wdoherty@bbncca.ARPA (Will Doherty) (01/15/84)
I have been resisting war taxes for a couple of years now. Are there any other resisters out there? I refuse to pay 50% of the tax computed according to IRS regs because I will not voluntarily contribute to past, present, and future wars. Will Doherty decvax!bbncca!wdoherty
eder@ssc-vax.UUCP (01/17/84)
Ever since I got a well paying job and realised how much I was
going to be expected to pay in taxes, I have been interested in the
subject of how much was the government really entitled to.
I have spent considerable amounts of time at a university law
library, and have read a number of books in the 'tax protest' genre.
Some of the statements made by the authors of these books seem to be
valid, others are not supported by the facts.
Some of the areas I have looked into are
o Whether wages constitute 'income' for tax purposes
o What is the nature of a Federal Reserve Note (small piece of
paper commonly referred to as a dollar, five dollars, etc.)
o Is an individual obligated to file a form 1040?
I would be interested in sharing what I have found out and
finding out what other people know on the subject, but, since
it could get rather long winded, I'm asking for what topics folks
are interested in.
DaniEder
ssc-vax!ederjme@drux3.UUCP (01/17/84)
I pay my taxes, but have often considered ways to let the government know where I want MY money to go. The best method I've come up with is a check sheet. Along with the normal tax form, a check sheet would be included with a list of things the government spends our money on. You simply check off the things you support - things you would like to see your money go toward. I don't forsee every actually using this as the method of allocation, but it would certainly be a way for our elected officials to know what WE want, not just their interpretation of what we want. J. M. Engel AT&T IS - Denver
jhh@ihldt.UUCP (01/19/84)
Well, one of the leaders of a tax revolt using the principles that filing a 1040 is voluntary was recently convicted of numerous counts of failure to file, tax evasion, aiding others in filing fradulent tax returns, and other offences. He was sentenced to about 2 years in jail, 5 years probation, and a large fine. One of the conditions of probation is that he cannot give tax advise to others. If he violates this, he faces 28 years in prison. Many of his followers have also faced charges, some facing $10,000 fines plus back taxes. The leader used the ploy for about 15 years before he was charged, so just because someone has gotten away with it does not mean that you will. ***FLAME ON*** If you want to find tax shelters, fine, go ahead. I pay my taxes, as do a majority of others. I may not agree with everything that my tax dollars are spent on, but I have a chance to change that with every election. If you feel that you do not want to contribute tax dollars to the society that has helped you get where you are, you can always leave. I hope that if you don't pay taxes, you will quit using things brought to you in large part by tax dollars. Quit listening to weather reports (National Weather Service), quit using interstates, Federal routes, airplanes. Also don't use anything related to the ARPAnet. For that matter, you probably should get out of anything related to computers and micro-electronics, as a lot of that was financed by NASA. When family members get kidnapped, don't call the FBI, you won't be paying for them. If you haven't guessed by now, I take a dim view of tax evaders. ***FLAME OFF*** John Haller
koomen@rochester.UUCP (01/19/84)
From: Hans Koomen <koomen> You apparently have missed the point entirely. Most of us DON'T want to evade taxes at all. I appreciate very much our many civil facilities and services made possible by some of our tax dollars. The point of war tax resistance is to argue for alternate destinations for the military portion of our taxes. I would gladly deposit double my wartax dollars into either a special Peace Fund or a social services fund. I find this very much analogous to the legal recognition of conscientious objection to military service, where social or third world service is an accepted alternative. -- Hans (Koomen@Rochester, ...!rochester!koomen)
warren@ihnss.UUCP (01/19/84)
Our tax system (and for that matter our legal system) is full of loop holes to be tried. In the final analysis, however, as long as the government makes the rules and decides that people should pay taxes, any attempt to get around this through loopholes is bound to fail. This goes for legal nitpicking on the definitions of income and taxes, tax-shelters, and all other dodges. If you really want to pay less in taxes, or avoid supporting government spending in areas that you don't approve of, I suggest investigating and supporting the libertarian party, which doesn't believe in either taxes or government spending for the most part. Neither of our major parties cope with this problem at all, they simply shift who they tax and what they spend it on. (This is NOT an endorsement, and by all means move any flames or discussions on this to net.politics, not here. Net.politics had some lively debates on this in the past.) Attacking the tax system with legal quibbles is a fruitless excercise, doomed to failure. -- Warren Montgomery ihnss!warren IH x2494
