Amazon.com Widgets
  • Fancy name for theft

    We get taxed to work--our federal income, we get taxed for the cars we take to work, taxed for our clothes, taxed for our food, coffee, our automobiles in some states every year, it's almost not worth working. We get taxed for our savings---even though it's money left over after we were taxed. Double dipping? Sure. Irs is beyond doing anything with any remote integrity. The irs is just a legal bully---we take your money or else.
    Do we have better schools because of our taxes? No. Do we have better teachers? No. They make the lowest salaries. The land of the free feels like we are hamsters on a wheel. We can't have any type of wealth in the middle class. The poor get subsidized and the rich know how to get out of it. IRS is just a lottery that wins daily for government purposes.

  • The federal tax code is 74,000 pages long

    Any reasonable person would agree that this level of complexity and verboseness is completely unnecessary for collecting the taxes of a free people. Besides supporting a system that unfairly burdens productive citizens and incentivizes those who are not, the IRS has proven to be an effective weapon for those in power to suppress political opposition. Let's abolish the IRS while we still have the power to do so.

  • The federal tax code is 74,000 pages long

    Any reasonable person would agree that this level of complexity and verboseness is completely unnecessary for collecting the taxes of a free people. Besides supporting a system that unfairly burdens productive citizens and incentivizes those who are not, the IRS has proven to be an effective weapon for those in power to suppress political opposition. Let's abolish the IRS while we still have the power to do so.

  • It should have never existed in the first place.

    People forget that the IRS is a relatively new agency when considering the overall history of the United States. Personally, I'd rather pay higher taxes on consumer goods than have to fork over a huge chunk of my income. It is far worse if you are self-employed. Social Security made it slightly feasible as an agency... But as it stands, I'll be lucky to receive 70% of every dollar I put in.

  • No Trust in IRS

    For years, we have all been awed by the all powerful IRS who had virtually unlimited power. We feared them but we respected them, also. With all that has come to light regarding political profiling, targeting and extreme waste of taxpayer dollars to boot. They are now an agency who has no credibility but more power than ever. They should be disbanded and a whole new system put into place!

  • Unwieldy, unfair and unsustainable

    I don't think the IRS is the bogeyman the Crazy Right portrays it. I think the IRS isn't efficient enough to have an agenda. This bloated bureaucracy can't even answer the phones or get their website to work properly.. I can't see how they could mastermind a political tax jihad! We need common sense tax reform based on a flat tax, and eliminate these Bozos.

  • Political Thugs with Immunity

    The IRS has become an enforcement agency and weapon of fear for progressive zealots. It's no secret that the halls of nearly every government bureaucracy are lined with offices of progressive operatives, all of whom play their small part in expanding government and the reach and force of its power.

  • Should definitely be reduced to bare bones if not abolished...

    Our entire tax system needs to be completely overhauled. Instead of having bloating bureaucracy and laws that you need a tax lawyer just to help you get through the basic paperwork, how about having a system where truly everyone pays their "fair share"? Look at FairTax system. Sweet, simple, to the point, and would generate far more revenue than the current system. The only losers here would be the IRS employees, but our country as a whole would be far better off.

  • Taxes are needed but...

    I work hard for my money nome months it is hard to make ends meet. When I work a little extra and get more money to maybe make next month a little easier, more money gets taken out for taxes and so my hard work goes towards nothing. I understand we have roads and schools and police, etc to maintain but it is hard for me to worry about that when I might not be able to pay rent next month.

  • The modern understanding of what constitutes 'gross income'.

    The Law: For federal income tax purposes, “gross income” means all income from whatever source derived and includes compensation for services. I.R.C. § 61. Any income, from whatever source, is presumed to be income under section 61, unless the taxpayer can establish that it is specifically exempted or excluded. I like how income, is presumed to be. The 16th Amendment, the income tax, has been the subject of many Supreme Court decisions. US Supreme Court decisions are binding and lower courts are not. Generating income is a commercial activity. The Supreme Court ruled exactly that in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), where the Court stated the following: “The 16th Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted.”. The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of federal law and the Constitution. Their rulings are intended to carry the force of law, and set binding precedents for inferior courts. On May 21, 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a direct tax on personal income was unconstitutional as a result of the case of Pollock v. Farmers‘ Loan and Trust Company. The lawsuit had been precipitated by the 1894 Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision stated that a “direct tax” on the “income of real and of personal property” was “unconstitutional and void.” What does that say? The 16th Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted.”. That is binding case law! In Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955), the Supreme Court laid out what has become the modern understanding of what constitutes 'gross income' to which the Sixteenth Amendment applies, declaring that income taxes could be levied on "accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion." Under this definition, any increase in wealth — whether through wages, benefits, bonuses, sale of stock or other property at a profit, bets won, lucky finds, awards of punitive damages in a lawsuit, qui tam actions — are all within the definition of income, unless the Congress makes a specific exemption, as it has for items such as life insurance proceeds received by reason of the death of the insured party,[41] gifts, bequests, devises and inheritances,[42] and certain scholarships.[43] After the Brushaber and Stanton Supreme Court decisions were rendered, the Treasury Department issued its own decision, Treasury Decision 2313 (TD 2313). TD 2313 was issued to “collectors of internal revenue” and it stated that the Internal Revenue Form 1040 is to be used only by the fiduciary of a nonresident alien who has received interest from bonds and dividends on the stock of domestic (US) corporations on behalf of that nonresident alien. This Treasury Decision, which was based upon the Supreme Court decisions, confirms the foreign commerce nature of the income tax.

