High Crimes in Perspective

 

Why is it that the high government officials who torture people based on erroneous legal advice are not prosecuted, but a middle class taxpayer who signs a tax return based on the erroneous legal advice of his attorney is sent off to prison along with his attorney?  Think about it and think about the situation in this country when the rich and powerful do not go to jail for horrendous crimes but the poor go to jail for phony crimes created by the government to scare the population into submission.

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND "CIVIL" TAX INVESTIGATIONS

 

            Probably the strongest issue that exists in the Freedom Movement regarding the non-requirement to file returns is the issue of the Fifth Amendment and a waiver of Constitutional Rights.  However the issue is very confusing.  For example, in some First Party Summons Cases, the IRS backs down in the face of the Fifth Amendment.  In other cases, the IRS goes for enforcement.  In some cases, the judges rule that the defendants don't have to answer questions, and in other cases the judges force the individual defendants to answer questions or go to jail for contempt.

 

            The reason for this mass confusion is that the courts, the IRS and the bureaucrats must create confusion so that there is never a serious challenge to the alleged requirement to file a 1040 return.  Of course, the government cannot require the filing of a return, use the information in a criminal case and consequently require the waiver of Constitutional Rights under the Fifth Amendment.  The government takes that position that the income tax is a "voluntary compliance" type of system.  They, in my opinion, use the term "voluntary" because they know that you can only "voluntarily" waive your Fifth Amendment Rights and you have to waive those rights to file a 1040 Return.

 

            The situation, legally, is very confusing, but let's try to make a path through its murky waters.  IRS agents are required to get the Criminal Investigation Division involved if they suspect fraud.  If a special agent informs the individual that he is under criminal investigation, and the individual cooperates, there is a strong possibility that the individual will turn over information that can be used against him.

 

            The Supreme Court Case of Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298  (1921) is instructive in this matter.  In Gouled, a suspect let an agent enter his office because he had no idea that the agent was getting evidence to be used against him in criminal prosecution.  The Court held that the use of "stealth" to gain admittance into the office and secure privileged evidence was a violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.  The Gouled case has been raised in Tax cases but without much success.  One Court even ruled that whenever a civil audit begins, an ordinary individual "surely knows" that it may lead to a criminal investigation (United States v.Sclafani, 265 F.2d 408 (2d. Cir.) cert. denied, 360 U.S. 918 (1959).

 

            Another issue is that a holding that there is no deceit when an individual is not informed that a civil audit has changed into a criminal investigation is contrary to established principles of tort law dealing with non- disclosure as fraud.

 

            One who has made a statement and subsequently acquires new information which makes it untrue or misleading, must disclose such information to any one whom he knows to be still acting on the basis of the original statement...(W. Prosser, Law of Torts 711 (3d ed. 1964).

 

            Therefore, if a civil agent suspects fraud and doesn't tell the target, he very may be violating tort law.

 

            A case that takes the opposite point of view is Kohatsu v. United States, 351 F.2d 898 (9th Cir. 1965).  In Kohatsu, two special agents were called in and the target was not informed of that fact.  He turned over his records to the agents. The court agreed with the government in its argument that the accusatory stage had not been reached because the special agents were only gathering material bearing on the correctness of the individual's income statement.

 

            The actual problem involved in tax cases, once the investigation starts, is the issue of the point at which constitutional rights attach.  The current procedure used by the IRS creates a situation of three points at which constitutional rights may attach.  Traditionally it is thought that the earliest place is the beginning of the audit; however, one can argue that Constitutional rights attach to the alleged filing requirement; I will discuss more on that later.  If all individuals knew that they could tell the IRS to lay off and ignore an audit; the tax system would probably break down.  For that reason, it will be difficult to get courts to admit that Constitutional Rights apply at the civil audit level.

 

            The second possible beginning is when the civil agent discovers the evidence of a crime and reports this fact to his superiors.  The last stage is the point at which the criminal investigation agent enters the case.

