Supreme Court Denies Hearing On Major Challenge to Constitutionality of Income Tax

Would “blow them out of the water” if the facts exposed in this case became public knowledge

Supreme Court Denies Hearing On Major Challenge to Constitutionality of Income Tax 

“The gravity of these fundamental law questions have never been properly adjudicated… and the evidence in fact available proves without a doubt that the taxation scheme being implemented against Petitioner, and all Americans, is fundamentally and profoundly unlawful, unconstitutional, unfair and biased, and is evidence of ongoing, willful, wanton, deliberate and unconscionable fraud…

We have all been deceived and misled and misinformed, apparently with willful, wanton intent—clearly an (illegal) "racket" involving every State citizen, and many government agencies and officials and even the courts themselves…

The recent scandals coming out about the IRS shows the whole agency is corrupt…

Have we become a lawless people, with no means to defend our freedoms?”

- Jeffrey T. Maehr, Conclusion, Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, U.S. Supreme Court, February 12, 2013

"When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic" (Dresden James).

Amid an unusual spotlight on IRS conduct, a Colorado businessman contends his case is one the government particularly wants to keep hidden, because it could cause the whole federal agency to self-destruct.

Jeff Maehr, a Colorado chiropractor who has engaged in a number of business ventures, including PureHealthSystems.com, admits he has refused to file federal income tax returns since 2002, but he says the IRS is afraid to press criminal charges against him.

“They don’t want this to go to court, because there is so much information there that would blow them out of the water if this became public knowledge,” Maehr claimed.

“They are scared to death to bring this in front of a jury and give it a public hearing,” he said. “Instead, they know the IRS goes through administrative processes and ignorant judges and courts who all play this little game.”

Maehr insists he is not a “tax protester.”

“It’s not that I’m unwilling to pay my taxes. In fact, I acknowledge the principle of taxes is constitutional,” Maehr said. “However, I only want to pay the taxes that I owe.”

As WND previously reported, the U.S. Supreme Court docketed a case by Maehr in which he contended that while the government has constitutional authority to tax, the IRS has engaged in “unlawful, unconstitutional, unfair and biased” practices to declare salaries and wages to be income without any legal basis. Earlier this month, however, the high court declined to hear his case.

Maehr said there are questions he has asked the IRS that the agency has yet to answer.

“I am not talking about the answer given on their website, I am talking about a specific law or statute that defines income as wages,” he said. “They apparently cannot produce it, or they would’ve done so already.”

Maehr said that in 2007, the IRS attempted to gather the information from various sources such as PayPal and his mortgage company to prepare a $280,000 assessment it determined he owed for 2003 to 2006.

However, despite its claims, the IRS has made no apparent effort to hold Maehr accountable for refusing to pay.

Additionally, the agency has not attempted to go after Maehr for income from 2007 to 2011.

Maehr noted that the federal government’s unwillingness to prosecute him is particularly noteworthy because it has had no problem pressing charges against high-profile people such as actor Wesley Snipes.

Snipes was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison for failing to file tax returns for 1999 to 2001. The three years are a fraction of the time Maehr has refused to file.

However, Maehr says he has a paper trail that has prevented the IRS from going after him as it did Snipes.

“There are certain parameters they have to follow when attempting to prosecute somebody for willful failure to file,” Maehr said. “They have to be able to prove that I knew I had a duty to file and I didn’t file.

“However, my paper trail clearly shows that I do not believe I had a duty to file and the reasons for my believing that – and here’s where I have asked the questions, and I want them to answer and show me where that duty is in the law in the Internal Revenue Code.”

Maehr insisted that for the IRS to prosecute him, it would have to answer his questions in court.

“They would need to prove their case in court that wages are income and they can’t possibly make the case,” he said.

Circular logic?

Maehr asserts the courts and IRS are engaging in circular logic.

