Chrisforliberty's Blog

Just another site

Does The IRS Exist?

with 4 comments

NOTE: Please check out Rules of Statutory Construction (first published in 2001 and updated over the years)

In 1861, Congress enacted the Revenue Act of 1861.

This particular income tax was in its nature a direct tax. Direct taxes are taxes on real and personal property via means of ownership. “Taxes on real estate being indisputably direct taxes, taxes on the rents or income of real estate are equally direct taxes.” Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co., 158 U.S. 601 (1895)

On the other hand, “Duties and imposts are terms commonly applied to levies made by governments on the importation or exportation of commodities. Excises are ‘taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale, or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations, and upon corporate privileges.’ Cooley, Const. Lim. 7th ed. 680.” Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911)

The Revenue Act of 1862 was enacted the following year and within it, created the office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. This is the official name of this particular revenue collecting agency. Likewise, any official actions brought against this agency such as a lawsuit would be against the “Commissioner of Internal Revenue“. For example, see Penn Mutual Indemnity Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 32 T.C. 653 (1959)

Among other duties, the Commissioner can “recommend to the President a candidate for appointment as Chief Counsel for the Internal Revenue Service when a vacancy occurs, and recommend to the President the removal of such Chief Counsel.”

Supposedly, in 1953, in Treasury Decision 6038, the name was changed to “Internal Revenue Service”. This raises the question “Who made the final decision on this?” and “Did Congress authorize this particular tax collection agency to operate under this name”. If this particular mystery individual, presumably an undersecretary in the Treasury Department changed the name, did he or she have such authority? Several letters to the “IRS” about these questions have yielded insufficient answers. Therefore, unless legal documentation can be provided, it is presumed that “Internal Revenue Service”, “IRS” or any derivative are aliases. This is akin to a person claiming to be a police officer when they are not (perhaps they are just a desk clerk at one of the precincts) or someone going around claiming to have been “in Vietnam” when they weren’t even born until 1963.

If you go to Title 31 under “Chapter 3 – Department of the Treasury“, it lists a Federal Financing Bank, Fiscal Service, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network among others. No “Internal Revenue Service” is listed, yet letterhead received from this agency claims it is an agency in the Department of the Treasury.

So what happens if someone comes to your door, flashes a badge and claims to be from the “Internal Revenue Service” (as opposed to the Office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue)? They would be operating without proper authority. Likewise, if you are harassed, threatened or your property is damaged, you would sue the particular individual in civil court or perhaps have charges pressed. You would not sue the Commissioner in U.S. District Court because this individual was not operating within the scope of employment.

This is why you need to keep the horse before the cart. The issue of how taxes are levied and how they are accessed is one issue. Only Congress has this authority. The issue of tax collection and who has the authority to collect those taxes is another issue.


Written by chrisforliberty

June 27, 2010 at 12:55 am

Posted in Politics, Taxes

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. chrisforliberty,

    Do you believe that you are going to get the IRS eliminated? I don’t understand your point. At any rate the IRS is not the problem. They are merely the tool Congress and our President uses to steal our money.

    Alan Scott

    June 27, 2010 at 1:05 am

    • Whether or not the IRS is eliminated is not the point. Since it does not exist as a legal entity, it would be hard to get rid of it. Almost like asking someone to drive your car when you don’t even have one. The point was that people keep need to keep the horse before the cart and understanding the facts as verified by documentation. Too many people have fallen for the “The IRS is a corporation established in Delaware”, “The IRS doesn’t exist” (duh!), etc… traps.


      June 27, 2010 at 1:49 am

  2. chrisforliberty,

    ” The point was that people keep need to keep the horse before the cart and understanding the facts as verified by documentation. Too many people have fallen for the “The IRS is a corporation established in Delaware”, “The IRS doesn’t exist” (duh!), etc… traps. ”

    Again, why bring it up? Looking at your site, you are Libertarian? I am hard core Conservative Republican. If you care to discuss why the IRS exists, it’s because the Federal Government needs to collect massive taxes. It needs to collect those massive taxes because it is committed to massive spending.

    It has built support for the massive spending because it has made so many dependent on the massive spending.

    Alan Scott

    June 27, 2010 at 4:27 pm

  3. I bring it up because far too many people are confused on where the IRS comes from. As a legal entity it doesn’t exist. If it was established as the “Internal Revenue Service, “IRS”, etc…, then it would be in the Congressional Records, The Federal Register or some official record. I’ve even sent requests to my representatives asking for copies of these records, but they were not able to produce anything. This verifies that it does not exist as a legal entity. So basically you have individuals acting as “Internal Revenue agents” or employees of the “IRS”, but they have no legal authority to do so. This is like someone impersonating a police officer.

    The issue of taxes and how they are levied are another issue. If taxes are too high or the government engages in massive deficit spending, then that is an issue pertaining to Congress. Ultimately, the problem is the people themselves want the government to protect them and that is totally unrealistic not to mention delusional.

    I’m a libertarian in the little l sense, but I’m not a member of the Libertarian Party itself. I don’t have any use for political parties.


    June 27, 2010 at 9:32 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: