|
Tax protesters in the United States advance a number of conspiracy arguments asserting that Congress, the courts and various agencies within the federal government –primarily the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)– are involved in a deception deliberately designed to procure from individuals or entities their wealth or profits in contravention of law. Conspiracy arguments, though related to, are distinct from constitutional, statutory, and administrative arguments. Proponents of such arguments contend that all three branches of the United States government are working covertly to defraud the taxpayers of the United States through the illegal imposition, assessment and collection of a federal income tax. ==Conspiracy arguments, in general== Tax protester Irwin Schiff, following his criminal conviction for tax fraud that resulted in the imposition of a 13-year prison sentence, released a statement asserting in part that "the entire federal judiciary is involved in a monumental, criminal conspiracy to collect income taxes in violation of law". Schiff's web site continues to state: "Since the income tax was repealed in 1954 when Congress adopted the 1954 Code, it is clear that for 50 years federal judges in conspiracy with U. S. Department of Injustice prosecutors have been illegally and criminally prosecuting people for crimes that do not exist in connection with a tax that nobody owes."〔See (www.paynoincometax.com ).〕 One tax protester web site, called www.tax-freedom.com, quotes from an article by William Cooper titled "BATF/IRS - Criminal Fraud", from the publication ''Veritas'' (issue no. 6, September 1995), as follows: Claims made in support of the income tax conspiracy include: *The courts rely only on the many cases where tax protesters lost, and ignore those few where tax protesters prevail.〔Dan Evans, (Tax Protester FAQ arguments about judges ).〕 *The gold fringe around the American flag, as displayed in many federal courts, designates them as Admiralty courts, which cannot hear other kinds of cases, or signal that the court is operating under martial law.〔American Patriot Friends Network Accessed 16 October 2008 http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flag.htm〕 No court has ever upheld this argument, as neither the presence (or absence) of a flag (or of any other standard or element of decor), nor the fringe on a flag (which has no heraldic or vexillological significance), has any bearing whatsoever on the jurisdiction of a court. In ''United States v. Greenstreet'', the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas noted: 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Tax protester conspiracy arguments」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|