Re: http://sprintmail.com/dalereastman/861/tax/scams
Hale Westman
news:_tudnURw1rK...@comcast.com...
>
> "Dale Eastman" <dalere...@sprintmail.com> wrote in message> >
> >
> > esenter wrote:
> >
> >
> > > That's your problem, eastboy, and it is why you are a retard that
never
> made
> > > it past the 6th grade.
> >
> > > I don't expect an intelligent reponse from you, eastboy. Why don't
you
> > > suprise me?
> >
>
> Why am I not suprised? When eastboy is challenged to think, he tucks tail
> and runs like the little chickenshit retard he is.
dale eastman is also a larken rose scam meister
http://www.quatlosers.com
Larken Rose
When a scam gets rolling, all sorts of human cockroaches come out of the
woodwork to try to cash in. This is the perfect description of Larken Rose,
a scammer come lately to the world of tax protesting who runs tax scam
website http://www.taxableincome.net.
Not being smart enough to come up with any unique theory of his own, Larken
has simply latched on to the "861" or "Income Can't Be Defined" arguments
that end up with the conclusion that only foreigners are required to pay
income tax. Larkin's argument has been exploded more times than a pack of
Blackcats at a 4th of July festival (see below) but this hasn't stopped
Larken from marketing his video for $20 on his other website
http://www.theft-by-deception.com
Larken's ally is Thurston Bell, which means that his nemesis is Rick Haraka
a/k/a Rick Bryan, who criticizes both Larken and Thurston as to be too wet
behind the ears to be able to give advice on how to live a perpetually
tax-free existence. Indeed, Larken and Thurston represent the "new breed" of
tax scam promoters, i.e., high visibility, no shame, and wanting to make the
"Big Splash" to try establish themselves as the next Irwin Schiff.
Larken's most recent marketing ploy has been to announce his "Operation
Glove in Face" via his websites and articles in the militia nut media, where
he publicly pleads for the IRS to arrest him for non-payment of taxes since
1997. Crazy as this sounds, the convictions of other tax scam artists, such
as Irwin Schiff and Bill Benson, only helped their careers.
In the crazy world of tax protesting, failure sells.
Larken Rose's Argument Exploded
As stated above, for federal income tax purposes, "gross income" means all
income from whatever source derived and includes compensation for services.
I.R.C. § 61. Further, Treasury Regulation § 1.1- 1(b) provides, "[i]n
general, all citizens of the United States, wherever resident, and all
resident alien individuals are liable to the income taxes imposed by the
Code whether the income is received from sources within or without the
United States." I.R.C. sections 861 and 911 define the sources of income
(U.S. versus non-U.S. source income) for such purposes as the prevention of
double taxation of income that is subject to tax by more than one country.
These sections neither specify whether income is taxable, nor do they
determine or define gross income. Further, these frivolous assertions are
clearly contrary to well-established legal precedent.
Hale Westman
>
>
> esenter wrote:
>
> >>>That's your problem, eastboy, and it is why you are a retard that never
made
> >>>it past the 6th grade.
>
>
> >>>I don't expect an intelligent reponse from you, eastboy. Why don't you
> >>>suprise me?
>
>
> > and runs like the little chickenshit retard he is.
> http://www.861.larken.rose.tax.scams <--- "They" don't want you to look
here.
you tell 'em dale!
http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html
Wages paid within the United States are not a "source" of income defined by
section 861 of the Internal Revenue Code and so are not taxable.
The claim is that the Internal Revenue Code does not apply to most of the
income of citizens of the United States because the only definitions of
"sources of income" apply only to nonresident aliens and foreign
corporations. (See I.R.C. section 861 and its regulations.) This argument is
completely contrary to the express language of the Internal Revenue Code and
its regulations.
Section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code states the general rule that
"gross income" (which is the starting point for the calculation of taxable
income) "means all income from whatever source derived...."
The regulations confirm that U.S. citizens (and residents) are taxed on all
of their income, regardless of where the source is located, and so the
source of income is irrelevant to U.S. citizens and residents.
"In general, all citizens of the United States, wherever resident, and all
resident alien individuals are liable to the income taxes imposed by the
Code whether the income is received from sources within or without the
United States." Treas. Reg. § 1.1-1(b).
This has been confirmed by the U.S. Court of Claims:
"The determination of where income is derived or 'sourced' is generally of
no moment to either United States citizens or United States corporations,
for such persons are subject to tax under section 1 and section 11,
respectively, on their worldwide income." Great-West Life Assur. Co. v.
United States, 230 Ct. Cl. 477, 678 F.2d 180, 183 (1982)
The general rule, therefore, is that all income is included in gross income,
and the burden is on the taxpayer to find a statute or regulation that
excludes the income from tax.
So how can tax protesters claim that their income is not subject to tax? By
a selective and very tortured reading of section 861 of the Internal Revenue
Code and its regulations. Briefly, many tax protesters claim that:
"Taxable income" and the "sources" of taxable income can be determined only
by reference to section 861 and its regulations; and
The regulations under section 861, specifically § 1.861-8(f), list all
possible taxable sources of income; and
The incomes of most citizens are not described in Treas. Reg. § 1.861-8(f).
Needless to say, every step in the "logic" of tax protesters is wrong.
As already explained, the Internal Revenue Code and regulations are quite
clear in stating that citizens and residents of the United States are taxed
on all income, regardless of source.