Is it a legal requirement to pay taxes?

Cabal46

Free Member
Jan 5, 2008
60
6
I've always been meaning to ask knowledgeable people here, if we legally need to pay tax?

I've seen youtube videos of many people saying that the IRS tax is illegal in USA; it doesn't exist. Just a fabricated concoction to perpetuate debt and fractional reserve banking.

There's an interesting case of Edward and Elaine Brown indicted on January 21, 2009 (video here) by a federal grand jury where most of the charges are for obstruction of justice, possessing firearms, etc, but interestingly, no mention of tax evasion. The trial is in June 2009.

That got me thinking. Does the BoE pay any taxes? If not, then we shouldn't as well. Can anyone cite any UK legislation? Does the BoE have transparent accounts and file them like companies have to submit annual returns to companies house?

Also, i would highly recommend reading this pdf (Mary_Croft.pdf). It is extremely enlightening about the fallacy of Fiat money.
 
I've always been meaning to ask knowledgeable people here, if we legally need to pay tax?

No, we all pay them for the goodness of our heart, to make sure that our Home Secretary doesn't have to pay for 88p bathplugs from her £145,000 (?) salary.

And taking the US as a precedent could well be a tad dangerous - let us know how you get on if you drive to work on the right hand side of the road.
 
Upvote 0
No, we all pay them for the goodness of our heart, to make sure that our Home Secretary doesn't have to pay for 88p bathplugs from her £145,000 (?) salary.

And taking the US as a precedent could well be a tad dangerous - let us know how you get on if you drive to work on the right hand side of the road.

morning Mr Grumpy :p How are you today?
 
Upvote 0
You will find that there is a common law requirement to pay taxes going back as far and further than the Magna Carta. Since then the legal requirement to pay tax has been strengthened by both precedent and statute law.

The fact that YouTube videos of Montana Mountain men doing their idiot-liberterian schtick about "ain't gonna pay me no damned taxes" doesn't make a case for the argument that there is a non tax movement in the USA, although there is a small anti high tax movement at the moment, the tea parties.

The BoE doesn't pay taxes or report as a company. Are you really advocating that it does? An agency of the Government charges itself? Idiocy. Transparency however should be encouraged. As to that Mary Croft pdf: are we really expected to take seriously an economic treatise written from a cod Buddhist perspective ? Even the Austrians and von Mises are not that loopy.
 
Upvote 0
A great history of it here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090331082300AAooHuM

Income Tax was announced in 1798, and introduced in 1799, as a means of paying for the war against the French forces under Napoleon. France was threatening to invade, and had already landed briefly in Wales and Ireland. For much of his campaigns from 1795, Napoleon was better organised than the British forces. The cost of war had drained Britain’s resources, and run up a considerable national debt. The army was starving, and poor conditions in the navy in 1797 had led to mutiny.

William Pitt the Younger was Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1783, and needed greater ‘aid and contribution for the prosecution of the war’.

‘Certain duties upon income’ as outlined in the Act of 1799 were to be the (temporary) solution. It was a tax to beat Napoleon. Income tax was to be applied in Great Britain (but not Ireland) at a rate of 10% on the total income of the taxpayer from all sources above £60, with reductions on income up to £200.

It was to be paid in six equal instalments from June 1799, with an expected return of £10 million in its first year. It actually realised less than £6 million, but the money was vital and a precedent had been set.

In 1802 Pitt resigned as Prime Minister over the question of the emancipation of Irish catholics, and was replaced by Henry Addington. A short-lived peace treaty with Napoleon allowed Addington to repeal income tax. However, renewed fighting led to Addington’s 1803 Act which set the pattern for income tax today.

Significant change
Addington’s Act for a ‘contribution of the profits arising from property, professions, trades and offices’ (the words ‘income tax’ were deliberately avoided) introduced two significant changes:

Taxation at source - the Bank of England deducting income tax when paying interest to holders of gilts, for example
The division of income taxes into five ‘Schedules’ - A (income from land and buildings), B (farming profits), C (public annuities), D (self-employment and other items not covered by A, B, C or E) and E (salaries, annuities and pensions).
Although Addington’s rate of tax was half that of Pitt’s, the changes ensured that revenue to the Exchequer rose by half and the number of taxpayers doubled. In 1806 the rate returned to the original 10%.

Pitt in opposition had argued against Addington’s innovations: he adopted them almost unchanged, however, on his return to office in 1805. Income tax changed little under various Chancellors, contributing to the war effort up to the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.

Nicholas Vansittart was Chancellor when Napoleon was defeated. His inclination was to maintain some tax on income, but public sentiment and the opposition were against him. A year after Waterloo, income tax was repealed ‘with a thundering peal of applause’ and Parliament decided that all documents connected with it should be collected, cut into pieces and pulped.

The critics of income tax had won the day, but experience had proved that it was a practical means of raising revenue, that it could be applied fairly, and that concerns about invasion of privacy were largely misplaced. The critics were also frustrated in the destruction of the records, unaware that duplicates had already been sent to the King’s Remembrancer.