  • Not feasible

    The IRS has always been a boogeyman, to the point of being the name of a heel wrestler back in the glory days of the WWF. While it isn't the favorite organization of most, I've yet to hear an explanation from anybody wanting to get rid of it that makes sense. None will work in practice, most of them aren't even bulletproof in theory.

  • No

    We have to have some type of checks and balances system. If there was not IRS than people would try and cheat the government all time. The IRS, even though thought of negatively, is important because a lot of people are afraid to cheat the government because of the wrath of them.

  • The answer is efficiency!

    The IRS is not the big bad wolf. We cannot abolish the IRS, but we can make it more efficient! The tax code should be overhauled & simplified. Loopholes should be closed, but small businesses should receive some relief since they employ a majority of the workforce. A few bad apples does not mean the IRS as a whole is bad. This "scandal" needs to be thoroughly investigated before we turn this into a politicized event with Libertarians surrounding the IRS with pitchforks & torches. So, tale a deep breath & let's figure out how to streamline the tax code & make our IRS more efficient.

  • No, the IRS should not be abolished.

    No, I don't believe that the IRS should be abolished. Taxes are a burden on every family in America, regardless of social class and status. This does not, however, mean that we should just solve that by abolishing the IRS. We need the IRS because we need to pay taxes in order to support the government's budget in spending money on programs which help us as a nation, like Medicare and Social Security.

  • Taxation and Representation

    I am not inherently opposed to the idea of an income tax, but I think that the rich should pay their fair share (i.e., not a vastly lower percentage of their total income than their employees) and the average taxpayer, as opposed to special interests and lobbyists, should have more say in what that tax money is actually used for. Right now we just put our money in a black hole and see little benefit, which makes it hard to support the idea of the IRS.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Jameson71 says2013-07-21T23:22:01.673
The Law: For federal income tax purposes, “gross income” means all income from whatever source derived and includes compensation for services. I.R.C. § 61. Any income, from whatever source, is presumed to be income under section 61, unless the taxpayer can establish that it is specifically exempted or excluded. What does that say? Is presumed to be income under section 61. The 16th Amendment, the income tax, has been the subject of many Supreme Court decisions. Generating income is a commercial activity. The Supreme Court ruled exactly that in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), where the Court stated the following: “The 16th Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted.”. The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of federal law and the Constitution. Their rulings are intended to carry the force of law, and set binding precedents for inferior courts. On May 21, 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a direct tax on personal income was unconstitutional as a result of the case of Pollock v. Farmers‘ Loan and Trust Company. The lawsuit had been precipitated by the 1894 Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision stated that a “direct tax” on the “income of real and of personal property” was “unconstitutional and void.” What does that say? “The 16th Amendment must be construed in connection with the taxing clauses of the original Constitution and the effect attributed to them before the Amendment was adopted.”. Supreme Court again ruled upon the 16th Amendment’s effect on the federal government’s power of taxation. In Peck & Co. V. Lowe, 247 US 165 (1918), the Supreme Court stated, in part: “The Sixteenth Amendment … does not extend the taxing power to new or excepted subjects …”. The Supreme Court again ruled upon the 16th Amendment’s effect on the federal government’s power of taxation. In Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955), the Supreme Court laid out what has become the modern understanding of what constitutes 'gross income' to which the Sixteenth Amendment applies, declaring that income taxes could be levied on "accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion." Under this definition, any increase in wealth — whether through wages, benefits, bonuses, sale of stock or other property at a profit, bets won, lucky finds, awards of punitive damages in a lawsuit, qui tam actions — are all within the definition of income, unless the Congress makes a specific exemption, as it has for items such as life insurance proceeds received by reason of the death of the insured party,[41] gifts, bequests, devises and inheritances,[42] and certain scholarships.[43] What does that say? Modern understanding of what constitutes 'gross income' to which the Sixteenth Amendment applies, declaring that income taxes could be levied on "accessions to wealth. Wealth: a great quantity or store of money, valuable possessions, property, or other riches: the wealth of a city. Are you taxed on your wealth? After the Brushaber and Stanton Supreme Court decisions were rendered, the Treasury Department issued its own decision, Treasury Decision 2313 (TD 2313). TD 2313 was issued to “collectors of internal revenue” and it stated that the Internal Revenue Form 1040 is to be used only by the fiduciary of a nonresident alien who has received interest from bonds and dividends on the stock of domestic (US) corporations on behalf of that nonresident alien. This Treasury Decision, which was based upon the Supreme Court decisions, confirms the foreign commerce nature of the income tax. The statutes that make up the Internal Revenue Code must, therefore, be read in mind with the above Supreme Court decisions: The IRS is breaking the law of the land. The IRS never refuted this augment. They have hundreds of lawyers on their pay-roll, and they cannot refute this! People need to wake up. People have been protesting the income tax since 1913 and the government to this day won't put and end to the confusion. Lower courts call the tax protesters augments frivolous. First of all, Supreme Court decisions are not frivolous. The Supreme Courts squash the lower courts in authority. Government money is not government money, it is tax money used to fund the government. The government works for the people, we do not work for them. They get paid because we the people pay taxes. We the people do not owe them anything, but they owe us. They owe us their public service and they are bought and paid for. The IRS takes in 2.4 trillion a year in taxes, why are they raising the debt ceiling? We the people need to step up and speak out.