“The IRS attempts to argue in court cases that my argument is frivolous. However, in each of these instances there has never been any evidence entered into court,” he said. “They then turned around and cited previous rulings as to why my case is frivolous. Essentially they are saying it is frivolous simply because they say so.”

He said, for example, courts say his case is frivolous “because everybody knows that when you get some finances for working from somebody that’s income and that’s all profit.”

“However, they don’t want to look at the original intent of the law. They don’t want to look at the Constitution, indirect or direct taxation or any of the facts. Instead they simply ignore it all,” he said.

Maehr began researching the issue in 2002 and discovered legal cases indicating that the definition of income excludes wages and salaries.

Asking for help to clear up his confusion, Maehr asked the IRS to provide the statutory authority that wages were, in fact, income. Instead, he says the IRS simply pointed to its own statements to back up its assertions.

“I started writing some letters to the IRS and asking them some very basic questions,” Maehr explained. “I told them there appears to be this question and I would honestly like an answer since a particular law would say something, while on the other hand, they were saying something completely different.

“I simply asked them to please clarify their statements. However, it was always non-answers coming back, and finally they sent me a letter saying they were not going to respond to any of my questions anymore, and if I wanted to find an answer I would have to find it in the courts.”

So that is exactly what Maehr did.

However, he soon discovered that the courts were unwilling to address his claims, despite his clearly having standing.

A copy of a ruling from the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, before judges Michael Murphy, Bobby Baldock and Harris Hartz, was included in Maehr’s filing.

The ruling appears to support Maehr’s argument, because the judges, without responding to his questions and challenges to the constitutionality of the issue, dismissed the claims as “frivolous” and ruled, without support for its argument, that Maehr’s petition “contains no valid challenges.”

In his petition, Maehr cites a wide range of historical court and congressional statements that back up his assertions regarding taxes. For instance, Black’s Law Dictionary defines income tax as being “a tax on the yearly profits arising from property, professions, trades and offices.”

Maehr argues based on this and other references that wages are not “profits” but are instead the simple exchange of labor for money. To bolster his assertion, he notes that while businesses frequently pay taxes on their profits, they do not pay taxes on their expenses.

Likewise, the labor of an individual is the “expense” required to obtain the money, therefore it is not “profit,” and to declare otherwise would subject corporations such as Sears to “income taxes” on 100 percent of their cash register receipts, he argues.

The U.S. Supreme Court itself said an 1883 case, “It has been well said that, the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable.”

In 1969, the high court ruled: “Whatever may constitute income, therefore, must have the essential feature of gain to the recipient. This was true when the 16th amendment became effective. … If there is no gain, there is no income. … [Income] is not synonymous with receipts.”

And a 1946 case stated, “Reasonable compensation for labor or services rendered is not profit.”

Despite these references and the refusal of other courts to consider the merits of his case, the Supreme Court likewise turned down his petition.

Maehr said while he understands that the Supreme Court typically refuses to hear about 95 percent of the cases it receives, he believes his case met the criteria established because it involves an important issue of interpretation of the Constitution and federal law that directly affects every American.

“Based on their own criteria this is exactly the type of case that they should hear. It involves a constitutional issue and addresses a large segment of the population. A lot of their previous cases over the years and decades have always focused on constitutional law issues and due process.”

“With them refusing to hear this case and considering all the facts, they have basically stated I don’t get due process rights through the courts and I am not allowed to defend myself against the IRS. They will not hear it, none of the courts are willing to hear the case and adjudicate it.”

Maehr says while the news is focused on the IRS targeting of conservative groups, critics of the agency are missing a golden opportunity.

