The standard time period for somebody like Brian Swanson is tax protester, which Wikipedia defines as somebody who refuses to pay a tax claiming that the tax legal guidelines are unconstitutional or in any other case invalid. In 1998 Congress forbade IRS from designating individuals “unlawful tax protesters”, however that doesn’t forestall others together with the courts from throwing the time period round. Nonetheless I do not prefer it, so what I’m going to name Brian Swanson is an alternate tax thinker.

ADVERTISEMENT

I first heard from Brian in 2018 and now we have been e mail buddies of a kind since then. In his first e mail he instructed me that he had learn Peter Hendrickson’s guide and primarily based on what he learn corrected his returns and received a full refund. Peter Hendrickson together with his Misplaced Horizons web site the place he teaches you about “cracking the code” might at the moment be the main different tax thinker.. I’ve been overlaying Hendrickson since 2014. Most not too long ago certainly one of Hendrickson’s disciples was convicted on seven counts of knowingly and fraudulently submitting false revenue tax returns and a few chapter associated expenses.

Doing Your Personal Analysis

Brian had “carried out his personal analysis” although and determined that Hendrickson was not fairly proper. He had written his personal guide correcting what he sees as Hendrickson’s errors and he gave me an digital copy to overview. That guide was primarily based on the idea that People do not perceive the distinction between capital and revenue. His transient rationalization was:

“The sixteenth Modification applies to revenue solely, it doesn’t apply to capital. One works to create capital and from invested capital one derives revenue. Referring to capital as “earned revenue” is an try to eradicate capital in private finance and trick individuals into paying extra tax than they owe. Employment earnings are capital and funding earnings are revenue and my guide explains why.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Constitutional Tax Construction: Why Most People Pay Too A lot Federal Earnings Tax is obtainable however it’s on the expensive facet and I am unable to actually advocate it. He additionally has a web site Capital VS. Earnings that explains the idea. The thought is that earnings from labor are usually not revenue however reasonably create capital. Solely the earnings from capital are revenue. To an accountant who thinks in double entry Brian’s principle does not even make good nonsense.

When Brian wrote me in 2018 it was a form of heads up. He was not taken with changing into extra well-known. He’s a very nice man and doesn’t get mad after I inform him that I feel his concepts are nonsense and virtually beg him to give up. I used to be not profitable. He has run up sufficient of a litigation file to make himself newsworthy. I discovered he had eight instances in PACER. A few them are about his objection to individuals in Georgia having to vote for his or her Senators on condition that George didn’t ratify the Seventeenth Modification. The remainder are tax associated. There was additionally a Tax Courtroom case.

Nonetheless I will probably be a bit imprecise about a few of his particulars though they’re public file. He’s about fifty years outdated and receives a federal pension. He additionally teaches highschool. He has a level in programs engineering from a well-known school. He believes that he ought to pay revenue tax on the federal pension however not the highschool wage.

ADVERTISEMENT

He prefaced his rationalization as to why wages are usually not taxable revenue with this:

“I am not a decide, a lawyer nor do I’ve any formal or casual authorized coaching. What I do know is that the legislation is an abstraction. It does not exist in the actual world. It’s actually a code just like a pc programming code. It really works the identical approach.

A pc programmer can create the variables after which can outline what they imply. A pc program can outline a variable known as “apple” and assign it as an integer variable and provides it the worth of 10. “Apple
AAPL
” = 10. In the actual world an apple is a fruit, however within the code it may be 10. That is abstraction. Within the Tax Code, the variables are known as “authorized phrases” and are often expressed with quotes which means that this time period doesn’t essentially have the identical which means within the code because it does in the actual world. The completely different Subtitles within the Tax Code are like subroutines in a program. They’re self-contained and run independently and the capabilities of every routine don’t function exterior of its outlined Subtitle with out permission. “

Brushaber

The wonderful thing about participating with different tax thinkers is how a lot historical past you find yourself learning and the way a lot time you spend eager about the Structure. The large division within the Structure is between direct and oblique taxes. Common individuals do not give it some thought a lot as a result of we haven’t any direct taxes as a result of they aren’t actually sensible. Direct taxes should be apportioned among the many states. What occurred with the revenue tax was that in 1895 in Pollock v Farmer’s Mortgage and Belief the Supreme Courtroom dominated that an revenue tax to the extent it was taxing revenue from property was a direct tax and due to this fact would should be apportioned which successfully killed it.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Sixteenth Modification handed in 1913 permits an revenue tax on revenue from any supply with out apportionment. So are revenue taxes direct or oblique taxes? Who cares? They do not should be apportioned regardless. Brian cares and you’ll examine it in his attraction to the Supreme Courtroom of the eleventh Circuit choice the place he was sanctioned for frivolity.

