alpert@nanook.DEC (11/27/84)
> Okay, you've convinced us all that everything the > IRS is doing is illegal. Now, what difference does > it make ? You will have to go to the Supreme Court > to make them admit it (if you can), and then Congress > will change the law to make it legal. Please respond > to this point. If you have checked out the list of citizen wins that I posted some time ago, you should realize that it is not necessary to go to the Supreme Court to defeat the IRS. Relevant Supreme Court decisions have already been made. As far as Congress changing the law, what we are looking at is a fundamental change in the protections provided by the Constitution. This would not be a trivial task to accomplish. As for the IRS Code itself, there has been ample opprtunity to change the wording of key statutes to make filing "required". These changes have not been made. For example, section 6012 of the Code was modified for the tax years following 1984 in order to incorporate indexing. This is the section that states: "Returns with respect to income taxes under Subtitle A shall be made by the following:" Interestingly, this section does not go on to list who "SHALL" file. It instead goes on to list those who are "NOT REQUIRED" to file a return, thus IMPLYING but NOT STATING that some people are "REQUIRED" to do so. The word "shall" (the use of which we have previously examined) has NOT been replaced by any phrase using "mandatory" or "required". This is despite the fact that by the IRS's own estimates, there are at least 6 million people per year who do not file. The authors of the IRS Code have shown repeatedly that they will not make a frontal assault on the Constitution, which would open the Code itself up to being challenged on Constitutional grounds. Bob Alpert ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-nanook!alpert