TaxFool.Net

[LPC]

A new web site by a former tax protester who wised up: taxfool.net

[Agent Observer]

This is the second site like this that's been identified here in the last two weeks. A lot of tax protesters who visit Quatloos tend to believe that somehow everyone here is associated with the IRS and/or government. The admins may want to consider a section dedicated to linking the testimonials of former tax protesters, such as these.

In reading through taxfool.net, I thought this was a pretty funny analogy:

If You Are Considering Fighting The IRS...... Become a missionary to a dangerous third world country—God could use your zeal and energy. You obviously have little fear and lots of energy, so invest it wisely instead of running headlong into a concrete wall.

It's too bad the doctor hosting the site ended up where he apparently is before he understood the consequences

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

It never fails to amaze me how someone who has completed post-graduate research degrees can be fooled by the tax protestor nonsense. They have the "research tools" in place to find the actual information yet they still choose to drink the kool-aid.

[webhick]

The admins may want to consider a section dedicated to linking the testimonials of former tax protesters, such as these.

A good start to that would be a moderator or admin to the forum starting a sticky thread listing ex-protester sites, with a rule that any discussions regarding the sites must be kept to other threads, so it doesn't pollute the list.

[Weathervane]

It never fails to amaze me how someone who has completed post-graduate research degrees can be fooled by the tax protestor nonsense. They have the "research tools" in place to find the actual information yet they still choose to drink the kool-aid.

It should fail to amaze you. Why? Because it happens all the time.

The world is full of smart people who do dumb sh*t.

Its a good site. And too bad he (like me) had to learn the hard way. But maybe he'll stop a few other people from jumping off the cliff.

[webhick]

The guy definitely knows about us.

[grixit]

Hey Famspear, i hope you locked the door so nobody walked in on you while you were wikiing yourself.

[Agent Observer]

Grixit wrote:

Hey Famspear, i hope you locked the door so nobody walked in on you while you were wikiing yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Famspear#Tax_stuff Wrote:

Number of edits, from 22 November 2005 to 14 March 2008 at 10:45 P.M. (Central Daylight Time USA): 13,814.

[webhick]

Grixit wrote:

Hey Famspear, i hope you locked the door so nobody walked in on you while you were wikiing yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Famspear#Tax_stuff Wrote:

Number of edits, from 22 November 2005 to 14 March 2008 at 10:45 P.M. (Central Daylight Time USA): 13,814.

I heard you can go blind doing it that often.

[Famspear]

Averages out to about 16 edits per day for the past 2 plus years. A large chunk of those edits, I think, deal with enforcing Wikipedia policies and guidelines as they relate to, uh, "contributions" by TAX PROTESTERS who post their nonsense over there.

[Disilloosianed]

I have a question for those of you that work in federal tax: How often will the Feds nail a guy like this to the wall? I mean, they've scared the hell out of him, and pretty much financially ruined him. Do they tend to just plow ahead towards jail time too? At the state level, there tends to be the idea that if they are in prison, they sure aren't going to be paying back taxes.

[Imalawman]

I have a question for those of you that work in federal tax: How often will the Feds nail a guy like this to the wall? I mean, they've scared the hell out of him, and pretty much financially ruined him. Do they tend to just plow ahead towards jail time too? At the state level, there tends to be the idea that if they are in prison, they sure aren't going to be paying back taxes.

Yeah, you really have to be doing some bad stuff to get charged criminally on the state level from what I've seen. I'd be curious about what the feds do as well.

[Agent Observer]

Webhick wrote:

I heard you can go blind doing it that often.

Uhh.. Um.. Coming from Webhick, I'm not exactly sure how to take that one...

[Famspear]

webhick wrote:

I heard you can go blind doing it that often.

--to which I respond with another quote from Woody Allen:

Can I just do it until I need glasses?

[webhick]

Webhick wrote:

I heard you can go blind doing it that often.

Uhh.. Um.. Coming from Webhick, I'm not exactly sure how to take that one...

Actually, you can blame grixit for turning wiki into a euphemism.

Now, if you'll all pardon me, I'm off to wiki myself until I go blind.

[Imalawman]

Webhick wrote:

I heard you can go blind doing it that often.

Uhh.. Um.. Coming from Webhick, I'm not exactly sure how to take that one...

Actually, you can blame grixit for turning wiki into a euphemism.

Now, if you'll all pardon me, I'm off to wiki myself until I go blind.

Ha! now that right there's funny and yet...strangely arousing....

[Quixote]

It annoys be a bit that neither Taxfool nor the other reformed TP ever says he was wrong. He only says that the courts don't agree with him. To the lawyers here, he was wrong because the courts didn't agree with him. To we laypeople, the courts didn't agree with him because he was wrong. But his target audience think they are right even when the courts disagree with them. Telling them they're going to lose without telling them why might just appeal to the TP's inner martyr.

[darling]

Yeah, you really have to be doing some bad stuff to get charged criminally on the state level from what I've seen. I'd be curious about what the feds do as well.

According to one of the DoJ prosecutors, it's pretty much the same deal. You don't have to worry about going to jail if you make an honest mistake, even if it's a bad one - just pay tax owing and penalties.

[LPC]

I have very little experience with how the IRS operates, or how it chooses what cases to investigate for criminal prosecution, but I would expect that the IRS would want to limit prosecutions to people who *deserve* to be prosecuted, not just in the sense that they clearly broke the law, but also in the sense that the general public would agree that what the person did was bad enough to warrant jail time.

Otherwise, the IRS would run the risk of (a) acquittals by sympathetic juries, (b) bad press from sympathetic reporters, and (c) hearings in front of sympathetic Congresspeople.

[Nikki]

Yeah, you really have to be doing some bad stuff to get charged criminally on the state level from what I've seen. I'd be curious about what the feds do as well.

According to one of the DoJ prosecutors, it's pretty much the same deal. You don't have to worry about going to jail if you make an honest mistake, even if it's a bad one - just pay tax owing and penalties.

Unless you work for the IRS. Then, you have to worry about losing your job.

A friend, employed by the IRS, was due a refund on his Maryland state income taxes. He filed the Maryland return two days late. Maryland sent him his refund without imposing any penalties or late filing fee.

A year later, he was brought up on disciplinary charges for "failing to meet his tax filing obligations." He was lucky and only received a one-week suspension.