Uncle Sam Doesn’t Want You to Know that Income Taxes May Be Voluntary for Most Americans!
TAXATION BY MISREPRESENTATION
The Truth about Income Taxes in Plain English
by John W. Benson
The tax Code contains “language so complicated and circumambient that neither Solomon nor all the wise men of the East could understand it or interpret it.” – Senator Alben W. Barkley, Senate Majority Leader, Congressional Record, 78th Congress, 2nd Session, Vol. 90, Part 2, February 23, 1944, page 1965
As Senator Barkley, later Vice President under President Truman, stated, there is a great deal of confusion in our Nation as to the truth about income taxes.
Almost 40 years ago, I began researching to discover for myself what laws lie at the foundation of the federal income taxes.
Little did I realize that I would be spending the rest of my life in this endeavor, clouded, as it is, by old, arcane and obfuscated language, laws, processes and procedures long out of the memory of the average lawyer, not to mention the average American.
The “down and dirty” result of my long quest was this: All our federal tax laws, processes and procedures are based upon those used by the king of England to collect his revenues in 1791. Some of those processes and procedures date back over 800 years to Magna Charta, the Great Charter of Liberties sealed by King John at the point of a sword on the Plains of Runnymede in 1215.
Here is how I came to that realization. (Tax laws and their history are not intended to be easily understood, so I hope you will understand that I am phrasing things as simply and as easily as I can, in order not to confuse you, dear Reader!)
In G.M. Leasing v. United States (1977), the government stated to the U.S. Supreme Court that all Internal Revenue Service (IRS) procedures are based upon the standards set forth by the Supreme Court in Murray’s Lessee v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co. (1856).
In Murray’s Lessee, the Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution required that all summary or administrative processes and procedures used by the federal government to ascertain, assess and collect its revenues must mirror, or be no different in principle from, the processes and procedures employed by the king of England in 1791 (the year the Fifth Amendment was ratified) to collect debts owed to him.
After reading Murray, G.M. Leasing, and the government’s admission to the Supreme Court in 1977, I came to realize that all IRS processes and procedures are, in substance and effect, simply the ancient English revenue processes and procedures employed by the king’s revenue officials in the Exchequer (Treasury) in 1791 dressed up in modern garb. To be sure, the words used are different and not intended to be easily understood. However, as the Murray Court stated clearly, “The name bestowed upon it cannot affect its constitutional validity.” 59 U.S. 272, 276 (1856).
Therefore, in order to understand today’s tax processes and procedures, you must understand the ancient processes employed by the Exchequer, some dating back in time before King John was forced to seal Magna Charta in 1215.
The Murray Court cited several English treatises as authorities on these ancient processes. I spent over a year hunting down the four principal treatises, as they are all long out of print, and read through each of them.
Based upon almost-40 years of research, I have attempted to unravel these processes in my principal book, Taxation by Misrepresentation, the Truth about Income Taxes in Plain English. I have included numerous authorities in support in order to lay today’s tax processes and procedures side by side with the English processes.
After having done this, I came to realize, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the Form 1040 tax return used today by the IRS as the record of an individual’s income-tax liability must be based upon one of only two similar records used by the king in 1791, both of which are cited by the Murray Court, namely, either the finding of an inquisition, aka an inquest of office (administrative hearing, in today’s terms), or a statute staple process (an ancient form of contract enacted by Parliament in 1353 for the benefit of merchants).
My conclusion as to which of these two processes applies to the Form 1040 tax return is both startling and has consequences that bring into question the convictions of countless Americans imprisoned for alleged tax crimes, not to mention the billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars collected by force in the name of tax laws.
A major finding of my research is that the Exchequer revenue processes were open to challenge by the king’s debtors at every stage of the proceedings, even before the debt was collected. What that means is that every alleged taxpayer is absolutely entitled to trial by jury to the IRS record of assessment before the government can collect a single penny of tax, based upon similar processes employed in the Exchequer and secured by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Jury Trial Clause of the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
In my book, I demonstrate, time and time again, how our present tax officials and those who enforce taxes in the courts are simply either woefully ignorant of the true basis of the income tax or are knowingly corrupt.
