LEGAL PLUNDER

FED INCOME TAXES ARE LEGAL PLUNDER

The following article embodies the truth in the statement that if one tells a lie long enough it becomes the truth. It just may be that our Government has been caught with it proverbial pants down.
The IRS recently lost a case in a Federal district court attempting to prove that income tax, at least as we know it, is legal.

By de Andréa

Tom Cryer a lawyer by profession is acquitted after arguing so-called income tax law lacks legal foundation.

Tom Cryer won a challenge in front of a jury to prove that there is no constitutional foundation for the nation's income tax. The victorious attorney now is setting his sights on higher achievements toward the repeal of Federal Income taxes on personal income.

"I think now people are beginning to realize that this has got to be the largest commission of fraud, backed up by intimidation and extortion and by the sheer force of taking peoples property and hard-earned money without any lawful authorization whatsoever," said Tom Cryer just days after a jury in Louisiana acquitted him of two criminal counts of tax evasion.

The truth, he said, is where he comes in, with the launch of a new Truth Attack website that is intended to build on his victory, and create a coalition of resources to defeat – ultimately – the income tax in the United States.

Cryer said the underlying issue is not that complicated. Essentially, he argued that income is not necessarily any money that comes to a person, but rather categories such as profit and interest.

He said the free exchange of labor for compensation has been upheld as a right by the Supreme Court, but that doesn't necessarily make the compensation, income.

If ever such an argument were to be presented widely, Cryer said, the income to the federal government would plummet. But not to worry, he said, the expenses could be reduced equally by eliminating illegal programs, departments and agencies that also have no foundation in the Constitution. These so-called needy programs could be easily picked up by individuals or the States as the Tenth Amendment directs.

One simply needs to read the Constitution to find out what the Fed can be involved in, and then read the 10th Amendment (the most ignored Amendment among the Ten) to find that the Federal Government only has the power designated to it by the Constitution. In other words the Fed cannot just do as it pleases, not legally anyway.

The following paragraph is the most profound statement of truth one could ever say about the criminal evolution that has taken place in our history since and because of federal income tax. I have written at least half a dozen previous articles on this very fact.

"The Founding Fathers intentionally restricted the taxing powers of the new federal government as a measure of restraint on its size. By exceeding that limited taxing authority the federal government has been able to obtain resources beyond its intended reach, and that money has enabled the federal government to exceed its authority," Cryer said.

For example, he said,”the Constitution does not empower the federal government to regulate education, or employment, and agriculture, yet it does so.”

The jury in U.S. District Court in Louisiana found Cryer, of Shreveport, not guilty of failure to file income taxes for two years. He had been indicted in 2006 on charges of failing to pay $73,000 to the IRS in 2000 and 2001. “The next step in his personal case will be up to the IRS and prosecutors, if they choose to continue the issue”, he said.

But for the rest of the nation, he's working with Save-a-Patriot, the Free Enterprise Society, Live Free Now, and his own Lie Free Zone to spread the message of the truth.

"There are three points that are important," he said "There's no law making the average working man liable [for income taxes], there's no law or regulation that allows the IRS to contend that earnings are 100 percent profit received in exchange for nothing, and the right to earn a living through any lawful occupation is a constitutionally protected fundamental right, and it is exempt from taxation."

Spokesman Robert Marvin in Washington's IRS office said the Internal Revenue Code provides for taxation on salaries or wages, but when pressed for a specific citation, or constitutional provision, he said, "I can't comment."

Cryer's encounter with tax law began more than a decade ago when a friend told him the income tax was a sham. Cryer started researching, hoping to keep his friend out of trouble. But his conclusions, after years of research, were exactly what his friend told him. He researched not only tax laws, but also the documents pertaining to the drafting of the U.S. Constitution as well as the first income tax.

He said throughout his battle with the IRS, he offered at every turn, to pay taxes if the IRS could show him their authorization to demand tax on income, and that never has happened.

Another profound example:
"The Criminal Investigation Division and Department of Justice both responded only with 'your position is frivolous.’ I had never stated a position, so how could they know whether it was frivolous?" he said. "Imagine my sending you a bill for $1,000 and when you call me and ask what the bill was for I simply said, 'that position is frivolous, just write the check and send it to me.'"

His acquittal, he said, was a precedent because it means "people can see and recognize the truth." He said multiple Supreme Court opinions have affirmed an individual's ownership of his or her own labor, and "exercising your fundamental rights" is not taxable. "It is definitely a trade. What most people receive in the form of wages, salaries or in my case fees that they personally earned for their labor is not received in exchange for nothing." In other words labor is a product traded for money.

He said there might be a profit that should be taxable, but there might not.
"The IRS lets Wal-Mart sell a trillion dollars worth of goods, but they can back out their cost of goods [before being taxed,]" he said. "The IRS considers, in the case of a Wal-Mart wage earner however except for a few allowable deductions, 100 percent of what he takes in is profit."

"But he's using his life, energy and work lifespan, and depleting it as he goes," Cryer said "[Working] is a God-given fundamental right that is protected under the Constitution and can't be taxed any more than exercising freedom of speech."
While he waits to see what, if anything, the IRS and Justice Department will do next in his case, he's working to coordinate the groups that are battling taxation as unconstitutional.

"I have started a campaign to unify [the work] and we've got a number of organizations that are sponsoring and supporting this campaign," he said. The goal is to get everyone "who is aware of the truth" organized so they can spread the word

Cryer warned without a restoration of constitutional basics, the nation is lost.

"Read your Constitution and you will see that the federal role does not include ANY authority to regulate or tax any citizen directly and that “WE” expressly reserved the right to rule and govern ourselves as States, not as mere political subdivisions," his website says.

"The Constitution does not allow the government to run your lives, but the money it is stealing from millions of Americans is the fuel for its over-reaching and unfettered power. Take the money back and we and our states and communities can again be free," he said.

The fight is over "our FREEDOM from rule by a DISTANT RULER, just as we fought to free ourselves of a distant Kingdom over 200 years ago," he said.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Federal law defines income, "fruits", as things that are produced by or derived from another thing without the diminution of its substance.

Diminution is defined in Webster’s dictionary as “decrease”. The simple fact is that our income is the trade of labor for that income; and the substance of individual labor does in fact expend, diminish, or decrease over time. In other words income is something that is not produced without diminution. It is therefore legally defined as trading item for item, so there is no profit. A “tip” for example might legally be classified as profit, over and above the fruit of expendable labor, and therefore may be taxable.

The Sixteenth Amendment’s reference to taxes on Income does not legally refer to, nor does it document that individuals trading the expendable labor for money and does not therefore create the establishment of taxable income. Income produced without diminution would normally be derived from the profits of a business, because the source of said income is only diminished by its expenses, and what is left (profit) is taxable.

The expenditure of personal income is the diminishing source which is “labor”. Therefore one must, as in a business, be able to deduct the “cost” of individual personal income, and this cost is the diminishing labor of the individual.

This was the bases of Tom Cryer’s case [The IRS verses Cryer]. Now that the IRS has lost this case, this becomes case law and a precedent in future cases. Moreover, unless the Fed is successful in getting this over turned on appeal, it just may be like stacking dominoes for the future of personal income tax.

One can only hope…

de Andréa