May 16

Tyranny Busters

By Kenneth Feucht books Add comments

BenoitTyrannyTyranny Busters: The Sham and Shame of the Federal Income Tax, by Michael Benoit ★★★★

Michael Benoit sent this book to me a few months ago, and I finally found some time to read it. He is from California, has run for political office a few times in the past, and remains politically active. Benoit discusses the nature of the difference between direct and indirect taxes (since the constitution defines them as different!). Benoit struggles with the income tax, determining how it can legally be a graduated tax, since direct taxes much be apportioned equally as according to the constitution. He also struggles with trying to define if the law really does say that he need to pay an income tax.

This is a wonderful book that was educational in many regards to me. I don’t consider it particularly fun struggling with the nature of tax law. Benoit does it quite capably, yet is cautious in his recommendations. I presume that he has a grasp on the rogue, un-constitutional nature of the IRS. His main education in this regard has come from Otto Skinner, who seems to be attacked viciously by the group called Quatloos!, found on The only argument Quatloos seems to make against Skinner is that it is obvious that all people need to pay taxes and everybody knows that. Actually, the Quatloos argument is self defeating, since a substantial portion of our population, the 50% “poor” and the filthy rich (George Soros, etc.), pay almost no tax. It seems like some people “know” that you can avoid taxes, or not be legally responsible for paying them.

I defer to my brother’s attempt to define the US tax code. Multiple letters to the IRS were never responded to asking specific clarification of tax law. Perhaps Quatloos needs to speak with the IRS and inform them as to the precise nature of tax code. My brother depended mostly on the writings and advice of tax and constitutional lawyers Larry Becraft and Edwin Vieira, who seem to have a grasp at the true morass of our tax system. It is difficult to imagine our current system lasting much longer before the system breaks, leaving us either under anarchy and a new revolution, or under a Stalinist style police state. I’m grateful for those like Benoit with the courage to speak out and attempt to fix the system before it fixes us.


Add comments

2 Responses to “Tyranny Busters”

  1. Onkel Dennis says:

    A little clarification: Neither I nor Lowell H. Becraft Jr. have attempted to define any of the U.S. statutes. They are defined by those who write them. That does not mean that they are clear, or even coherent. (There is a legal precedent in the courts that a law is void for vagueness. Becraft talks at length about the case that establishes this.) Title 26, subtitle A does not answer certain basic questions asked of it. You would think that a question so basic as who is liable for the tax would be answered. If you look in Sec. 4001, who is liable for the vehicle tax, it is clearly stated:

    There is hereby imposed on the 1st retail sale of any passenger vehicle a tax equal to 10 percent of the price for which so sold to the extent such price exceeds the applicable amount.

    Does that answer the question of the liability for the tax? Presumably the seller would have the buyer pay it, but the sale itself causes the imposition of the tax.

    Now look at this; Subtitle A starts out with this kind of language:

    There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of —

    (1) every married individual (as defined in section 7703) who makes a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013, and

    (2) every surviving spouse …

    Does not the first question that comes to your mind is: what income is taxable?
    The question, for the average Joe American, is never answered.

    The letters that were sent to the Secretary of the Treasury and the IRS Commissioner by Becraft and me (and remain unanswered) were based on Becraft’s legal research. He could not find in the Congressional Record (where new laws must be posted to go into effect; you have to be told what they are before you can be held liable for them – as though everyone regularly reads the voluminous Congressional Record!) where Congress legislated the IRS as an agency of the U.S. govt. It really does look as though it is not part of the U.S. govt. Some people have come up with theories about it being a foreign corporation,etc. but the simple fact is that nothing can be found in the Record establishing the IRS. Dept. of Treasury letterhead is issued by them in their letters, so they obviously must have something to do with the U.S., but it is not clear that they are a Congressionally legislated agency of the U,S. govt.

    Other fundamental quandries exist. This is an area of law that is inherently unstable because the Constitution forbids slavery, and a tax on labor is essentially a form of it.

    Skinner is wrapped up in another unclear legal issue of whether the income tax is direct or indirect. Skinner argues that it is indirect but most tax experts (like Becraft and most U.S. District courts) say that it is direct.

    The 16th (income tax) Amendment (which was not constitutionally ratified, by only 3 or 4 states, not the 38 required – search for Bill Benson and The Law That Never Was for more on this scandal) adds to the confusion. It can be interpreted either as acknowledging that

    1) the income tax is a direct tax for which exception is being made, or
    2) that it is being moved into the category of an indirect tax

    Read it and try to decide. The wording is very clever and leads people like Skinner to write whole books on the subject.

  2. Dennis;
    Agree. Thanks for your clarification.

Leave a Reply


preload preload preload