“This query shouldn’t be in dispute as a result of this Courtroom has already answered the query in Brushaber and Knowlton, however many courts of appeals appear to contradict this Courtroom’s choices. The Eleventh Circuit held in its choice that:

The Supreme Courtroom acknowledged that the Sixteenth Modification authorizes a direct, non-apportioned revenue tax upon United States residents all through the nation. See Brushaber, 240 U.S. at 12-19. (App. 3)

ADVERTISEMENT

The Eleventh Circuit cites Brushaber for this faulty holding. Nevertheless, The Supreme Courtroom stated no such factor. Brushaber truly states that:

The competition that the Modification treats a tax on revenue as a direct tax though it’s relieved from apportionment and is essentially due to this fact not topic to the rule of uniformity, as such rule solely applies to taxes which aren’t direct, thus destroying the 2 nice classifications which have been acknowledged and enforced from the start, can also be wholly with out basis. See Brushaber, 240 U.S. 18.

In a single sentence, The Supreme Courtroom concurrently demolishes the concept of a non-apportioned direct tax and a uniform direct tax. No direct tax is relieved from apportionment and no direct tax might be uniform. But, in accordance with The Eleventh Circuit, Brushaber authorizes a direct, non-apportioned revenue tax upon United States residents. How can this be? Will this Courtroom refuse to appropriate this error?”

I feel he may very well have some extent about how the appellate courts interpret the Brushaber choice in an inconsistent method. I do not suppose the entire system goes to crash due to it anytime quickly. Previous to Pollock the revenue tax was seen as oblique which makes it topic to the rule of uniformity. Pollock stated that to some extent it was a direct tax. The Sixteenth Modification removes the apportionment requirement to the extent, if any, that there was one. It will most likely be good to clear up this confusion, however at the moment you and I and Brian should preserve paying. An revenue tax doesn’t should be apportioned. It most likely must be uniform, however who cares as a result of it’s uniform and there’s no menace for the second that Congress goes to make it apart from uniform.

ADVERTISEMENT

However Brian has one other inspiration as he sees a flaw in uniformity.

However What About Puerto Rico?

This one is admittedly nice. Let’s put our Brushaber worries apart and go together with the revenue tax being oblique. Nicely then it must be uniform, which it just about is. Once you transfer from New York to Massachusetts you may need completely different state returns to file however the federal returns are the identical. It doesn’t work that approach if you happen to transfer to Puerto Rico. Should you develop into a bona fide resident of Puerto Rico chances are you’ll not have to file a federal tax return in any respect. Puerto Rico has its personal revenue tax, however it’s completely different sufficient from the federal revenue tax that we do not have uniformity.

So Brian thinks he has discovered the important thing to deliver the system crashing down. He’s significantly excited a few latest Supreme Courtroom choice ( United States v Vaello Madero April 21, 2022) that will get into the sophisticated story of the standing of Puerto Rico. Madero had been accumulating SSI whereas residing in New York. He moved to Puerto Rico. SSI is just not obtainable to residents of Puerto Rico. He managed to gather anyway and he was getting sued to pay again greater than $28,000. Madero argued that denying SSI to residents of Puerto Rico violated the equal-protection element of the Fifth Modification’s Due Course of Clause. District and Appeals courts agreed with Madero, however the Supremes dominated 8-1 in favor of the federal government.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The deferential rational-basis check applies. And Puerto Rico’s tax standing – particularly, the truth that residents of Puerto Rico are usually exempt from most federal revenue, present, property and excise taxes – provides a rational foundation for likewise distinguishing residents of Puerto Rico from residents of the States for functions of Supplemental Safety Earnings advantages program.”

General the opinion by Justice Kavanaugh doesn’t appear to be of any assist to Brian’s objection to not being taxed uniformly. What excites him is the concurring opinion by Justice Gorsuch. The completely different therapy of Puerto Rico is supported by a number of early twentieth Century Supreme Courtroom choices often known as the “Insular Circumstances”. Justice Kavanaugh needed to concur as a result of neither facet argued that the Insular Circumstances be overturned.

The Insular Circumstances happened as there have been disputes about how the Structure was supposed to use to the territories that got here below US rule on account of the Spanish American Conflict, Puerto Rico being amongst them. You may get a way of the kind of considering that was floating round if you discover that the USA entering into ruling these territories impressed Rudyard Kipling to write down the poem “Take Up The White Man’s Burden“. Basically the Structure did not apply to these form of individuals. Decide Gorsuch writes:

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Insular Circumstances haven’t any basis within the Structure and relaxation on racist stereotypes. They deserve no place in our legislation.”

Brian has a case reside now within the United State District Courtroom for the Southern District of Georgia – Brian Swanson v USA the place he’s making his argument. It defies straightforward abstract, however you may get a style of it right here in his response to a authorities movement to dismiss.

My authorized mind belief doesn’t have a lot persistence for different tax thinkers, so I must go away you with my evaluation. Within the occasion that the Insular Circumstances get overturned it won’t imply that these of us residing within the nifty fifty will not should pay the federal revenue tax. As a matter of reality Decide Kavanaugh’s opinion addresses that risk.

“And if this Courtroom had been to require equivalent therapy on the advantages facet, residents of the States might presumably insist that federal taxes be imposed on residents of Puerto Rico and different Territories in the identical approach that these taxes are imposed on residents of the States.”

ADVERTISEMENT

I’ve to say that I’ve a sure admiration for Brian Swanson, though I want that he would discover a new pastime.