Your first time: Was it -- well, was it good for you?

[Famspear]

Ah, now that I have your attention, the question is: The first time you became aware of this thing called a "tax protester," was it a good experience? And who was your first tax protester?

Mine was Irwin Schiff. Some time around 1986-1988, I was browsing in a used book store in Houston, and I picked up this Irwin Schiff book - I think it may have had a yellow cover. I can't even remember the title. I leafed through it for a few seconds, and thought it was totally bizarre. I put the book down (never bought it).

It wasn't until many years later, probably early 1999, when I started reading tax protester cases on a regular basis. Eventually this developed into a sort of "hobby". (I'm not sure what I should call it.) In late 2005 I began interacting with tax protesters on the internet. I have never actually met or talked with a tax protester (that I know of). On the internet, I have interacted with lots of 'em.

Anyway, Uncle Irwin was my first time in terms of indirect exposure to protesters. The digital record of my first internet communication with -- and disagreement with -- a tax protester in late 2005 is preserved in Wikipedia.

What about you? Got a story to tell about how you became interested in this? And who was your "first" tax protester?

[grixit]

Back in the 70's, i would occassionally hear claims that paper money was the source of all economic problems.

Paper Money

I play the game of a rich boy, I buy everything I can.
My bankroll is a foot thick, I'm a wealthy man.

A million dollar reserve note is right there in my hand
And I can't stand to think...it's all that I've got.

Take away all my silver
Take away all my gold
And hand me a stack of paper
Paper money don't hold. Paper money don't hold.

Well, you act as though you don't remember
The way it all used to be.
Now one man, he locks up the money
Another man holds the key.

My car cost me fifteen grand,
Some say I got a deal.
Melt it down, I've got a thousand pounds of junk
And ten dollars worth of steel.

I recall seeing a car painted all over with flags and the words "NO MONEY MEANS NO TAX, ONLY GOLD AND SILVER IS MONEY!"

Later, in the mid 80's, i heard my first "sovereign citizen" on a radio program as he explained how he was not a "resident", he merely "maintained a domicile". A few months later i met one in person. We got into a big argument. He explained all about the use of magic words to insulate oneself. I asked the obvious question about legal redress and he talked about common law courts. I asked what if the other party declares a common law court with you as the defendant. I don't recall the answer, but it was not very clear.

After that, i began reading about such things online for entertainment. I first found Quatloos while reading up on debt elimination scams.

[The Operative]

While I probably had contact with a tax protester, or his or her beliefs, at some earlier time, I started interacting with tax protesters on a regular basis in 2006. I remember being asked by a coworker what I thought about "America:Freedom to Fascism". I had not seen it yet, so I watched about 30 minutes that night before I had to turn it off. My BS meter is a light-weight and I try not to tax it too much. I wrote about six pages on the falsehoods contained in the first 30 minutes of the film and gave it to the coworker. He had a few questions, but overall seemed satisfied with my answers. To the best of my knowledge, he never became a tax protester. A short time later I found that there were quite a few people asking questions about that movie and other tax protester rhetoric on Yahoo!Answers. I do my best to try and dispel their beliefs. Around that time, I found both Quatloos and the TP FAQ.

[Tax Man]

Not sure about my first time, but I know my most recent experience was going undercover to see Robert Clarkson in action. (That sounds bad, I know).

His Patriot Network website listed him as making an appearance at the prestigious Perkins Restaurant and Bakery on Tamiami Trail in Fort Myers, Florida. I convinced my wife to go with me - and for a split second, I felt like we were reenacting the movie True Lies (which was also partially filmed in Florida).

As we pulled into the parking lot, I started getting butterflies in my stomach. I'm not sure if it was the anticipation of encountering a real live tax protestor, or the thought of eating Perkins for dinner. At any rate, I reminded my wife to just act normal, to wit, she just rolled her eyes and told me I was crazy.

