However, since the Fed and it’s underling agencies have gotten so much more greedy lately, people are now starting to notice that the whole tax biz (and other related scams – see bankster bailouts) are now quite a pain in the butt.

First, let’s go back to the idea of “voluntary compliance.”

Compliance, as it reads in the dictionary, is the act of conforming. We either conform because we want to or because we have to. We’re either conforming because we choose to or because we’re required to do so.

So if we agree that there are two reasons we would comply with something (by choice or by requirement), then we can categorize such compliance as either voluntary or mandatory.

The dictionary describes mandatory as the following:

–adjective
1. authoritatively ordered; obligatory; compulsory: It is mandatory that all students take two years of math.
2. pertaining to, of the nature of, or containing a command.
3. Law . permitting no option; not to be disregarded or modified: a mandatory clause.

All laws are to be obeyed. But they can’t physically stopping us from breaking them. So in that sense, every rule, every law, every system in human nature is one of “voluntary” compliance. It’s against the law to murder but no one can physically prevent someone from disobeying the laws against homicide.

In the thesaurus, “mandatory” is a direct antonym of “voluntary.” The two are direct opposites. This does not need any further legal definitions to decipher, but absent legal definitions, it’s impossible to conclude otherwise. It’s butchery of the English language to write (or interpret) any legal code based on “voluntary” compliance. If that weren’t the case, do you think laws regarding murder or rape would be worded to say they were “voluntary compliance?” Of course not.

We are people of free-will. Our actions cannot be controlled. So by the logic being presented by Peter K, everything is “voluntary compliance” regardless of what law it is. So there has to be a clear distinction between voluntary and mandatory compliance.

We don’t obey traffic laws because we’re doing it on our own accord. If we did, we wouldn’t obey them because they’re inconvenient. We do so because it’s mandatory to do so or else we are punished. Anything cannot be voluntary if we’re not doing it freely or on our own accord.

It’s frankly disturbing someone, anyone, claiming such wit would argue such logic. Clearly even the framers of the tax code knew what they were doing, because they had to get around years of historical precedent and that inconvenient constitution persisting apportionment of direct taxes–of which labor traded for wages has been defined. So the IRS crafted carefully worded tax laws that imply but do not illicitly state mandatory compliance.

All that said, I did read section 6012(a) of the IRS code. And you know what was specifically missing in the text of the law? Where it actually states who is *required* to file. It states who is *not required* to file (and pay), but it does not specifically state who *is* required. This may seem like semantics, but it’s not. In any law, any state penal code or what have you, something that is expressly required or forbidden is stated as such.

Chapter I defines income levels that are taxable. But they don’t state an individual’s requirement to file. Title 26 states the IRS is of voluntary compliance, but nowhere in statute is the mandatory aspect of compliance laid out. And 6011(a) states requirement to file based on the secretary of treasury, but again, where is the law that states the requirement itself? It’s not in 6012(a) because it tells us who is not required, but again, it DOES NOT SAY WHO IS REQUIRED!

This is not an accident. Lawmakers are not idiots. When something is mandatory, the language is not left to assumptions or implications. It’s specifically stated in text what is required of someone. It is absolute fact that 6012 does not do that. It says who is not required but does not say who IS required.

See, this is the true genius of the system. They know the average person is not going to notice that distinction. Tax professionals certainly would if they research the code for themselves (and clearly at least a few — Joe Banister and Sherry Jackson have), as would other former and current IRS agents and attorneys, but most folks will simply take the IRS and their overstated, abused rhetoric about how it’s our “obligation” and how these nutty fanatics are using baseless, frivolous arguments that have been shot down in court. Then they’ll simply threaten us with tax evasion, tax liens and further “frivolous” penalties.

And that sounds voluntary to you? Right.

Nevermind that mandatory filing is in direct violation of the right against self-incrimination. After all, if you “voluntarily comply” with the IRS and you make a mistake, you could face financial or criminal penalties. That in itself is unconstitutional. But the law is not written as such.

Unfortunately, America has gone on with the charade and folks like Peter K. will come along trying to bury you in rhetoric hoping you won’t uncover the finer details.

The offshore banker robbery hit the US in 2008, and 16 years from that will be 2024.

But why worry? The world’s supposed to be ending by 2012, anyway!

Unless we turn back to God’s Word, his wisdom, I see our country falling. But, I think our people will win, but it will be an uphill battle. Keep the faith.
2Chronicles 7:14

Keep close to your families. Always be prepared. Be aware of what your local government is doing. Look for voter fraud. We need to stop legal and illegal immigration.

The third clause (i believe) of the first article states in no uncertain terms, that “the trial of all crimes are to be decided by a jury” (can’t recall verbatim at the moment, but this is the premise). That the adjudication process is incessantly intruded upon by court magistrates is illegal. This is a nation of sovereign citizens whom agree to be compliant with a democratically elected government of laws. This means that the “of, for and by” mechanism that creates the governance in this society is still bound by the duly sworn decisions of the informed ‘jury of peers’. However, at the same time, this ‘informed’ jury is specifically defined by its knowledge and understanding of the United States Constitution, of which each and every one of its decisions must be based upon.

To have so monsterously misinterpreted such amendments as the 7th — which states that “for all suits at common law in excess of $20, the right to a jury trial shall be preserved…” is causing the halls of justice to bleed. This amendment in no way, ever allowed any individual the right to “waive” their jury trial. This waiver being allowed so many criminals to seek the decision of a “god” (supreme court judge) is what circumvents the rights of ‘we the people’ in myriad fashion.

The corporation is populated by individuals whom, each and every one, are born with the inalienable rights ratified within the Constitution. Not even one of these rights ever devolve onto any group…including the Corporation.

All issues on the subject taxation must comply with the rights of the individual only. That groups are being allowed to avoid taxes is what is causing all of the problems…be they Corporations, companies, charities, foundations, religions, environmental groups, agencies, non-profit organizations…this duplicitous government intrusion among the people is the murky and turbid environment the vast majority of American citizens are being constantly sucker-punched with.

Wake up and smell the destruction before it is too late…