Comments on: What Brown Can Do To You: UPS Lobbyist Responsible for FedEx Investigation http://www.taxgirl.com/what-brown-can-do-to-you-ups-lobbyist-responsible-for-fedex-investigation/ Paying taxes is painful... but reading about them shouldn't be. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:33:00 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Diane http://www.taxgirl.com/what-brown-can-do-to-you-ups-lobbyist-responsible-for-fedex-investigation/comment-page-1/#comment-5825 Diane Sun, 06 Jul 2008 18:05:26 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/what-brown-can-do-to-you-ups-lobbyist-responsible-for-fedex-investigation/#comment-5825 Wow, this is terrible. The IRS can go back (retroactivlly) and looks into this further....unfortunatelly for them Wow, this is terrible. The IRS can go back (retroactivlly) and looks into this further….unfortunatelly for them

]]> By: Leigh Feuerstein http://www.taxgirl.com/what-brown-can-do-to-you-ups-lobbyist-responsible-for-fedex-investigation/comment-page-1/#comment-5826 Leigh Feuerstein Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:17:04 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/what-brown-can-do-to-you-ups-lobbyist-responsible-for-fedex-investigation/#comment-5826 Remeber that Tax protesters in the United States make a number of statutory arguments that the assessment of the federal income tax in the United States violates the statutes enacted by the United States Congress and signed into law by the President. Such arguments generally claim that the statutes fail to create a duty to pay taxes, that such statutes do not impose the income tax on wages or other types of income claimed by the tax protesters, or that provisions within the statutes exempt the tax protesters from a duty to pay. Other arguments contend that the Internal Revenue Service is not authorized by statute to assess income taxes, to seize assets to satisfy tax claims, or to penalize persons who fail to file a return or pay the tax assessed. These kinds of arguments are distinguished from related constitutional arguments and general conspiracy arguments. Statutory arguments presuppose that Congress has the constitutional power to assess a tax on incomes, but that the Congress has simply failed to impose the tax by statute. Supporters of such arguments may or may not be inclined to contend that constitutional and conspiracy arguments apply as well. The courts that have been presented with such arguments have ruled them to be spurious, unpersuasive, frivolous, or all three. Remeber that Tax protesters in the United States make a number of statutory arguments that the assessment of the federal income tax in the United States violates the statutes enacted by the United States Congress and signed into law by the President. Such arguments generally claim that the statutes fail to create a duty to pay taxes, that such statutes do not impose the income tax on wages or other types of income claimed by the tax protesters, or that provisions within the statutes exempt the tax protesters from a duty to pay. Other arguments contend that the Internal Revenue Service is not authorized by statute to assess income taxes, to seize assets to satisfy tax claims, or to penalize persons who fail to file a return or pay the tax assessed.

These kinds of arguments are distinguished from related constitutional arguments and general conspiracy arguments. Statutory arguments presuppose that Congress has the constitutional power to assess a tax on incomes, but that the Congress has simply failed to impose the tax by statute. Supporters of such arguments may or may not be inclined to contend that constitutional and conspiracy arguments apply as well.

The courts that have been presented with such arguments have ruled them to be spurious, unpersuasive, frivolous, or all three.

]]>