The following is a review of Taxation by Misrepresentation, the Truth about Income Taxes in Plain English, by a senior executive with one of the largest corporations in the world, one of the companies that make up the Dow Jones Industrial stock market average:
Over years of studying government tyranny, monetary reform and freedom, I’ve run across a lot of information about how unconstitutional the US Income Tax is, how the 16th Amendment was never ratified by the requisite number of states, and how there’s really no law that compels citizens to pay Federal Income Tax. One of the best documentaries on this topic was the late Aaron Russo’s film “From Freedom to Fascism”. At one of Ron Paul’s early campaign rallies in the Bay Area in July, 2007, I even arranged for Joe Banister, a former IRS enforcement agent and whistle-blower living locally in San Jose to speak about the topic. A lot of the arguments seemed very convoluted to me, and for sure nothing seemed clear enough that you could take on the IRS and a heavy-handed judiciary and expect to come away unscathed.
Along comes a fantastic new book, “Taxation by Misrepresentation”, by John W. Benson, which I now believe is by far the best resource to understanding the true constitutional aspects of our income tax system, as well as the origin of the laws and processes involved in compelling citizens to pay it. Far from being convoluted, it is an extremely logical, sound and extraordinarily well-researched book. The engineer in me can connect all the dots and see where all the legal facts and foundations lie.
The book lays out the definitive case that US income tax is absolutely a “voluntary” tax,
which cannot be made compulsory by virtue of its unconstitutional nature, and which requires a great deal of fraud and outright intimidation on the part of the IRS to convince people that what can only be voluntary, is instead a lawful requirement.
The thesis of this book by John Benson is that the US Constitution explicitly disallows a tax on one’s labor, and that the 16th Amendment took “Income” to mean the same thing as used in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909. Current Treasury regulations explicitly state exemptions from “gross income” include “those items of income which are, under the Constitution, not taxable by the Federal Government”, without ever enumerating such. But our treacherous overlords engineered a legalistic workaround for this thorny dilemma. Such a tax could be implemented if it was in accordance with “due process” according to the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, requiring that such due process does not differ in principle from the statute law of England for the King to collect revenues at the time the Constitution was formed.
As a result, all IRS processes and procedures are, in substance and effect, simply the ancient English revenue processes and procedures employed by the king’s revenue officials in the Exchequer (Treasury) in 1791 dressed up in modern garb. To be sure, the author claims, the words used are different and not easily understood. In fact, these procedures and the laws relating back to them are deliberately shrouded in complexity in order to avoid the populace gaining any real insights to the foundations of our tax system.
Therefore, John claims, in order to understand today’s tax processes and procedures, you must understand the ancient processes employed by the Exchequer, some dating back in time before King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta, the Great Charter of Liberties, on the Plains of Runnymede in 1215. If you knew that the foundations of our tax code relate back prior to the Magna Carta, you are in a very small minority.
A precedent-setting Supreme Court tax case in 1856 cited several English treatises as authorities on the ancient processes used by the king’s Exchequer. John and his associate, Glenn Ambort, spent over a year hunting down the four principal treatises, as they are all long out of print, and read through each of them. They traced the tax processes and procedures employed by the IRS today and laid them side by side with the English processes. By this process, John demonstrates a compelling case that the income tax process used today by the IRS must be based upon one of the only two processes used by the king in 1791, both of which are cited in the 1856 Supreme Court case, namely, either the finding of an inquisition, aka an inquest of office (administrative hearing, in today’s terms), or a “statute staple” process (an ancient form of contract enacted by Parliament for the benefit of merchants).
