XnForums

A community for freethinkers, skeptics, agnostics, atheists, spiritual seekers, the religious and you.
 
It is currently Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:00 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours



Welcome
Welcome to XnForums

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 12:33 am
Posts: 533
I saw a recent programme in which they said that there is NO legal requirement for a USA citizen to give details of their income for tax purposes.

Seem the IRS gets pretty miffed at nay sayers but there is no law - so it was claimed.

Mind you, I've not paid tax for over 40 years so the question is merely for interest.

_________________
We are wondrous thoughts, sojourning in flesh, awaiting recollection.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:44 am
Posts: 1361
Location: Member #240 in the Foothills of the Spice-laden Mountains.
If you refuse to give details you end up paying more.

If you refuse to pay it......you go to jail or file for bankruptcy and the government sells all your stuff.

Sometimes being right is not enough.......as tax protestors have discovered.

;)

I pay a lot. I will be paying more if Conoco-Phillips ever starts paying me the oil money they owe me.

Funny, I can't send THEM to jail.

8-)

_________________
The fate of the country does not depend on how you vote. The worst man is as strong as the best at that game.....it depends instead on what kind of man you drop from your chamber into the street every morning.
-- Henry David Thoreau


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:49 am
Posts: 490
These people make me laugh :lol: they are just the ignorant repugnuts that listen to fox news and limbaugh.

Here's limeburgers latest.

RUSH: You know what we have learned about the Somali pirates, the merchant marine organizers that were wiped out at the order of Barack Obama, you know what we learned about them? They were teenagers. The Somali pirates, the merchant marine organizers who took a US merchant captain hostage for five days were inexperienced youths, the defense secretary, Roberts Gates, said yesterday, adding that the hijackers were between 17 and 19 years old. Now, just imagine the hue and cry had a Republican president ordered the shooting of black teenagers on the high seas. Greetings and welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:57 am
Posts: 1558
Limpbogg is nothing more than an inciter of violence, imo. A coward behind a microphone.

The Somali pirates are sometimes 9 year olds who have been trained to use weapons. They would have no qualms about gutting fat Limpbogg, maybe even eating him alive. Grissly fat of Limpbogg would probably give them food poisoning. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 12:33 am
Posts: 533
So I'm none the wiser :-)

If there's no law requiring one to send in a tax form then why do people do it?

Logos, the first syllable of Conoco -Phillips is con. I hope they are genuine as I expecting a hefty donation to the hermits' retirement fund.

_________________
We are wondrous thoughts, sojourning in flesh, awaiting recollection.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:44 am
Posts: 1361
Location: Member #240 in the Foothills of the Spice-laden Mountains.
You will be the first to know!

:mrgreen:

I suspect you are right about Conoco.

_________________
The fate of the country does not depend on how you vote. The worst man is as strong as the best at that game.....it depends instead on what kind of man you drop from your chamber into the street every morning.
-- Henry David Thoreau


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:57 am
Posts: 1558
One of the talking idiots on a news commentary spot said that the constitution demanded Americans pay income taxes.

Several years ago I called the local IRS office and inquired about the then running gossip of Americans having to pay no taxes. Sure enough, there was no rule at that time, iow, American citizens were paying income taxes voluntarily because they didn't know any better. There was no mandatory tax law existing at that time. However, due to the curiosity of American citizens as to the true situation, congress may have by now concocted a special tax law in case people should challenge the IRS in court. It's my understanding that several people have gone to court with the IRS and won their tax-free case.

Someone said that tax evaders in the past are not required to pay "back taxes" now. So, if you think you owe the IRS from ten or more years ago, forget it, they have. :mrgreen: I have no idea if this is true or not. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 82
Coolhermit,

I barely squeaked through Tax Law I in Law School and never looked back. Certain types enjoy the minutia and detail that come with perusing small type in large books. Not me.

I did get a DVD from a friend outlining all the reasons there shouldn’t be an I.R.S, and no law is on the books as to filling out a tax form, etc. I also know there are people sitting in prison for tax evasion. Which raises the question—do you want to be correct, but in lock-down, or wrong and in sunshine?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:37 pm 
"Someone said that tax evaders in the past are not required to pay "back taxes" now. So, if you think you owe the IRS from ten or more years ago, forget it, they have. I have no idea if this is true or not."

