RT CPA

[Dale Eastman]

SCOTUS has said:
   In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions, by implication, beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen." GOULD v. GOULD, 245 U.S. 151 (1917).

 SCOTUS has said:
... [T]he well-settled rule ... the citizen is exempt from taxation unless the same is imposed by clear and unequivocal language, and that where the construction of a tax law is doubtful, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid... SPRECKELS SUGAR REFINING CO. v. MCCLAIN, 192 U.S. 397 (1904)

SCOTUS has said:
If it is law, it will be found in our books; if it is not to be found there, it is not law.
Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 627 (1886)

What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestically earned compensation for labor?

Since I'm getting spammed by ignorant or dishonest tax preparers, I'm returning the favor by asking this question. Please note all the failures and refusals to answer this very specific question about tax law.

Dale Eastman Gee. Did you miss the Constitutional Amendment that actually allowed for an income tax? The amendment, makes those court cases from before 1913 not applicable to the question of income taxes.

Hey Brainiac... How bout you answer the question?
What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestically earned compensation for labor?

Dale Eastman How about you just continue in ignorance? If I gave it to you, you would just deny it means anything.

So... You fail to answer a very specific question, But I'm allegedly the ignorant one?

What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for the distilled spirits tax imposed on distilled spirits?

IRC § 5005

Now... Your answer to my question?

What statute in the Internal Revenue Code, using clear and unequivocal language as required by the Supreme Court, makes a private Citizen liable for subtitle A - income taxes on his or her domestically earned compensation for labor?

Dale Eastman I don't recall anyone asking a question about distilled spirits . . . now, I'm guessing that you already know the answer to the question you ask. Regardless, what will you pay me for an answer?

Why would I pay you to lie to me?
You are correct. I absolutely know the answer to my question.
I know that there is no statute that imposes a liability on a working stiff's domestic compensation for labor.
Therefore I know that you can not post an answer. I love your bravado. Should I give you the link to the discussion I had with a former IRS agent who also could NOT supply the correct answer?

Dale Eastman No need for a link. If the IRS agent was incapable of showing you, that explains why he/she is a former IRS agent.

He started with the same bullshit you did... Fear the IRS.
He and you both share another attribute: Failure - refusal to answer the question.
You, and he, couldn't and can't answer the question because there is no statute that imposes a liability on a domestic working stiff to pay a tax on the working stiff's domestic compensation for labor.
I am intrigued by your continuing attempts to bluff people with your claim that you have the answer. Post it or I rightfully call you a liar.

Dale Eastman And if I do show you, does that mean YOU are a liar?

You won't because you can't.

The best you will do is pretend I didn't write the exact and specific words of my question. Your answer MUST be as specific as the question I've asked.

Dale Eastman I see. If it doesn't exactly say "private Citizen" (as opposed to words like "person," "individual," or similar), then you will say it's not exact? Or the the exact phrase, "domestically earned compensation for labor" isn't used, but instead of terms like "wages" or "earnings" is used? Is that correct?

SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION...
DE: ➽ I know that there is no statute that imposes a liability on a working stiff's domestic compensation for labor.
Therefore I know that you can not post an answer.
RT: ➽ Dale Eastman And if I do show you, does that mean YOU are a liar?
/SUMMARY

So far, all you've done is BULLSHIT about an answer you COULD give. So far you are proving my last paragraph in my original post to be a correctly prescient comment:
DE: ➽ Please note all the failures and refusals to answer this very specific question about tax law.

I happened to notice on a mouse-over that you are a CPA. That explained part of your interest in this discussion to me.

You wanna prove I'm a liar? Post the statute that makes a working stiff liable for a tax on their domestic compensation for labor.

quote=22 June 17:48

file:///C:/Users/daler/Desktop/Snappy/tax/1040InstructionsSay.html
PRA notice

[Dale Eastman]

You wanna prove I'm a liar? Post the statute that makes a working stiff liable for a tax on their domestic compensation for labor.