Re: And the purpose of that section is.........

"Dale Eastman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
>
> > Dale Eastman wrote:
> >
> >>You are either for tyranny or you are against it.
> >>I am taking this crusade just a seriously as the criminality of the
> >>government necessitates.
> >
> > I'm against tyranny.  I cannot imagine anyone honestly
> > believing that the income tax is tyranny.  Unjust, yes.
> > Morally wrong, yes.  Tyranny, no.
>
> Mr. Rubin, You are an intelligent man. You just have a problem with
> thinking outside of 'your' box.
>
> You just can not believe that it could be as Larken et al. claim.
> That would make it one massive fraud.
>
> The government refuses to answer 6 questions. The courts refuse to look
> at the words of law, even going so far as to allow the DOJ representing
> the IRS to get away with contempt of court.

The court has looked at the law, and said that the LAW does not
act to exempt income as you attemt to twist Regulations to do so.

Furniss v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-137
"Petitioner’s reliance on section 861 likewise is misplaced. Petitioner
reads section 861 to provide that items not defined therein are not subject
to tax. Section 861(a)(1) and (3) provides that interest from the United
States and compensation for labor or personal services performed in the
United States (with exceptions not applicable here) are items of gross
income which shall be treated as income from sources within the United
States. Nothing in section 861 operates to exclude from income any of
petitioner’s receipts."

And that the Secretary cannot write something into Regulations that the
Congress did not put into Statutes.

LYNCH v. TILDEN PRODUCE CO, 265 U.S. 315 (1924)
Congress has not delegated power or authority to make such a regulation.

-- 
Richard A. Macdonald, CPA/EA