kim@analog.UUCP (Kim Helliwell ) (10/23/84)
The article on whether or not tax returns are legally required or not
makes interesting reading, but I have a couple of comments:
1. This is not exactly new--I have heard of people trying this as a defense
for not filing (sorry, I can't quote references, however). What appears
to happen usually is that, EVEN IN A JURY TRIAL, the person trying this
is convicted of tax evasion or at least not filing.
Note, I am not making any comment about the legality or illegality, merely
stating that my impression is that a jury of peers is likely to convict
such a person. This could be attributed to the judges' instructions in
these cases, which might tend to follow the IRS's thinking regarding the
necessity of filing.
2. IF such a defense started becoming successful in a large number of cases,
I imagine it would not take very long for Congress to enact whatever laws
were necessary to make such filing mandatory. Should it be necessary to
amend the Constitution, I am not sure what would happen, but I am sure
Congress would keep trying, either through new laws (as the Supreme Court
knocks out "unconstitutional" ones) or through amendments to the
Constitution, to make this a requirement.
In any case, I am not sure that that would necessary lead to an improvement
in the situation as it stands.
I think I understand the motive here to be to put the burden of proof on the
IRS for what I owe, NOT to avoid paying taxes. But it seems to me that that
approach will inevitably lead to the IRS's having even more power to intrude
on the affairs of the American people and disrupt their lives than they now
do (if in fact that is possible!). I fear that there would be a YEARLY
interview with the tax man for EVERYONE, if ever this point were successfully
made. Aside from the overhead of supporting the manpower necessary for this,
think of the trauma for you and me when it becomes a certainty that everyone
will be audited every year.
I think I prefer the status quo, bad as it is!