Re: Fifth Amendment vs. Tax Returns

Freespeak (
Mon, 10 May 1999 09:07:55 -0700

I think it's more appropriate to think in terms of using an overall strategy for dealing with the IRS.

An arsenal of "weapons" is available to do this. The 5th Amendment is one of these weapons. "Weapons" are available to effectively deal with all the issues you raise below.

What weapons you decide to use is a question of strategy. How you use any particular weapon is probably best thought of as tactics.

As an individual you have a basic choice: (a) Blind obedience to the entropic IRS system resulting in your financing a wide range of political entropic behaviors; or (b) Searching for ways to behave more extropically in relation to the IRS system.

The first decision may be to decide whether it's worthwhile to invest some time in "searching." For example, if you're currently entropically paying the IRS $10,000 a year, your "searching" may result in your not having to pay that money -- without your incurring significant entropic personal risk.

A quick overview of 'Fiscal Freedom'
<> may help you determine whether "searching" is potentially worthwhile or not.

Frederick Mann

At 06:06 PM 5/9/99 -0400, The Baileys <> wrote:
>Freespeak wrote:
>> At a meeting held in Tulsa the evening of Tuesday, May 4,
>> Springer distributed a short paragraph people should provide
>> to anyone asking them to file State or Federal income tax
>> returns, the paragraph supposedly constructed by an attorney
>> in the Department of Justice.
>The problem with this strategy is that it reinforces a right everyone
>already has. No one is compelled to file their tax return or sign it.
>Everyone is "free" to not comply with the Internal Revenue Code. However,
>the IRS and the Department of Treasury are empowered to invoke the
>provisions of the IRC (including 'late filing' penalties, 'lack of filing'
>penalties, 'nonpayment' penalties, and interest on all of these penalties
>and on taxes owed). Additionally, the law allows the IRS to place and
>enforce liens against your property in order to collect taxes. While this
>strategy might get you out of contempt charges, it won't stop the IRS from
>liquidating your assets. Just because you aren't required attest to whether
>or not you broke the law or to supply evidence that might incriminate you,
>that does not eliminate the judicial remedies available to governmental
>agencies or insulate you from them.
>The IRS can determine your tax liability without your help. If they are so
>inclined, they can fund a fairly invasive investigation. If you work they
>have 1099s to track your income. If you are self-employed, your customers
>must also supply 1099s for payments over certain amounts. If you aren't
>employed there is no tax liability to avoid in the first place. If you're
>not employed but have tons of bank accounts and securities that pay you
>dividends and interest, the IRS receives 1099s for these amounts also.
>The most cogent cases I've seen are the ones that attack the government's
>authority to assess tax in the first place. However, the Supreme Court has
>discarded this argument in various vicissitudes several times. The argument
>is so inadequate now that it is the grounds for frivolous claims charges.
>Finally, this DOJ employee, as well as yourself, should be careful spreading
>this "strategy" about since to the extent someone relies on this strategy,
>there could be vicarious liability issues for yourself and the DOJ employee.
>Doug Bailey

Best Freedom Site on the Web - <>.
Freedom/Liberty Portal - <>.
International Libertarian Network, USA Coordinator -
Freedom & Financial Independence Lists -