We walked in the restaurant and were immediately overcome by the smell of freshly baked sugar cookies and moldy carpet. I spotted Mr., oops, I mean "Dr." Clarkson behind partially closed blinds in secluded dining room.

After we sat down, it was pretty non-eventful. We did get a kick out of watching various low-lifes lurk into the secluded dining-area-turned-conference-room. About 20 minutes later, and half-way through my Tremendous Twelve, a lady came out of the meeting on her cell phone. As she sat down, I heard a noise that sounded like a squeaking door that needed a little WD 40. Then, the noise repeated itself, only this time, it was much more apparent what the noise was - someone ripped one. But it wasn't just someone, it was the lady who just walked out of the meeting. Apparently she was lady-like enough to leave the tax protestor meeting and pass major fumes in the dining area (which only had about 4 people in it, including us).

As I finished my eggs and tried to stop laughing, I was able to make out some of what she was saying on the phone. Although I could only hear bits and pieces, she was saying how Dr. Clarkson was staying at her house tonight...and how the person she was talking to needed to buy some of her Mona Vie.

That's about it. Someone else on this board actually got into a little altercation with the same group of people, and when I read his description of the event, I nearly cried laughing.

Ft. Meyers, FL: trong>4th Thursday Perkins Restaraunt, 12300 Cleveland Ave, Ft Meyers, FL. Call Guido for directions 239-498-1701. Click here for directions.

[Thule]

Accidental at first, I was working on a case with tax-fraud in connection with WGI and FFI, and stumbled upon Quatloos when I did some internet research.

Later I had great fun following the Ed Brown-standoff, and of course the Dogwalker trial. The finer points on US law is somewhat lost on me, but the mindset and knuckledragging stupidity of US tax-protester bears a striking similarity to some people I encounter from time to time.

[LPC]

No, it wasn't particularly good for me, in retrospect.

I had begun reading (and posting to) the misc.taxes newsgroup, mainly addressing questions about tax issues with which I was familiar. And some people started ranting about how the income tax is unconstitutional, and citing Supreme Court decisions that they said supported them.

Well, I didn't remember anything about the income tax being unconstitutional from law school, and I felt uneasy about the idea that there was an issue I didn't know about, so I took the time to look up the cases, and on July 23, 1995, I wrote my first real response to tax protester arguments, which I've retrieved from the misc.taxes archives on Google groups and have copied below.

I was naive enough at the time to think that my explanations would settle the argument, but they shifted to some other argument, which I also rebutted, then they shifted again, then someone else new would come in a repeat the same argument, and I finally realized I was repeating myself a lot, and started assembling the FAQ so that I could cut-and-paste my rebuttals as fast as they could cut-and-paste their gibberish.

Anyway, what's spooky to me about the message below is that I got all the legal and psychological issues right the first time.

Call me open-minded, call me curious, or call me gullible, but I
actually took the time to look up Pollack, Brushaber, Stanton, and other
cases that have been cited by Jason, Johnboy, et al., and guess what,
THE CASES DON'T SAY WHAT THEY CLAIM THEY SAY!! I mean, it's
not even close. Reading the cases, I was impressed by the power of
Congress to tax, which is almost unlimited in scope. The cases say
so.

Oh, there is the problem with "direct" taxes. Before the Pollock
decision, it was generally thought that the requirement that direct taxes
be apportioned among the states (U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 9,
number 4) only applied to two kinds of taxes, "capitation" or "poll"
taxes, and taxes on the value of real estate. See Hylton v. U.S., 3 Dallas
17X (1795). [I've lost my notes of the cases, but can post the exact cites
later if anyone is interested.] It is interesting to note that three of the
four justices who decided Hylton were members of the Constitutional
Convention who drafted the Constitution, and the fourth was a member of
the North Carolina convention that ratified the Constitution, so presumably
these guys knew what the Constitution meant.

