I recently wrote an article for Poker Player Newspaper on taxes for poker players (I’ll post a link to the article in about a week when it’s up on their website). This morning I received an email that states,
“You said that people must sign their tax returns under perjury (which subjects them to potential criminal liability), but failed to mention the US Constitution’s 5th Amendment: “. . . nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself . . ” Since tax return information can be used against a filer in a criminal prosecution, this makes the filing/signing of the tax return voluntary.
…If you can show me in the Infernal Revenue Tax Code where it makes the filing of a tax return mandatory, then I will be glad to recant my objections….”
I’m always happy to help, and for any other tax protesters out there, please read this carefully.
You must file a tax return if your income is above the statutorily determined amount of gross income during the tax year. See either the Tax Protester FAQ or the IRS’ page on frivolous tax arguments. As for the Fifth Amendment claim that’s implied in the email I received, “It is well settled that the Fifth Amendment general objection [to filing a proper tax return] is not a valid claim of the constitutional privilege.” Betz v. United States, 753 F.2d 834, 835 (10th Cir. 1985) The Tax Protester FAQ has plenty more to say about this specious argument.
Every year I get emails like this one. I choose one to respond to on the hopes (probably forlorn hopes) that the one lucky individual will see the light. I know I’m likely wasting my time. Eventually, though, that individual will have an IRS Special Agent or law enforcement officers from his state knocking on his door and telling him, “You have the right to remain silent….” If you want to send me an email like the one I received feel free to do so. I only respond to one a year because, as the Tax Court routinely says, “Their arguments that this income was not taxable are frivolous tax-protester arguments that we need not “refute * * * with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit.” Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984).” [Quoted in Callahan, et. al., v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2007-301] So go ahead and waste those electrons!