sole real reason taxes exist.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Quite true terrahertz. The masses are quite unreachable. I always suspected as much but recently ran across Franz Oppenheimer’s work from 1914 the state, it’s history and development viewed sociologically. The book shocked even me when it comes to the true state of hopelessness of the masses. Lol. The research and level of intellectual prowess they displayed in the late 19th century is really quite incredible.

      It is impossible to read his work and references and come away imagining that we are anything except trapped by the mindless fools who refuse to see. Of course the creation of fiat is the heart of the fraud today but it is simply and extension of a very long set of lies and exploitation that is the state. Take care my friend. — L

  18. Alan Donelson

    BRILLIANT, succinct, knife-like clarity, in fact! Thank you!!! Yes, I’ll pay my taxes this year, as I have every year since I had a “gross” income. I shall not make my life about NOT paying tribute to the king. With information so clearly distilled, though, the time may come when we peasants cease to do so. The Emperor walked nearly naked down my town’s street yesterday. Could be start of a trend. I tried to take a picture, but a taser-wielding thug with a badge blocked my view. IRS, DHS, NSA, the list goes on and on. One acronym at a time, I counsel.

    1. Profile photo of LegalmanLegalman Post author

      Thank you Alan I’m glad you enjoyed it. I always appreciate feedback. Let’s me know if what I said made any sense to anyone but me. I kept it limited of course because there are so many different tax arguments. Most of them are very technical. Plus for me I went with what I consider to be the best argument. The reality is that if this argument isn’t a winner, then there is no winning argument to make. Enjoy my fellow inmate. — L

      1. Alan Donelson

        O I shall indeed tell you of the hordes of correspondents that revelled in — or reviled, I do have contrarians on my mailing list, anything I say wrong, ill-informed, and conspiratorial! — your latest good work. I have reserved several toes on both my feet (no bias, neither right nor left hand involved!) for the vote counting. GOD bless, Legalman, you make each day for me with your posts!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *