Judge calls govt employed tp an economic terrorist

[Demosthenes]

‘Economic terrorist’: Montana man convicted of tax evasion
By EVE BYRON - Independent Record - 11/16/07
A Montana man convicted of tax evasion could be viewed as nothing more than an “economic terrorist” along the lines of the anti-government Freemen and should pay not only $91,700 in restitution, but also $50,000 to help cover the cost of his incarceration for 27 months plus $1,700 to pay for the government’s prosecution of him.

That was the view of U.S. District Court Senior Judge Charles Lovell Thursday as he expressed disbelief of Rolan Becker’s refusal to admit his guilt and his continued refusal to pay taxes — even after being convicted in May of three counts of tax evasion.

Lovell discussed at length the reasons behind his sentence for the Ronan resident.

“Mr. Becker is a mature and apparently intelligent, well-educated individual who seems to have determined that he can declare himself exempt from income taxes,” Lovell said. “One of the things that makes it difficult to believe that he was able to evade those taxes is the fact that he has been a quasi-employee of the United States government for the past (12) years.

Becker was a forester for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes.

“In addition to that, he has received government benefits … and I will never understand how he could believe the United States could pay his salary through the tribe if people like him didn’t pay their taxes to the government,” Lovell said.


Becker, a slight, wiry man, appeared defiant as he stood before the judge with his arms crossed in front of him. He told Lovell that he “regrets that it came to this” and continued not paying taxes because he assumed he would appeal the jury’s verdict before he was sentenced.

“What I did was a function of my belief system and wasn’t a malicious attempt to deprive anyone of anything,” Becker said. “I was forthcoming in terms of telling the IRS where I stood. I wasn’t sneaking around. It was part of my core values based on research that I had done. I made a decision based on that and now I will live with the consequences of it.”

During Becker’s three-day trial, his attorney, Lowell Becraft Jr., didn’t dispute that his client hadn’t paid his taxes since 2000. Instead, he argued that his client read books, listened to tapes and attended seminars in which he was told that tax laws didn’t apply to him, and he believed what he heard.

That belief meant Becker was acting in good faith when he didn’t pay the taxes or file the returns in 2000, 2001 and 2002, so he didn’t have the criminal intent needed to convict him of tax evasion, Becraft argued.

“Rolan Becker was a law-abiding citizen until the events that gave rise to this issue,” Becraft said.

Becker filed false W-4 forms with the IRS so that he wouldn’t have federal taxes taken out of his paycheck beginning in 2000, and conveyed his home and vehicles to limited liability corporations to put them beyond the grasp of the tax man.

During the trial, U.S. Attorney Kris McLean noted that Becker walked into an IRS office and told them he wasn’t going to file any tax returns because he didn’t owe taxes, and that there isn’t any reason to file false W-4 forms unless someone is planning to evade taxes.

Even without McLean’s statements, Lovell wasn’t about to grant Becker any leniency, and in fact added time and restitution to his sentence for not paying taxes from 2003 until 2006 — a time frame that Becker hadn’t even been prosecuted for.

Lovell noted that it was within his realm to do so, and urged McLean to consider filing charges against Becker for trying to hide his assets by transferring the title of real estate he owned, and his car, to the LLC Becker had formed.

“… That otherwise would be called fraudulent conveyance in bankruptcy court,” Lovell said. “He’s avoiding payment of his creditors and tries to put his property out of reach of creditors by conveying the title.

“In addition — and the number is quite large — the evidence showed that at one point he conveyed his property back to himself so he could take out a $168,000 loan on the property, after which he conveyed it back to the corporation so it no longer would be in his name.”

In 2000, Lovell presided over the trial of Freeman LeRoy Schweitzer, a member of a group of anti-government activists who also maintained they didn’t have to pay taxes. On Thursday, Lovell compared Becker to the Freeman, noting that his acts were openly aggressive.

“You are probably the most flagrant protester and tax dodger that I have seen,” Lovell said. “It makes one wonder where the United States government would be in today’s world if everybody took the same attitude as this defendant. The government would be brought into total disarray.

“I know there are those who would see the defendant as an economic terrorist because of the very acts he advocates. His dedication and commitment and his greed are destructive to the system of government in this country.”

[LPC]

“It makes one wonder where the United States government would be in today’s world if everybody took the same attitude as this defendant. The government would be brought into total disarray."

Stop giving them hope.

Seriously, that's what Larken Rose really wanted. He knew the 861 argument was nonsense, but thought it was believable enough to convince enough people not to file returns or pay taxes to cripple the government.

"Economic saboteur" would be more accurate than "economic terrorist."

[grixit]

“What I did was a function of my belief system and wasn’t a malicious attempt to deprive anyone of anything,” Becker said. “I was forthcoming in terms of telling the IRS where I stood. I wasn’t sneaking around. It was part of my core values based on research that I had done. I made a decision based on that and now I will live with the consequences of it.”

Up to this point i was thinking, he was different from the other tps, that he could be viewed as an honest, if misguided, civil disobedient.

But then he had to get cute with the trusts.

[student]

Good on the judge. Now, unleash to IRS on the scofflaw and seize every last thing he has. Just break the man and break him hard.

By breaking his will and confiscating everything, he may be forced to camp in a large unpopulated section of bone-dry BLM woodlands. And to think he's labeled a terrorist now...

[Weathervane]

Good on the judge. Now, unleash to IRS on the scofflaw and seize every last thing he has. Just break the man and break him hard.

Yes, we must have justice. While we're at it, yank out his toenails, give him a good scourging, and then have his family gang-r*ped and machine-gunned while he watches. That'll teach him, right CPT?

[The Observer]

Good on the judge. Now, unleash to IRS on the scofflaw and seize every last thing he has. Just break the man and break him hard.

Yes, we must have justice. While we're at it, yank out his toenails, give him a good scourging, and then have his family gang-r*ped and machine-gunned while he watches. That'll teach him, right CPT?

If the IRS has to seize everything in order to satisfy the liability (in the absence of the taxpayer submitting a valid offer-in-compromise) then it would be justice, since that is what the law allows the IRS to do. Otherwise, the IRS cannot seize more than what the taxpayer owes and any excess has to be returned to the taxpayer.

I always find it interesting that people think that somehow losing everything to satisfy their debts is not fair or equitable, despite the fact that it was usually their own decisions that put them in that situation. This thinking never goes beyond the point of what happens to the creditor who is owed money and their own livelihood is harmed by not receiving what is due to them.