 

            It is this author's opinion that realistically, the issue of Constitutional Rights goes all the way back to the filing of the tax return.  If you look at the Privacy Act Notice that comes with the 1040 Instruction Booklet, you will notice that the IRS notifies the public that any information on a tax return can be given to Department of Justice and other government agencies; presumably for use in criminal cases.  Furthermore, the IRS refers to the income tax law as enforcement by "voluntary compliance."  If you file a tax return and give the government information, they can use that information against you because you gave it to them voluntarily and you were warned in advance by the Privacy Act Notice that they had a right to use the information criminally.

 

            Apparently, the courts are attempting to separate civil use and criminal use in order to protect the tax system. Return filing is voluntary and it is also required.  The IRS may collect information and give it to DOJ.  They can do it all because the issues are civil, or so they claim.

 

            What about a variation on the theme, however.  An individual, who is classified as an illegal tax protestor, presumably has a reason to be concerned about waiving his Fifth Amendment Rights. The classification of illegal tax protestor is a project of the criminal investigation division.

 

            It is in my opinion, clearly an advantage to have the label "illegal tax protestor" attached to your files with the IRS. Any information you give the IRS can definitely be used against you; and the CID is already involved. It is something to think about!

 

Tea Party Time:

 

Over two hundred years ago, our ancestors threw tea in the harbor to protest taxation without representation.  Today we have a problem that is much worse.  Our government is giving away hundreds of billions of dollars, taken from the middle class, to the rich guys who got us in this mess.  These guys should be going off to prison, but instead, they are getting handouts from the government.  Meanwhile, we have no health care, we have no safety net for people who lose their jobs, we have millions of people losing their homes.

 

The guys who are running things are some of the same guys who got us in this mess.  Our representatives have destroyed bankruptcy court relief for the middle classes.  Our senators and our congress people have a wonderful health care system and a wonderful retirement system that is paid for by the middle class. The IRS continues its war against the people.

 

For over thirty years I have been pointing out these issues to anyone who would listen.  The situation is getting worse.

 

Are you ready yet for a tea party?

 

 

More History of the Income Tax Fight:

Marvin Cooley

 

            One of the early heroes of the Income Tax fight was a fellow from Arizona named Marvin Cooley.  Marvin discovered in the mid-1960s that there was a severe problem with the income tax and he started to hold seminars to teach people about the problems.  He maintained that:

 

1.  IRS procedures are illegal

2.  Threats, lies, bluff and intimidation are its normal means of operation.

3.  The vest pocket summons is illegal.

4.  The Agency fabricates charges against innocent citizens.

5.  IRS agents are unlawfully protected by sovereign immunity when they commit criminal acts.

6.  The Withholding tax is illegal.

7.  The Agency violates every protection to which citizens are entitled under due process of law.

8.  Many of the Internal Revenue Statutes violate the law.

9.  Tax monies are used for illegal purposes.

10. The IRS cannot legally force a citizen to answer questions, produce records, or obey its summonses.

11.  The IRS' illegal acts should be challenged in court.

12.  It is the right an duty of all patriots to challenge the IRS.

13.  Sworn testimony before congressional committees proves that the procedures, methods and rules employed by the IRS are arbitrary, dictatorial, and illegal.

14.  The Agency constantly uses its threat of punishment under statutes that have been declared illegal and void in prior court decisions.

 

            Starting in 1968, Cooley filed "improper" returns in which he did not supply the data for the tax to be computed.  In 1972, he published a book entitled, The Big Bluff.  The book contained documents to be used in litigation with sample letters, citations and copies of his 1040 returns.  The IRS indicted Cooley and arrested him on June 27, 1972.  He was convicted and spent two years in prison at Safford, Arizona.  When he was released a banquet was held in his honor with hundreds of followers present.  Later, Marvin developed a Fifth Amendment approach in which he took the Fifth Amendment on the return.  Marvin Cooley was one of the original inspirations whose early stand led to the current  Freedom Movement in this country.