Anyway, that seemed pretty settled until the Pollock decisions (once again,
I don't have the cite, but its 157 U.S. XXX and 158 U.S. XXX.) In Pollock,
the U.S. Supreme Court held, for the first time, that a tax on the income
(rent) from the use of real property was the same as a tax on the property
itself, and was a direct tax that must be apportioned. They initially
weren't sure about a tax on personal property (interest and dividends), but
on rehearing, decided to ignore Hylton and hold that that was a direct tax
also. Finally, and here is the interesting part, they decided to hold the
entire tax act unconstitutional, because all that was left was the tax on
"occupation and labor" which was, of course, constitutional (I'll get back
to that), and they didn't think Congress wanted to tax wages if they
couldn't tax rent, dividends, and interest.

That lead to the 16th Amendment, which allows taxes to be imposed
on income, without apportionment, regardless of the source of the income.
The Brushaber and Stanton decisions (240 U.S. 1 and 240 U.S. XXX) did
nothing but confirm that yes, that was what the 16th Amendment meant,
and taxes on income are now constitutional even if the income comes
from real property.

Now, here comes the weird part. All of these cases dealt with income
from real or personal property, not wages. That is because everyone
knew that a tax on wages is not a direct tax at all, but an excise tax
or duty, the only requirement of which is that the tax be geographically
uniform. (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, number 1.) The court
in Pollock was troubled by the decision in Springer v. U.S. (can't remember
cite) because Springer unanimously upheld the constitutionality of a
tax on "income, gains, and profits." However, the Pollack court was
able to distinquish the Springer decision because Springer's income
consisted of his income as a lawyer and interest on U.S. Treasury bonds.
In other words, taxes on wages have always been constitutional,
because no one has ever considered them to be "direct" taxes.

(Incidentally, Springer's case arose because he refused to pay the tax
and the U.S. seized his real property to pay his income taxes. He
claimed that the seizure of property to pay the tax was unconstitutional,
and the tax itself was unconstitutional, and argued the case himself
before the U.S. Supreme Court. He lost on every issue. Sort of the
Richard McDonald of his day.)

One other point (and this is what started me on this), and that is that
Pollack, like Brushaber and Pollack, involved a tax on a CORPORATION.
Jason, Johnboy, et al., keep saying that the U.S. can tax corporations,
because they're not individuals and don't have the same rights. Above,
in the post I'm responding to, Jason says:

>The DIRECT income tax only applies to corporations, since to do so to
>individuals would require APPORTIONMENT.

However, the ONLY case ever to hold an income tax to be a direct tax
and unconstitutional was an income tax applied to a corporation. It
was held to be unconstitutional because it had to be apportioned, and
yet Jason says that taxes against corporations don't have to be apportioned.
Jeez. He can't even agree with the cases that agree with him.

As I said above, these cases are not even close to what has been claimed
for them, and I don't think that anyone with a high school education
could read these cases and not know that the 16th Amendment allows
Congress to tax all income, whether rents, interest, or wages. How did
Johnboy, Jason, et al. not get it? There have been suggestions from other
people that they are stupid, but I don't think so. From what I have read
of their postings, they are very angry, unhappy people. Believing the
income tax is unconstitutional gives them a way to vent their anger,
and somehow makes them feel better. They can't understand the
truth because that would leave them without anything to be angry about.
If they are reading this, I would seriously suggest that they seek
professional help. This is not meant as a put-down, but as a sincere
desire to help them. They need a way to deal with their anger, and
continuing to post to this newsgroup is not the therapy they need.

Daniel B. Evans ********************
* This is not a legal opinion unless
* you agreed to pay for it.
*********************************

[jkeeb]

I was working at the Service Center and kept coming across letters written by these people.

One day, I took the time to list all the court cases cited. I then went to the local University law library and looked-up and read each case. To my surprise, if the case was a tax case, the individual had lost, and many times the cases had nothing to do with taxes.