Roslyn -- It's not true. They have the "power" to garnish one's wages, even, and they do. People have had their entire checking and saving accounts wiped out overnight due to the power of the IRS to come and "get their money" ... I pay them $250 per month due to a stupid move I made w/ regard to cashing in my 401(k) plan when I moved to Hawaii (and foolishly not holding out enough taxes on it to pay the IRS). As a result, they added huge penalties and astronomically high interest rates ... all SUPPOSEDLY legal, btw -- even though there is TECHNICALLY no law establishing the IRS! Go figure. But just try to fight it. Ham is 100% correctimundo. I've no plans to be incarcerated over money ... so I shall continue to "pay the piper." Ultimately, if I did not ... I have no doubt that they'd either garnish my paycheck and/or take a huge chunk out of future Social Security funds I'll be entitled to when I hit retirement age ... which (has anyone noticed?) is being pushed further and further back every year! So now one has to wait until one is 67 years old (some younger people I think will have to wait until 68 or 69 ... do you believe that) before one can collect any decent amount of $$ to live on in retirement. So my not paying the piper now is NOT an option if one wants to have any retirement funds forthcoming from Big Brother. You know, I wouldn't mind having to pay them the flat amount I clearly owed them, but the penalties and interest they continue to add on, and on, and on is clearly in the category of usury. Even when people are UNEMPLOYED, the Feds get away with continuing to pile on penalties and interest. It's pretty sick. As they continue to vote themselves raise after raise after raise in their salaries ... and have recess and break after recess and break!

Okay ... I've vented long enough. Now who got this distasteful conversation going in the first place????????? :lol: :mrgreen:

C'est l'avie.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 12:33 am
Posts: 533
So if there's no law requiring one to send in an income tax form why is there not a campaign etc of people willing to burn their demands (let's face bra burning was big in the 60s/70s - and very popular with us red blooded males)?

C'est la vie.

It's nice to know google ads are on the ball - on my laptop here I've a choice of:

Free Bankruptcy Advice
Write off Bankruptcy Debt with an IVA. See if You Qualify in 1 Minute
www.HarringtonBrooks.co.uk
Bankruptcy Free In A Day
What a Difference A Day Makes Debt Free in 24 hours Find Out How
www.debtfreeinaday.com
Pay Off Your Debts
Our 1 Min Test Will Show You Your Debt Solution Options, Start Now!
OneAdvice.co.uk
Need IVA Advice?
Only Pay What You Can Afford. Get Expert Advice From Debt Reducers!
www.DebtReducers.co.uk/IVAs

_________________
We are wondrous thoughts, sojourning in flesh, awaiting recollection.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:52 am 
Ever the teacher (re c'est la vie) . . . One of these days I may remember how to properly spell that thang, but I wouldn't count on it. Three years of NY high school French way too many years ago says it all. :mrgreen:


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:57 am
Posts: 1558
Thanks Hippyheart. You've shown why many people just lay all their worries aside, even walk out of their homes leaving furniture and other possessions behind. What else can they do? They are disgusted with the IRS, having their retirement funds ravished, and with what loose change they can cram in their pockets they head out toward total independence from government tyranny. The IRS might come after them but really, what can they do? There are thousands of people in the same boat and it would take more government funding to prosecute people for not paying money with what money they don't any longer have, it would be a disaster for the IRS to attempt such a feat of daring.

It is sometimes extremely difficult to live without "a job". But it can be done as seen more and more through forced circumstances. We just might be seeing the death of the IRS as we know it within the next ten years as predicted by some of the moneychangers.

Being the economic situation is what it is today in destroying lives of hard working people, "Head of Riverside Church Defends Rev. Brad Braxton's $600K annual compensation:

"Thanks to the "living allowance", Braxton, a 40-year-old former professor at Vanderbilt University Divinity School, his wife and young daughter have moved into a penthouse apartment at the Montana, a luxury high-rise on the upper West side where apartments rent for up to $18,000 a month."

What does this tell struggling Christians who are booted out of their $850 per month apartments because even with a job they can no longer afford to live in such basic shelter?

See full story here:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/200 ... ation.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:13 pm 
yup, Roz, I saw that article too. Pretty pathetic, really. The mucky-mucks in the church (supposedly the most spiritual?) gave that "pastor" the totally unreasonable compensation described in the article -- while they are in the process of laying off some of the church's staff due to the "economic downturn"! Amazing how huge the gap is growing between the haves and have nots ... and how many privileged folks are just so out of touch with the disparity.