His conclusion as to which of these two processes apply to the Form 1040 tax return is both startling and has consequences that bring into question the convictions of countless Americans imprisoned for alleged tax crimes, not to mention the billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars collected by force in the name of tax laws. Essentially, the statute staple process is a voluntary contractual process used in merchant law and not common law. The result is that IRS taxation is a voluntary contractual process between consenting parties and cannot be compelled on an individual. Much of the IRS code and procedures today are therefore designed to both conform to this fact, while insidiously hiding its significance from the populace, and doing everything in their power to intimidate tax payers to “volunteering” payment, even if at gunpoint.
If this wasn’t bad enough, there’s another staggering implication to be revealed. In another blog post/book review I wrote, I covered how U.S. Citizens “volunteer” themselves into the status of “U.S. citizen” under the definition of the 14th Amendment. As I pointed out, this new “Federal” citizenship was initially intended for the recently freed slaves (rather than making them citizens of their states as most citizens were at the time). John points out in his book how Chief Justice Fuller described the 14th Amendment citizenship rule in United States v. Wong Kim Ark:
The rule was the outcome of the connection in feudalism between the individual and the soil on which he lived, and the allegiance due was that of liegemen to their liege lord. It was not local and temporary, as was the obedience to the laws owed by aliens within the dominions of the Crown, but permanent and indissoluble, and not to be cancelled by any change of time or place or circumstances.
And it is this rule, pure and simple, which it is asserted determined citizenship of the United States during the entire period prior to the passage of the act of April 9, 1866, and the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, and governed the meaning of the words “citizen of the United States” and “natural-born citizen” used in the Constitution as originally framed and adopted. I submit that no such rule obtained during the period referred to, and that those words bore no such construction; that the act of April 9, 1866, expressed the contrary rule; that the Fourteenth Amendment prescribed the same rule as the act, and that, if that amendment bears the construction now put upon it, it imposed the English common law rule on this country for the first time, and made it “absolute and unbending” just as Great Britain was being relieved from its inconveniences.
In other words, if you are a 14th Amendment “citizen”, you are a serf on the land, a liege to your lord, in this case the Federal Government. The Federal Government, as it would to a serf, “owns” your labor and can rightfully take your income now (the compensation for your labor) as it deems reasonable according to the contractual benefits you “applied for” when you “volunteer” or “contract” yourself into this status. Remember that under the Constitution, we have unalienable rights and are Citizens (cap “C”) of the United States of America (the country, not the corporation). How do you “volunteer” yourself to become a 14th Amendment citizen-serf, under the definition designed for freed slaves? Well, by “voluntarily” submitting your IRS Form 1040, you annually assert that you are a 14th Amendment citizen (small “c”). The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude, but does not prohibit “voluntary” servitude according to contract law. Ergo, you have been had. This is less the Home of the Free and Land of the Brave, than the Home of Fools and the Land of Liars.
So, what do you do now? John points out in very clear terms in his “Disclaimer” at the very opening of his book that this is a political battle. Do NOT stop filing the usual tax returns and paying the usual taxes that the IRS and the courts require. This would be like going to a Mafia crime boss and telling him there’s no law allowing him to extract his “security” payments. You will not come out better for the conversation. Better to realize that we have become a nation of thugs and corruption, and not laws, despite your education to the contrary. John pleads with his readers to unite to overturn the entire system and replace it with a fairer and more transparent tax system for all, rather than for a small number to try to win a few battles in courts that, in his view, are simply not going to allow any victories, truth and justice be damned.
John has made this a very easy read for the layman, but provided enough references that other researchers will be able to verify facts for themselves. He is close to releasing a legal guide for attorneys defending tax protesters that will be far more detailed based on his 30+ years of research. Finally, you will be amazed at the personal tribulations that John Benson and his colleague, Glenn Ambort, have been through, as detailed in the final chapters of the book. When you expose the fraudulent foundations of an empire, you are not electing the comfortable, easy way of life. But like they say, you only catch flak when you are over the target.