“The recent scandals coming out about the IRS shows the whole agency is corrupt, and what’s amazing is issues such as mine are not being jumped on,” he said. “What they have done with the targeting of the conservative groups pales in insignificance when compared to forcing every man, woman and child to pay a tax that they are not legally and constitutionally liable for.”

http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/businessman-irs-fears-prosecuting-me/

***************************************************************************

Full text of Conclusion to Petition to U.S. Supreme Court for Writ of Certiorari

Jeffrey T. Maehr

Feb, 12, 2013

CONCLUSION

The issues herein are certainly not on equal footing with each other but are certainly related and relevant to showing the depth and extent of the violations of law and the presumptions made by Respondent. Petitioner has formed, in good faith and without any criminal intent

whatsoever, his position on these issues, using this honorable Court's own rulings, among many other sources.

Petitioner's challenges are not "frivolous" and are, in fact, based upon a reasonable reading and interpretation of valid and extant statutory and jurisprudential authorities.

The gravity of these fundamental law questions have never been properly adjudicated, apart from court hear- say and presumption, and the evidence in fact available proves without a doubt that the taxation scheme being implemented against Petitioner, and all Americans, is fundamentally and profoundly unlawful, unconstitutional, unfair and biased, and is evidence of ongoing, willful, wanton, deliberate and unconscionable fraud:

• Petitioner was denied due process over and over

again.

• Petitioner's evidence was dismissed without consideration.

• Petitioner was unlawfully assessed.

• Petitioner's evidence that "income" is not wages is

clearly supported by Court precedent.

• Petitioner was mistreated, and the Courts unlawfully ruled without regard to Respondent's stand- ing to be acting against him in filing deficiency notices, or due process of law.

• Respondent is taxing outside clear constitutional parameters, presumptively labeling him, and all Americans, as "taxpayers" apart from any mechanism of law.

• Respondent is wantonly promoting the mandatory filing of the 1040 form, which is clearly in violation of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

 

      • Respondent has not produced the law within the IR Code which makes Petitioner or any  American "personally" liable for filing the 1040 form, let alone other "requirements."

• Respondent is presuming Petitioner is in its jurisdiction, apart from obvious physical, Constitutional and lawful facts that he is not, and nothing in the record proves such jurisdiction.

• Respondent is wantonly ignoring this Court's historical, well-settled decisions.

• Respondent claims it is a U.S. government agency, yet also denies being so.

• Respondent is using the name "IRS" despite its being canceled in violation of 18 U.S.C. law.

• Respondent failed to rebut Petitioner's affidavit, thereby, via default, accepted that all unrebutted affidavit evidence is true, yet this was ignored by Respondent and lower courts.

• Respondent is denying Petitioner his 1st Amendment rights of practice of religion and to not violate his conscience, or violate fundamental law, in witnessing against himself as actually having lawful "income" and committing perjury in so do- ing, and paying an unlawful tax.

• Respondent is claiming a jurisdiction in States and over Petitioner and all Americans without statute or evidence and, in fact, acting outside its lawful jurisdiction.

This is a series of ongoing, egregious wrongs that have landed many people in prison for attempting to comply with the fundamental law of the land, and in challenging Respondent where it is clearly wrong, and

even where it is maliciously covering up the evidence. The courts are full of this evidence.

Recent wins by Joseph Bannister, Tommy Cryer, Vernice Kuglin and others against Respondent show the fraud and the fact that Respondent cannot prove its position in criminal Court and must rely on administrative disinformation still entrenched in our courts and society to continue the scam and harm to our citizens.

Unless these basic questions are addressed, based on well-settled case precedent, and this Court is willing to look at its own rulings that invalidate Respondent's taxation scheme and the clearly contradictory lower court rulings, this wrong will continue to destroy families, wealth and the economic future of more than 330 million people in our Republic.

Millions of man-hours are spent by citizens each year on complying with this scheme (with no compensation), and millions are walking away from it after researching the mounds of evidence now available via computers, the Internet and law-research capabilities. It is a jigsaw puzzle that has been purposefully hidden, scattered and obfuscated, but which is now being brought together.

Millions of Americans are learning of these truths from a thousand web sites, attorneys, judges and others providing the case law and statutes for proving the facts. The truth will be exposed, sooner or later, and this Court has the opportunity to act on it now.