I just keep on keeping on -- give where I can, love as best I can (and try to be gentle with myself when I don't do that too well), and continue to take comfort in what I trust to be true: that "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof." Just Friday, our firm let go 20 associate attorneys. One I am very close to, a Canadian gal. She worked weekends and late into the nights during the week ... and was still let go. The partners simply do not want to lose any slivers of the profit pie they enjoy (and it's huge ... about $1.75 million NET each!) ... and so the axes are coming down. My prayer is that I get my buns out of debt before the axe comes too close to moi! Without debt, all I need to come up with is enough for a roof over my head and food -- as I get busy looking for a new gig, if need be. The problem, of course, will be that there most likely will be thousands just like me hitting the pavement all at the same time. C'est la vie. 8-)

I recall another comforting verse from Psalms akin to the one I quoted above ... "I have been young and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken nor His seed begging bread" ... or something like that. The comfort comes from assuming I'm either righteous or his "seed" -- however -- and quite frankly, I'm not too sure I'm either. But God IS. That I know. (Strangely, it's all the comfort and assurance I need these days.)

ps: Then, again, should the partners decide to trim the support staff and no job shows up for me in this tenuous job market, I could always live in my lovely car! It's prettier than my apartment these days (which is in an extreme state of chaos/disarray as I'm preparing for yet another apartment move in two weeks!) :mrgreen:


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:57 am
Posts: 1558
Coolhermit wrote:
I saw a recent programme in which they said that there is NO legal requirement for a USA citizen to give details of their income for tax purposes.

Seem the IRS gets pretty miffed at nay sayers but there is no law - so it was claimed.

Mind you, I've not paid tax for over 40 years so the question is merely for interest.


Here's my current updated unofficial understanding of IRS information:

1. There is NO legal requirement for a US citizen to give details of their income for tax purposes.

a. People who make less than $400 per year need not file for income tax purposes.

b. If a cash-only method of exchange is used, with no "traceable money trail", NO filing with the IRS is necessary.

Note: Tax errors via not reporting correct figures from earned income may cause a taxpayer to be audited. However, the average wage earner need not panic as correction of the oversight is easily remedied by sending the appropriate funds due. Many Americans overpay and thus a tax refund is due them.

* Earned Income is defined in an employer/employee relationship whereby the employer and employee provide a paper trail for the IRS to follow.

Tax evasion is more or less of criminal intent to defraud and/or manipulate the taxing system via the paper trail. Penalties apply in regard to the extent and circumstance with applied fines or imprisonment or both.

ok, all you legal eagles might want to debate these points? :|


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I.R.S. question (for Ham?)
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:57 am
Posts: 1558
Hippy@Heart wrote:
yup, Roz, I saw that article too. Pretty pathetic, really. The mucky-mucks in the church (supposedly the most spiritual?) gave that "pastor" the totally unreasonable compensation described in the article -- while they are in the process of laying off some of the church's staff due to the "economic downturn"! Amazing how huge the gap is growing between the haves and have nots ... and how many privileged folks are just so out of touch with the disparity.

I just keep on keeping on -- give where I can, love as best I can (and try to be gentle with myself when I don't do that too well), and continue to take comfort in what I trust to be true: that "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof." Just Friday, our firm let go 20 associate attorneys. One I am very close to, a Canadian gal. She worked weekends and late into the nights during the week ... and was still let go. The partners simply do not want to lose any slivers of the profit pie they enjoy (and it's huge ... about $1.75 million NET each!) ... and so the axes are coming down. My prayer is that I get my buns out of debt before the axe comes too close to moi! Without debt, all I need to come up with is enough for a roof over my head and food -- as I get busy looking for a new gig, if need be. The problem, of course, will be that there most likely will be thousands just like me hitting the pavement all at the same time. C'est la vie. 8-)

I recall another comforting verse from Psalms akin to the one I quoted above ... "I have been young and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken nor His seed begging bread" ... or something like that. The comfort comes from assuming I'm either righteous or his "seed" -- however -- and quite frankly, I'm not too sure I'm either. But God IS. That I know. (Strangely, it's all the comfort and assurance I need these days.)

ps: Then, again, should the partners decide to trim the support staff and no job shows up for me in this tenuous job market, I could always live in my lovely car! It's prettier than my apartment these days (which is in an extreme state of chaos/disarray as I'm preparing for yet another apartment move in two weeks!) :mrgreen:



Sounds like you got the right-eous attitude HH. :D And I'm confident you can handle the slowdowns or cut-backs.

I was thinking there'd be more need for attorney's with this depressive economy but from your firm cutting back I guess I was wrong. Everything is being affected in one way or another it seems. Hope your firm begins an upswing soon so you're not forced into looking for something else.

Concerning the rev. Baxter, I wonder if he would even think about less than $600k per year. I think his "perceived" worth should be under $100k, if even that. And wouldn't we luv to see his tax records? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Donate Now
Donate Now


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Hosted by FreeForums.org | Create a free forum
Template made by DEVPPL Flash Games