True or False??

Individuals who believe they do not owe federal income taxes are prohibited by laws that define perjury from self-assessing, under the penalties of perjury, federal income taxes.

See:
Title 18 U.S.C. 1621 & Title 26 U.S.C. 7206

It seems that you're obliged to declare 'under penalty of perjury' that your tax return is (to the best of your knowledge) accurate, true and correct. You commit perjury if you deliberately lie - concealing income, for example, or putting down wrong amounts.

If you say that you 'do not owe federal income taxes' because you're telling a lie (that you have zero income, perhaps, or that you are an alien from Planet Zarg) than you are committing perjury, and you deserve the penalty.

If you're a tax protestor and believe that you 'do not owe federal income taxes' on principle, then you should try to argue that a tax return is meaningless or invalid - but this needn't prevent you from filling in all the little boxes as accurately as you can with the figures you have available, and stating that you've done so honestly and openly.

False.

So, then, NN, Are you saying that the tax avoider can fill out a 1040 by refusing his signature on the line that contains the perjury jurat?

No. Not at all. Surely you'd only need to avoid signing something that said you were being honest if you weren't.

The 'perjury jurat' surely means that you have to be honest. If you honestly believe that you do not owe federal taxes because federal taxes are somehow illegal, unconstitutional or whatever, then that is what you should say. Say you're not paying the self-assessed amount and have your day in court. (You'll need a better argument than any we've seen so far on this topic, however. )

Your tax-protest needn't stop you from filling in the tax form with an accurate account of your earnings and the tax which the government claims to be owed, and saying that you have done so honestly. Either that or don't bother filling it in at all.

On the other hand, if you honestly believe that you don't owe federal income tax because you didn't make enough money (or are just visiting from another solar system), then that is how you should fill in the form, and - if it's what you honestly believe - then you should be able to sign the perjury jurat with a clear conscience.

As an analogy, you may believe that it's not necessary to have a driver's licence to drive a car. If that's what you believe, then that's what you should honestly state when pulled over by some cop - and have your day in court. You wouldn't, because of your beliefs, apply for a driver's licence using false information, swearing that it's accurate, would you?

If you don't think you owe tax, then you honestly believe that the figures (or extra-terrestrial exemptions) add up that way, or you honestly believe that there's something wrong with tax in principle (possibly you might just be tight-fisted and scrabbling around for a loophole, but that wouldn't be very honest). In either of the first two cases, signing a statement to the effect that you've completed your tax return accurately and honestly to the best of your knowledge shouldn't be a problem; the difference is that, in the second case, you're not going to pay the amount arrived at.

The jurat reads, "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, they are true, correct, and complete." Gary Holder v. Secretary of the Treasury, 791 F.2d 68, 72 (7th Cir. 1986) makes clear (maybe) the purpose of this statement. The court in that case said, "The purpose of §§ 6673 and 6702, like the purpose of Rules 11 and 38 and of § 1927, is to induce litigants to conform their behavior to the governing rules regardless of their subjective beliefs."

In other words, even you think the game is ridiculous, and you're going to pay no attention to the results, you should play it by the rules. You don't make an argument that the game itself is all wrong by cheating. If you're going to fill in a tax form, do it honestly. If you don't believe in paying taxes, do that honestly too. Be straight about it.

I appreciate your answer, NN.
My problem with the 'Perjury' jurat has nothing to do with the honesty of the individual filling out the 1040. One believes he filled out his tax form truthfully, then signs under penalties of perjury, not realizing an error was made. He could possibly go to jail, even for an honest mistake. The other problem I have with the perjury jurat is that when willfully signed, puts the individual who signed it under federal jurisdiction.

But the jurat says "to the best of my knowledge and belief"; there's no punishment for honest mistakes.

And you already are under federal jusrisdiction, I guess, if you're a US citizen.

quote:

---

And you already are under federal jusrisdiction, I guess, if you're a US citizen

---

I am?........You Guess??........U.S. Citizen???

There is a big difference between a U.S.(Federal Corporation) Citizen and an American (Sovereign) Citizen. An American Citizen is at Liberty with unalienable rights under the Declaration of Independence that are protected by the Constitution. While U.S. citizens (by relinquishing their sovereignty) are subjects of Congress with only "privileges and immunities" granted by Congress under the Constitution's 14th amendment.

Do these 'American Sovereign Citizens' get to use Federally funded highways? How about Federally funded sewers? Are they allowed to commit, but not given any protection from, Federal crimes? Can they vote in Presidential elections? Who says who gets, or doesn't get, to be an 'American Sovereign Citizen' - what's to stop Mexicans or Canadians declaring themselves such? What kind of passport do they travel abroad with? Can they serve in the army? Should they be protected by the army, or other Federal security services? Do they really not use Federal zip codes? How on earth can you relinquish inalienable ('incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred' - m-w.com) rights?

The Sovereign Citizen Movement seems to be pretty nasty (if not Nazi); is there a cuddlier version?

More - The Legal Theories of the Sovereign Citizen Movement.

I have to admit that these so called "Groups or Movements" do go to great, if not extreme, lengths to practice what they believe. But please don't misunderstand me and put me in the position of a "Jerry Springer" stereotype. I'm not Anti Government, rather it is corruption within the government that I'm trying to avoid.
Taxpayers need to know up-front what their tax paying responsibilities are so they can comply with the law. But, the tax law is far too complex for that to be possible, and when the IRS and/or other Government authorities (who are supposed to know about this) are questioned, they either refuse to answer (probably because they don't know) or direct us to some section of the IRC that has nothing to do with the questions asked, or they use threats and intimidation in lieu of an answer to our questions. I don't appreciate that from a bureaucracy that I am supposedly volunteering to support.

Unfortunately, rather than simplifying things for the taxpayer, the IRS often makes the problem worse by interpreting the law in a manner that is literally or theoretically correct, but that is divorced from reality and that offends common sense!. Problems arise when the IRS spends too much time trying to get the perfect answer for every possible situation – the rules become unnecessarily complicated, with too many specialized rules, exceptions, and exceptions to the exceptions. The IRS gets bogged down with too many rules, too many procedures, and too much rigidity. And the taxpayers suffer.

I pay only the taxes for which I'm liable, no more and no less.

My Question is: What creates/created the "Liability"? Was it me or them?