1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar

Mises Economics Blog

Attorney Acquitted on Federal Income Tax Charges

July 20, 2007 7:26 PM by Justin Ptak | Other posts by Justin Ptak | Comments (6)

A Shreveport attorney who has challenged the government for years on the legality of filing federal income taxes has been acquitted on charges he failed to file returns.

A federal jury unanimously found Tommy Cryer not guilty this week on two misdemeanor counts of failure to file.

And according to Cryer, the prosecution dismissed two felony charges of tax evasion prior to trial...

"The court could not find a law that makes me liable or makes my revenues taxable," Cryer said. "The Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot impose an income tax on anything but the profits and gains. When you work for someone you give your service and labor in exchange for money, so everything you make is not profit or gain. You put something into it."

Comments (6)

  • David White

  • But of course, if such rulings proliferated, Congress would quickly "correct" the situation with legislation that made taxes on ordinary income -- i.e., work -- the law of the land.

  • Published: July 22, 2007 9:04 PM

  • Sag

  • Great that he got off. But I'm curious - is the federal income tax legal or illegal under the constitution? Was the 16th amendment ratified or not? Most people would get nabbed if they tried to do (or not do) what this Shreveport attorney has. But out of sheer curiousity, are federal taxes legal or not? I would love to see Stephen Kinsella's or some other lawyer's take on it.

  • Published: July 23, 2007 2:30 PM

  • Yancey Ward

  • Here is the text of the 16th Amendment:

    The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

    Now, I am no lawyer, but it seems pretty clear to me that the income tax is constitutional, like it or not.

    Of course, the selling of the 16th Amendment is one of the greatest bait and switch swindles in the history of humankind.

  • Published: July 23, 2007 3:12 PM

  • larry

  • What is income? Does a fair exchange of labor for money constitute income? While the Federal government points to wages as a gain there is a complete failure to recognize the corresponding loss of the laborer. What loss? The loss of time. If you do not show up to work will you receive your wages, of course not. The traditional definition of income at the time of the passage of the 16th amendment did not include the fair exchange of wages for labor. Income was profit ie dividends for stocks, capital gains profits from rent.

  • Published: July 26, 2007 8:22 AM

  • Dan Hooker

  • Interesting point concerning labor. Can I than deduct my time, at the average income of the state I reside in to offset my loss for which I will never see returned..i.e..time? That my labor is infringed on by the government is cause enough to go to war!!!!! Who do any of you think you are that you have a God given right to my sweat? I stake no claim against yours.

  • Published: July 30, 2007 4:50 PM

  • QuickReference

  • I have seen this happen once before, when I was a kid in an old, forgotten place called USSR. The lies so open, so in your face that you can not believe the situation really is what it looks like.

  • Published: August 2, 2007 8:58 PM

Post an intelligent and civil comment