After that I would occasionally copy the correspondence and take the copy to the law library (so I would have context). Again, many times I found an incorrect cite, or more likely, a quote taken out of context. From then on I had an interest in these people.

Later in my career, I found that the kool-aid drinkers couldn't hold their own without their guru at their side. Unfortunately, the one time I had a few in the office, I was forbidden from arguing with them.

[webhick]

My first encounter was in...2002/2003, according to my file archive. We were attempting to do the books for a new restaurant when they hired a pizza maker who refused to fill out any employment paperwork. He gave the owner a thick packet from WTP, which the owner forwarded to me - thinking that I was going to fight his battles for him. I reviewed the packet and dismissed the information in it for two reasons: First, when they would quote things and then explain the quote, the explanation was really just a contortion; Second, when I attempted to look up some of the quotes where the quotes matched the explanation...I couldn't find the quote anywhere in the court documents. I explained to the owner what I found out and that I thought the whole thing was malarkey and showed him the I-9 directions where it says that if his employee does not provide the necessary paperwork within 3 days, can his ass.

Spineless owner did not, and instead put me in a situation where I had no choice but to argue this out with the guy and fire him in the middle of the restaurant with clients there. Thankfully, I had printed out a copy of the IRS responses and had been keeping it on me because I'm paranoid and the owner is a wimp. The employee wouldn't let me get a word in edgewise (all the while, the owner is shushing him) and when I finally could, I told him that since I read his packet that it was only fair for him to read my packet. He refused. I then threw my hands up in the air, told the owner I was done with this and insisted that he do something to resolve the matter. He couldn't deal with that, and since I was refusing to tell him what to do we called the IRS. Coward couldn't manage to dial his on phone. While on hold, the employee threatened to sue me for giving legal advice and take down our business as well as the restaurant. My blood boiled so I threw it right back at him and told him that he could be sued for giving legal advice as well. He said that he couldn't be sued because he wasn't giving legal advice just forwarding a packet. I told him that was all I was doing as well. He was still arguing when the IRS came on the line. They refused to comment.

During labor board audit (to which owner was too spineless to show for), inspector explained to me that employee can be fired for not filling out the paperwork without repercussions and that if owner was too chickenshit to deal with this that he had no right to place liability on his bookkeepers.

Employee sent a letter to a phony inspector at the labor board attempting to get our company and the restaurant shut down. Threatened lawsuit, cited whistleblower protection act, blah blah blah. Didn't think it was funny at the time, so I called up CID and told my story. They wanted the packet and whatever information I could provide on the employee. So I took a copy of for my records and sent everything else on up, including a nice cover letter explaining what had transpired.

It appears that the employee may have been involved on some level with the Brown fiasco, it will be interesting if his name shows up in any indictments.

And just in case anyone knows who I am talking about. This is not the same guy who has been harassing and threatening me.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Here I go again aging myself.

As the song goes, "it was all so simple then...." in the days of rotary dial phones and party lines it was mostly word of mouth supplanted with a few books or cheaply-produced pamphlets. There were heavy layers of second amendment issues and a distinct anti-"Rockefeller banking agenda" imbued with the mythologies of the Rothchilds. The IRS was a more or less a collections agency and the ATF had not yet become that. There were no such things as SWAT teams and the M-16/AR-15 was still being tested. The CB radio craze hadn't taken off; having an amateur radio license was a sure-fire way to be invited in to some of these groups. FM radio hadn't stolen the music away from AM stations so "talk radio" that helped spread the word hadn't taken hold.

In that environment I met what you could classify as a "tax protester" on megalomania steroids. Long story short, he died in prison after being convicted of having people murdered.

[Imalawman]

Hmm, I suppose I have been around tax protesting since I was about...well..just about all my life. My dad befriended a tax protestor, and his kids were my age and so I've known his kids all my life and we still talk. Their dad has gotten a little kookier with age, but would always be ranting about something to do with taxes. Otherwise he was a nice enough guy with a particular bee in his bonnet.