The mid-1800s saw the beginnings of significant social and economic change. With the Whigs (forerunners of the Liberals) in power from 1830, child labour was limited, slavery in the Empire ended, and Parliamentary reform gave representation to cities including Manchester and Liverpool, and to more of the middle classes. Railways transformed communications within England and linked Scotland, Wales and - via Holyhead - Ireland. The potato famine in Ireland began in the mid-1840s.

The general election of 1841 was won by the Conservatives with Sir Robert Peel as Prime Minister. Although he had opposed income tax, an empty Exchequer and a growing deficit gave rise to the surprise return of the tax in his 1842 Budget. Peel sought only to tax those with incomes above £150, and he reduced customs duties on 750 articles out of a total number taxed of 1,200. The less wealthy benefited, and trade revived as a consequence.

Peel’s income tax was imposed for three years, with the possibility of a two year extension. A funding crisis in the railways and increasing national expenditure ensured that it was maintained. For Peel, the debate was academic. In 1846 he repealed the Corn Laws - which supported farmers by inflating the price of corn when cheaper imports were available - and lost the support of much of his party. The Whigs resumed power the same year to be joined by some notable ‘Peelites’.

A ‘temporary’ tax
Income tax is still a ‘temporary’ tax - it expires each year on 5 April and Parliament has to reapply it by an annual Finance Act. For up to four months until the Finance Act becomes law, the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1913 ensures that taxes can still be demanded.
 
Upvote 0
Didn't Wesley Snipes try the 'tax is illegal' argument before getting banged up?

Yes, amongst other things. The tax protester argument in the US basically argues that congress has no constititutional right to levy taxes.
 
Upvote 0
We got 2 phone calls and an email on a subject close to this yesterday. They didn't like the answer we were giving them so they kept contacting us again with the same question in the hope of a miraculous change in the answer.

They wanted to know how they could set up 12Pay so that none of their regular monthly paid employees would pay any tax or NI until they'd earned more than £6400 in the tax year.

Apparently it is a deficiency of 12Pay that we couldn't tell them how to do this. They appeared to think that the PAYE/NI system is a kind of optional setup that you can choose how you operate yourself.

"But the employees insist that they don't want to pay any tax or NI till they've earned that much!"
Well that's convinced me. I told them in the end that they could pay their employees whatever they like and completely ignore their payroll software as long as they're happy with the enormous fines and worse that they might face. Just don't involve 12Pay in their scheme.
 
Upvote 0
We got 2 phone calls and an email on a subject close to this yesterday. They didn't like the answer we were giving them so they kept contacting us again with the same question in the hope of a miraculous change in the answer.

They wanted to know how they could set up 12Pay so that none of their regular monthly paid employees would pay any tax or NI until they'd earned more than £6400 in the tax year.

Apparently it is a deficiency of 12Pay that we couldn't tell them how to do this. They appeared to think that the PAYE/NI system is a kind of optional setup that you can choose how you operate yourself.

Well that's convinced me. I told them in the end that they could pay their employees whatever they like and completely ignore their payroll software as long as they're happy with the enormous fines and worse that they might face. Just don't involve 12Pay in their scheme.

Hahahaha thanks for the laugh. :D
Tom, really, you could make millions if you could sort your software out to make folk not have to pay tax :p:cool:
 
Upvote 0
Wow Elaine, not bored at all - fascinating stuff! I like this bit:

"Peel sought only to tax those with incomes above £150, and he reduced customs duties on 750 articles out of a total number taxed of 1,200. The less wealthy benefited, and trade revived as a consequence"

I think the current government could do with a reminder of these, and OK the figures would be say £60,000 instead of £150 now, but what a way to ensure that the 'common man' could afford to live and buy and sustain our businesses!
 
Upvote 0
I'm sure it's only a matter of time before somebody successfully argues that taxes breach their human rights.

Exactly, the opaque nature of 'tax' collection is insidious and corrupt to the core. Petrol tax for example, goes into the central treasury pot and so can be used for other intent, instead of what the money is for, road improvement et al.

Spending tax payers ($1billion per week) in Iraq isn't exactly what they'd want their money used for.

Thanks to all other replies.

p.s. Does Brown really think anyone earning over £150k will pay 50% tax, yeah right. There are many ways to skin a cat, so i can see execs have a multitude of jobs, just so they can disseminate their salaries to stay below the threshold; or worse yet, bugger off out the country.
 
Upvote 0
The mind boggles. I don't think I would have had the patience.

I have to confess the email that I sent in response to the 3rd identical query (the first 2 queries came in on the phone, and then the query was repeated by email) was pretty caustic. Usually it is company policy to be as conciliatory as possible, even when clients are being completely unreasonable, but on that one we'd come to the end of our tether.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eagle and Jenni384
Upvote 0

Latest Articles