Another "the Queen has broken her oath" tax evader

[Burnaby49]

A professional tax dodger, refuses to pay tax until the CRA is about to take everything then declares bankruptcy. This time he wasn't allowed that easy out. Perhaps the bankrupcy court wasn't as fair as it might be in not allowing him an escape-hole. He had good and valid reason for not paying his taxes:

[6] The bankrupt was convicted of various offenses under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.), including failure to file income tax returns in November 2006 and 2008. At the hearing before Judge Klinger, he challenged the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter, and he challenged the validity of the Income Tax Act and the Provincial Court Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 379. He insisted that the justice of the peace and prosecutors were required to produce a signed oath of allegiance. None of these arguments were accepted.

[7] His main defense, however, was that he refused to file income tax returns because to do so would conflict with his religious beliefs. He asserted as a proposition that the Queen is constitutionally, contractually, morally and ethically bound to uphold the Christian principle set out in the Bible. He argued that statutes which advance the faith are binding, but if statutes derogate or diminish the faith, they are not binding. He suggests the Income Tax Act derogates the faith and the principles of the Holy Bible and his religious beliefs, and it is therefore of no force and effect.

He also tosses in a touch of Poriskyism:

9] In addition, he denies that he is a "person" bound by the Income Tax Act

But, to be fair, he has apparently paid his debts. He claims that the court sold his original court order to pay to a third party so they are already paid off:

17] When asked why he did not pay any money into the estate pursuant to my court order of June 2012, he indicated that this order had nothing to do with him, but if he is forced to pay the court order, then he will endorse it once he is given the original court order. He viewed the court order as a negotiable instrument that was likely sold to a third-party, which is what he meant by it being "monetized".


2013 BCSC 1413

http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/20 ... c1413.html

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Ah yes, Mr. Kazimierz Chester Crischuk. A colourful fellow indeed. An accountant, as I understand it. And someone who has never seen a tax denial scheme he did not like.

I suppose one should be fair and mention he also called himself, at various points, Kaz-Chester: Crischuk, and also "Mythlim-Axkw". That last one is rather amusing. In R. v. Crischuk, 2010 BCSC 716 (http://canlii.ca/t/29w67) at para. 15 the court quotes an "Affidavit of Facts" that was part of the appeal record:

...The content is somewhat difficult to summarize. In paragraph 1, Mr. Crischuk deposed that:

• 1. The affiant, known as: Mythlim‑Axkw of the Wilps‑Daaxan, is a Sovereign North‑American‑Indian (sic.), given the spiritual appellation of the Mythlim‑Axkw by the Tribal‑Family (Exhibit A), and hereby reserves all rights and claims…as it relates to all parties.
  
  2. The affiant does hereby renounce and does declare void, ab initio and nunc pro tunc, any and all attempts to change the affiant’s status in Law to that of a Factor of, or for, an alien corporate, Statutory, Military, Maritime, Admiralty, Fictitious “CANADIAN”, “person”, “consumer”, “individual”, “citizen”, “citizen‑subject”, “plaintiff”, “defendant”, “resident”, “whoever”, “taxpayer”, “driver”, “gun/firearm owner”, “debtor”, etc..
  
  3. The affiant does not participate in any commercial activity in de facto corporate Canada; but remains as the Authorized Agent of the legal entity/juristic person known as KAZIMIERZ CZESLAW KRYSZCZUK CRISCHUK©™ (Trust), as the only authorized representative of the legal entity/juristic person of the Trust or any and all alphanumerical variation(s) thereof, herein after jointly and severally known as “Person”.

In paragraph 6, Mr. Crischuk deposed that the Wilps‑Daaxan Tribe had never transferred any of their lands to anyone and that their right to move on the lands is recognized by the Jay Treaty, a March 9, 1704, Order‑in‑Council issued by Lord Dufferin and the Royal Proclamation of 1763. The balance of the affidavit consists of Mr. Crischuk "accepting and returning" various parts of various statutes, including the Provincial Court Act, Canada Revenue Agency Act, and the Personal Property Security Act. Finally, he deposed that he did not understand any of the charges that he faced, an assertion that is difficult to reconcile with his earlier and later statements that he was not before the court to contest any of the allegations.

Mythlim-Axkw claimed he had been "adopted" by the Wilps-Daaxan tribe but offered only "largely unintelligible" evidence of that.

Lots of other silly arguments. Mythlim-Axkw demanded oaths of office from a bunch of officials (R. v. Crischuk, 2007 BCPC 470 at para. 7) (http://canlii.ca/t/20phz). Said paying tax is against his religion, which led to this amusing comment from the Provincial Court judge at para. 11:

... He also makes the surprising argument that taxation, biblically, of necessity and pursuant to the rule of law, must be voluntary. He suggests that forced taxation is theft. Interestingly, in the accused’s volume entitled “Under Protest, Duress and Intimidation – Challenge to Jurisdiction “, filed in the Registry April 5, 2007, at page 6, para. 28, it is stated that Mr. Crischuk does pay sales and gas taxes, however, this is only because of the extreme difficulty present in refusing to pay them. It would appear therefore that that extreme difficulty trumps his religious conviction. I conclude that if it were extremely difficult for Mr. Crischuk to refuse to pay income tax, he would also then pay income tax notwithstanding his religious convictions.

On appeal he also argued a split/double person motif in that he had somehow taken control of his capital letter strawman (paras. 43-45), but nevertheless did get his sentence reduced: R. v. Crischuk, 2010 BCSC 1165 (http://canlii.ca/t/2c43c). The B.C. Court of Appeal denied leave: R. v. Crischuk, 2010 BCCA 391 (http://canlii.ca/t/2c87t).

Something I had not realized til I was doing research on Mr. Crischuk is that he started his descent by hooking up with minister Belanger and CERI (viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9261). But sure enough, Belanger has thoughtfully posted Crischuk's entire CERI-type package online (http://allcreatorsgifts.blogspot.ca/200 ... ement.html). Like all CERI documents it goes on ... and on ... and on ...

But one bit I liked is that Crischuk has his own church!

From the Okanagan Sui Juris Church

Being a non-commercial, benevolent congregation of respected men not being "persons" (James 2:9; Deuteronomy 10:17; Acts 10:34) having assembled in response to a universal calling for the maintaining of truth, liberty and justice. This assembly of men is not to be assumed as purposed in clandestine order nor cultish performance but of quest for open and honest unfettered sharing of truths to ensure that integrity and honor prevail. "The one law is to cause no harm". Those who deem faith in God as cultish are obviously without God and discriminate against those who do profess their faith on a religious basis. The cult deemers do so with the intent to ignore their oath-sworn duty and to label a Christian monarch as cultish.

Minister of Christ, Kazimierz-Czeslaw: Crischuk in official function and performance of an ecclesiastical duty asserting no association with a false fictitious tax file number Account 607-902-723.

...

The men I speak for as their minister have an inherent right and duty, God commanded, not to bow to de facto authority. It is in ignorance that the people have given over their energy. We cannot contribute to what we have proof is a fraud. We, as followers of God's word and commandments, cannot be driven from the scriptural warnings and commandments of God. It is only by our free will of allowing deception to prevail that we can ignore them.

It is our belief that your fictional government form is based upon commerce and we are not to unite with or serve mammon which is commerce. We do not wish to insult anyone or decline our responsibilities to pay for essential social services and the maintenance of other usufructs. It is the servicing of a usurious and fraudulently obtained debt with which we take umbrage. It is pure slavery and forced work outside of God's Laws.

Since Mythlim-Axkw has now lost his protection as a bankrupt perhaps it's time to play the religion card again?

SMS Möwe