Then, over the years I've met several more. Some of them the paytriot gold fringed people. In my experience, there is a huge chasm between simple tax protesting and the paytriot nonsense. Most tax protestors are nice enough, maybe a little self-absorbed and obstreperous, but not scary. To a one, paytriot folks (UCC, golf fringe) are rather scary individuals with violent fantasies of government overthrow. I stay away from them. If we had cases with them while at the state, I would have state patrolmen present every time at the hearings.

Most recently, I litigated cases for a state as an AAG against tax protestors. I guess I did about 10 or so cases. About 50% Hendrickson and the rest a mixture. (Quatloosians were actually of some great assistance for some of my cases) The CTC cases were by far the easiest - summary judgment every time. Overall, I guess I enjoy the quirkiness of TPs and enjoy the opportunity to persuade them to avoid the disasters that I've seen in every single tax protester's life. Including my friends family listed above. They came to utter financial devastation because of his beliefs. So I figure that if I can persuade even a couple on this site its worth it.

[wserra]

My story is quite similar to Dan's. Along about 1994 or so, I was frequently posting to the Usenet group misc.legal, and occasionally to misc.taxes. We had our usual quota of wackos - Ray Karcewzski (who has been mentioned here), a disbarred lawyer named Grubor, a noodnik named Boursy, a Dartmouth janitor who fancied himself a physicist and called himself Archimedes Plutonium (everybody else called him "Archie"), and many others I don't remember. We also had a coterie of good guys - I remember Dan, Joey, somebody who kept using the names of retired IRS Commissioners, James "Kibo" Parry, my fellow Panixian Seth Breidbart and others. Along about the same time (early 90's), I was briefly assigned as a legal advisor to a pro se TP who espoused what I now know to be Schiffite stuff. It was specifically understood that under no circumstances was I going to try the case, so I basically just told the guy that there was no way that anyone would accept what he said was the law. He was far too full of himself to ask any questions.

I am fairly sure I heard about Quatloos on Usenet, maybe from Dan. I joined here in April of 2003, right after grixit and right before Yakko, El Papa Grande and buck09 (two of whom haven't been seen a lot lately, but were active at one point). I think I may have posted to Usenet a couple of times since joining here. After Quatloos, places with (much) lower S/N are hard to take.

[Arthur Rubin]

Well, I probably first heard about tax protesters on misc.taxes, like many of the regulars here. Because My Usenet posts were from a long-dead Email account, and not all of them had my name on them, I can't confirm, but I think it was around 1998, with characters such as "vox populi" and "Archimedes Plutonium", although there's a certain Lavigne who may also have been active at the time. I first met tax protesters in person in Liberartian functions in California, although I can't really say it was good for me, either.

I can't say I've done a detailed analysis of the tax law, but I used logic -- If the personal income tax is not unconstitutional per se, then any of the "loopholes" (861, etc.) would be quickly fixed if there was a problem. Then I found Dan Evans' site and quatloos.
[added]
I should add that I recently met a tax protestor (mostly "6 questions", although I don't know if he put any of it into action) who was married to a friend of mine. I hope things work out for them in their separate ways.

[buck09]

Mid 90's in the heyday of the patriot movement. Have a family member who hooked up with a guru. He hasn't done anything to get himself into any major trouble, but has "assisted" countless induhviduals dig their own graves with common law courts, UCC & liens, true bills, gold-fringed flags, FDCPA, RICO, challenging judicial oaths, etc. Tax protesting is just a tangent of this larger bizarro world these kooks live in.

Having met several other people who royally fracked up their lives this way, it makes me pretty angry when I see the fallout in their families - jail, reposessions, divorce, all because they're willing to make certain sacrifices for "the cause".

I came across Q back in 03 or so, when I was debunking some other paytriot nonsense, and have found the dialogue cathartic and helpful for keeping up on the latest scams.