Respondent intimidates Americans, creating fear through its campaigns. Respondent fits the government's own definition of "terrorism" (United States Code, p. xxxvii).

The logical question to ask is, If  Petitioner is violating any laws, why is he not charged with criminal actions?

Why is Respondent taking the circuitous route of using "administrative" ploys like "summonses" and "deficiency" notices?

The answer is because it has deceived the Courts and knows it has accomplices in committing this easy fraud using them, and it knows it cannot bring criminal charges against Petitioner due to the record created by Petitioner proving no such "failure" would stand up in Court but would expose the "income" taxation scam and other violations of law to the public at large.

Why would Respondent not respond to Petitioner's requests if it was acting in good faith and was standing on the Constitution and rule of law and wanted the truth to be known?

Is there a law making Petitioner personally liable for filing the "income" tax" form, or not? Is "income" actually all wages, salaries and compensation for services, or is it something altogether different, but has been perverted over the decades, and essentially draining the wealth of America away under color of law? This scheme deliberately impoverishes more than a million Americans who have been deceived into complying and "self-assessing" for "income" they do not lawfully or constitutionally have.

The only way Petitioner, or all Americans, can receive proper due process of law on this issue is for this Court to address the Constitutional challenges made, and for all the evidence in support of Petitioner's contentions, which are well documented, to actually be looked at and compared to this ongoing egregious, unconscionable abuse of power under the color of law.

We have all been deceived and misled and misinformed, apparently with willful, wanton intent—clearly a "racket" (18 U.S.C.) involving every State citizen, and many government agencies and officials and even the courts themselves.

      The courts across this country have been misled and deceived by Respondent and have, therefore, persistently ruled in error on the merits of these and thousands of other Americans' arguments, yet based on hearsay and presumption and not on the actual facts available.

Correcting this egregious error could fundamentally transform the economy, fundamentally transform the lives of every man, woman and child in this country, fundamentally transform the relationship between the people and government and fundamentally transform America's growing dissatisfaction with the biased courts.

This obfuscation, this fraud, this clearly unlawful and unconstitutional scheme is being vetted and will continue to be until it is corrected. Will this Court defend the American People, our Constitution, our rule of law, and apply the law in our favor and stop this abuse, or will far more acts of violence, theft and abuse be allowed to carry on?

Will this Court create a legacy that will never be forgotten, or will it discard this unprecedented opportunity to right what is perhaps the most fraudulent scheme ever foisted on the Republic?

Will those in prison for alleged "criminal" tax evasion or other alleged wrongs be allowed to remain in prison for not complying with this fraud, and properly resisting it?

Have we become a lawless people, with no means to defend our freedoms? The Respondent comes after Petitioner and other innocent Americans under color of law and yet violates its own rules and the laws of our Republic and is now being challenged for knowingly allowing $7 billion, in 2012 alone, to go to illegal aliens filing false returns. Is this just or fair?

Because Respondent has consistently ignored its due

diligence and good faith duty to verify or disprove the challenges, Petitioner respectfully reserves his rights to relief under law and justice, and to present all relief sought as part of due process, and for the Court to grant such other and further relief as is just and proper for all concerned.

"When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic" (Dresden James).

Petitioner maintains a remand is moot since no due process can occur unless the lower courts are ordered to address all questions and evidence raised.

This controversy is ripe for adjudication.

      The Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and adjudication of all facts in evidence should be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

___________________________ Date: 02/12/2013

Jeffrey T. Maehr, Sui Juris

924 E. Stollsteimer Rd.

Pagosa Springs, Colorado 81147

(970) 731-9724

Full text of Jeffrey Maehr’s petition to the Supreme Court:

http://foundationfortruthinlaw.org/PDF/Jeffrey-T-Maehr-v-Internal-Revenue-Service-US-Supreme-Court-S.pdf

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/businessman-irs-fears-prosecuting-me/#8laEG238VtmbjxiU.99