spear@ihuxm.UUCP (01/20/84)
There is one completely legal way to avoid paying your taxes due to problems of conscience, but it involves some sacrifice. You simply donate enough money to a charity that sees things your way. By dividing the contributions up to meet legal requirements you can deduct enough to avoid paying any taxes. Note however that this requires you to give somewhere between 2-5 times as much to the charity as you would otherwise give to the government, depending on your bracket. So if you are REALLY serious about your concerns and want to remain inside the law this is an option to consider. Steve Spearman ihnp4!ihuxm!spear
burris@ihopa.UUCP (01/20/84)
Tax evaders or not, your statement reeks of "LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT". I've commented on this mentality before! Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought our Constitution provides for freedom of speech. There are many things in this country that need to be improved and the fact that someone wishes to express their concern SHOULD be welcomed. I don't like your attitude, but you can STAY!!!! -- Dave Burris ..!ihnp4!ihopa!burris AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, Il.
renner@uiucdcs.UUCP (renner ) (01/21/84)
#R:bbncca:-48000:uiucdcs:13200007:000:418
uiucdcs!renner Jan 20 21:38:00 1984
Leaving aside the morality issue for the present, the war tax protesters seem
to have their percentages wrong. The Defense Department gets somewhere
around 27% of the federal government budget, not 50%. A good-sized piece of
that goes to pay pensions, and at least some of these go to the old and
disabled. A more appropriate deduction would be 25% of tax due, not 50%.
Scott Renner
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!renner rcj@burl.UUCP (R. Curtis Jackson) (02/02/84)
And how many of our tax dollars would go towards tallying those checksheets? :-) A couple of points on WAR tax dollars that have not been addressed here: a) As long as other countries are pouring money into -- quote 'defense' unquote -- spending, the U.S. is going to do the same. Period. b) The only ways to stop other countries from pouring money into WAR stuff (and I welcome additions to this list): 1) Raise conciousness WORLDWIDE concerning the foolishness of nuclear (and other) warfare. 2) Show the benefits that can be derived from other uses for WAR monies by supporting candidates and legislation in this country to LIMIT our own military spending somewhat and to funnel that money into education and health programs, to name two that I consider worthy. 3) WATCH what is happening at home!!! A lot of your military dollars go into boondoggles or into outright mistakes. Boondoggles are obviously stupid and useless research programs, equipment purchases, etc. As an example, the U.S. spent millions and millions of dollars to set up missile silos (above-ground) all over the U.S. to protect our factories and cities (ha!). Suddenly, as missiles became more accurate, some bright person in the Pentagon noted that the Soviets could target our missile silos instead of our factories first. A mad scramble ensued to put the missiles underground in 'secret' locations. Now we are more into making the missiles portable. If a high-level executive in private industry had made a blunder of this nature, he would be out the door in no time at all. Let's make the military accountable (as much as is possible with security restraints) for what they do and what they spend. I've been long-winded enough, but one more thing needs to come to light. Reagon, in his State of the Union address, said (paraphrased) "the only way to make sure that we never have a nuclear war is to make nuclear warfare infeasible." Reagon is moving out into space now, with killer satellites and satellite-based cruise-missile radars, etc.; trying to make nuclear war 'infeasible'. Meanwhile, the 'Bad Guys' are busily doing the same thing -- we have already gone quite a way beyond anti-missile satellites and are into the realm of anti- anti-missile-satellites and anti- anti-anti-missile satellites. If you thought that nuclear missiles were costly to design, build, and maintain, just wait until you get the price tag for these new babies! -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ floyd clyde ihnp4 mhuxv ]!burl!rcj