The CTC Study Guide

[Quixote]

CtC Worrier Ike Hall is writing a CTC Study Guide. Chapters 1 - 12 are available on Lost Horizons. I have only skimmed it down to page 9, on which Ike misinterprets Brushaber, stopping briefly on page 7, on which he misinterprets Springer.

[Cpt Banjo]

Classic example of the blind leading the blind (or perhaps the clueless leading the clueless).

[Famspear]

Goodness, what a mess! Twenty-one pages of idiocy.

[Burnaby49]

Look on the bright side. You've been complaining how quiet and boring the tax protester scene has been lately. This might give it a kick-start.

[darling]

CtC Worrier Ike Hall...

As in Ike Hall shenanigans.

[jg]

Page 4 (and 5) is where the claim is made that an excise tax can only be laid upon "gain,profit or income deriving from federal privilege".

The linchpin of CtC is that "It is the nature of the activity, not the income derived, that makes the income taxable".

As evidenced by the statutory language and by Hendirckson's convictions, there is no basis in fact, legal or otherwise, that supports these claims.

[notorial dissent]

Classic example of the blind leading the blind (or perhaps the clueless leading the clueless).

...the dim leading the bewildered...
...dumb preceding the dumber....
...lemmings.....

Page 4 (and 5) is where the claim is made that an excise tax can only be laid upon "gain,profit or income deriving from federal privilege".
And yet there is no FACTUAL basis for this claim as no where is such stated either in statute or constitution.
The linchpin of CtC is that "It is the nature of the activity, not the income derived, that makes the income taxable".
And when one builds ones entire thesis/premise on a house of cards on a mountain of soap bubbles, perched atop a pin, one should expect what ultimately happens. Along with all the laughing and pointing that goes with.
As evidenced by the statutory language and by Hendirckson's convictions, there is no basis in fact, legal or otherwise, that supports these claims.
Then why was his blowhardship, tried, convicted, and sentenced to prison, funsies?????

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

[Famspear]

But hey, don't just read the "Study Guide"! Read these testimonials from "satisfied" customers who have used Pete Hendrickson's Cracking the Code tax scheme:

They [the Tax Court] totally ignored my argument/fact that I did not engage in any revenue taxable activity. Didn't even mention it in their decision. This really has me disillusioned….

--Hendrickson follower Erik Stephen Clark.

Filing Pete's way has wound up with me owing over 115K to the IRs in penalties and stuff.

--Hendrickson follower "oldhawaiiscott".

I'm just getting back into this [Hendrickson's Cracking the Code tax scheme], and already its killing me.

--Hendrickson follower "macwildstar".

[webhick]

I was thinking the other day that it'd be pretty cool if we made a "Choose Your Own Adventure" book for tax protesting. You know, it could start out with a nasty divorce and child custody battle or simply not liking taxes. From there you'd choose a pet theory, it would meander through the court process, losing your job, family, friends and home; possible jail time and either end with you dying miserable and alone in a tin-foil beanie or "waking up" and rebuilding your life.

[Kestrel]

I was thinking the other day that it'd be pretty cool if we made a "Choose Your Own Adventure" book for tax protesting. You know, it could start out with a nasty divorce and child custody battle or simply not liking taxes. From there you'd choose a pet theory, it would meander through the court process, losing your job, family, friends and home; possible jail time and either end with you dying miserable and alone in a tin-foil beanie or "waking up" and rebuilding your life.

You are Walter (as in Mitty), a self-styled independent contractor. You dutifully file your tax returns every year, claiming all your income, deducting e*v*e*r*y s*i*n*g*l*e expense remotely associated with your business, and always paying your double-share self-employment taxes. Of course you keep meticulous records of your expenses, you claim your Home Office, and you make sure that you always put enough business miles on your wife's car to claim BOTH cars as Business Vehicles. Sure, some of those expenses are a little iffy, but it's your word against, well, nobody else... Who's going to testify against you?

Then one day you receive an IRS audit notice in the mail. Afraid of nothing (since you have all those records and no one can say they're not legitimate) you meekly report to the IRS office at the appointed hour. Only to learn...

You have so many deductions that the IRS auditor doesn't have time to finish the audit. You have a choice:
1) Have most of your deductions summarily disallowed [go to page 96], or
2) "Voluntarily" sign an extention form granting the auditor additional time past the statutory deadline to finish the audit [go to page 41].

Page 96: You owe $21,014 in taxes plus penalties and interest. You cash in your kid's college fund (substantial penalty for early withdrawl) and pay up [go to page 18].

Page 41: With no time limit, the auditor now requests you provide additional records for the years before and after the year under audit. Surprise! You fail the Independent Contractor test. You're an employee. Always have been. All your business deductions are disallowed. Furthermore, the auditor alleges fraud, so he goes back to even earlier years. You owe $73,871 in back taxes plus penalties and interest. The IRS levies your wages, leaving you without enough take-home pay to cover both the mortgage and the car payment [go to page 18].

Page 18: Disgruntled, you're websurfing on your employer's computer and discover...
Cracking the Code! Suddenly your whole life brightens! A new Tax Protestor is born!

This is fun. Who wants to write the next section?

[wserra]

I'll write the ending:

You are standing in an open courtroom west of someone in a black robe, with a barred door to your left.

There is a piece of paper on the table here.

> Examine piece of paper.

It is a Notice of Appeal.

> Read Notice of Appeal.

It says, "Don't bother".

> Go left.

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

[Burzmali]

> say XYZZY
I'm sorry magic words only work in video games.

[webhick]

OREGON TRAIL!

Oh the memories!

[obadiah]

> say XYZZY
I'm sorry magic words only work in video games.

BLAST!

[Kestrel]

BLAST!

> There is a loud explosion, and you are suddenly splashed across the walls of the room. A twenty-foot hole appears in the wall, burying the snakes in the rubble. A river of molten lava pours in through the hole, destroying everything in its path, including you!

> It looks as though you're dead.

Well, that's one way to make the IRS stop garnishing your wages.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Chapter 1 - Your situation
Chapter 2 - You get asked to pay taxes
Chapter 3 - Your response (this chapter contains free format parts where you can insert your own "magic words")
Chapter 4 - The authorities reply (this chapter contains a complex set of rules which can only be complied with by doing certain actions - hint - magic words won't help. This chapter also contains bad things that can happen if you go really wrong, like getting sent to jail.)
Chapter 5 - Your next move, back to Chapter 1

[LPC]

CtC Worrier Ike Hall is writing a CTC Study Guide. Chapters 1 - 12 are available on Lost Horizons. I have only skimmed it down to page 9, on which Ike misinterprets Brushaber, stopping briefly on page 7, on which he misinterprets Springer.

Instead of looking for statements that are wrong, I decided to see if I could find any that are right.

The first one I could find is the beginning of the last paragraph on the first page:

However, CtC is a tough read.

Yeah, gibberish can be that way.