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

I encountered my first TP argument on a YouTube video. I honestly cannot remember what led me to the vid, but I think it was a reference to Freedom to Farcism from a 9/11 CT fanatic. I remember thinking from the start that it was a sham and after a couple of short sessions of investigating, during which I found Jonathan Siegel's website, and later found Dan Evan's FAQ. Some time spent there confirmed my suspicion that the TP movement closely resembles a bovine bowel movement in content. I tried in vain to argue with some TP's on YouTube and soon figured out they were of the same breed as the 9/11 CT types. I got acquainted with Doktor Avalanche (in his YouTube guise) and while researching the Tommy Cryer situation I stumbled across Quatloos. I mentioned the site to Doktor Avalanche (in his YouTube guise) and he let me in on the secret of his dual identity and that Quatloos was a good bunch of people. Only after becoming better acquainted with the TP arguments did I realize that there is a long time TP guy right down my old street, who incidentally has most of his assets under IRS levy at present.

[Lambkin]

More than 10 years ago, I got a nasty letter from a certain Private Attorney General. That was my introduction to this breed of cretin. I'll spare you the details but a few days after receiving the ranting letter one of my colleagues had it inspected by an attorney who had this to say about it:

I sent the original note to my attorney, who got
a good laugh out of it. Said not to worry about it.
Yet another whiney middle-aged white guy convinced that
the world is out to get him (as if the world cared) .

I was introduced to Quatloos by ENM via the PAM fan club.

[Prof]

I washed up in Quatloosia in '03, largely as a result of interest in the debt elimination scams, including Dorean. My first exposure to the tax protest community was through news articles about Kahl, the Order, Christian Identity, the Montana Freemen and the Texas Republic (i.e., the dangerous as well as crazy part of the movement). I also ran into the Turner Diaries late in the 90's or just after the turn of the century. On this site, I was first exposed to the gurus, including -- I was surprised to see -- Robert Clarkson, who was my classmate in college and with whom I attended law school (we overlapped for two years). Following the tax protest movment, as well as the debt elimination scammers, on this forum has been great fun. Thanks, everyone.

[Doktor Avalanche]

I think it was around late 2006 when I first heard of Irwin Schiff, and it wasn't until after I washed up on the shores of Quatloos that I started taking to YouTube to find that despite the fact that tax protestors end up in prison or in hock to the IRS there were still true believers abound.

I can't for the life of me remember how it was I came to find this place. I think I was doing some random searching on Google when I ran into Quatloos.

[Imalawman]

I was introduced to Quatloos by ENM via the PAM fan club.

Where has she been to? I haven't seen her or her other handle for a while now. At least not around this forum. We need to dredge up Chapman again. Those were good times.

[Arthur Rubin]

I was introduced to Quatloos by ENM via the PAM fan club.

Where has she been to? I haven't seen her or her other handle for a while now. At least not around this forum. We need to dredge up Chapman again. Those were good times.

Perhaps a PM would be in order. She PM'd me last month in regard possible problems with a redacted subject on Wikipedia, known to use RL attacks against perceived online enemies. I made some suggestions, as a Wikipedia Admin, but I don't know if anything happened.

[Number Six]

I knew several "closet" tps, as well as the full-blown types who tend to get into trouble. They were both good chess players, one was a true courtly gentleman who chuckled about how stupid the IRS was. He came home one day to find his estate padlocked by US Marshals. His wife divorced him, they put him in the nut house. The other was a higher order of chess player, a master. When revenue agents tried to reach him at the school bus depot, where he worked, he became invisible to the data banks, playing and teaching contract bridge to the elderly. His father had left him untaxed income, it is a mystery why he didn't pay since he was one of the thriftiest skin-flints I ever knew. Tax revolter #3 was the most wiley of all. His support system is probably too large for meaningful government action. I also met Andy Melechinsky whose business was raided and was pauperized. He was living with his sister when I met him.