Irwin Schiff B.S.

Saturday, February 14, 2004

"Irwin Schiff Follower and Promoter Convicted"

"For Filing Zero Income Tax Returns"

On February 12th, 2004 long time Irwin Schiff follower and promoter Steve Swan was convicted on 18 criminal counts of willful income tax evasion and fraud in the District Court of New Hampshire Criminal Case 03-CR-36-01-B! Swan faces up to 54 years in prison and $4.5 million in fines and penalties. He will be sentenced May 19th, 2004.

Steve Swan of Auburn, New Hampshire started following and promoting Irwin Schiff's "Zero Income Tax Return" theories in 1996 after reading his book "The Federal Mafia How The Government Illegally Imposes and Unlawfully Collects Income Taxes". Sincerely believing what he read as promoted by Schiff in his books through Schiff's mis-interpretation and representation of Court case decisions, tax laws and the Constitution Mr. Swan started filing the "Zero Income Tax Return" created, promoted and claimed by Mr. Schiff to legally stop paying Federal income taxes!

On March 5th, 2003 Mr. Swan was indicted and later arrested on 18 counts of criminal willful tax evasion and fraud for following the "Zero Return" theory of Schiff. When Mr. Schiff was reached by the Union Leader Staff News for comment on one of his own dedicated followers and promoters being indicted and arrested for following and promoting his theories Schiff stated:

"If I told him to go rob a bank, would he do it? What is he, an idiot?"

Swans 18 criminal counts of willful income tax evasion and fraud is broken down as follows:

2 counts of preparing and filing fraudulent amended "zero tax returns" for himself seeking refunds of prior year taxes he had filed and paid, which Schiff promotes and teaches through the sale of what he calls "Schiff Reports".

15 counts of helping others prepare and file fraudulent amended "zero tax returns" along with filing fraudulent "zero tax returns" seeking refunds of any taxes withheld for income tax for the prior year filings, which Schiff promotes and teaches through the sale of his book "The Federal Mafia How The Government Illegally Imposes and Unlawfully Collects Income Taxes".

1 count of corruptly impeding the administration of the federal tax laws by:

* Filing and promoting the filing of fraudulent W-4 Forms claiming exempt to stop the withholding of Federal income taxes, which Schiff promotes and teaches through the sale of his book "The Federal Mafia How The Government Illegally Imposes and Unlawfully Collects Income Taxes" and what he calls his "W-4 Package".

* Continuing to campaign and harass through intimidation the IRS, its employees and third parties lawfully complying with IRS collection requests by sending letters of threat, which Schiff promotes and teaches through the sale of his "Schiff Reports" and a cd-rom he calls the "Letter and Law Suit Cd".

* For filing frivolous lawsuits and sought the baseless criminal prosecution of IRS collection employees and banks, title companies, and even a recorder of deeds for complying with the laws, which Schiff promotes and teaches through the sale of his "Schiff Reports" and what he calls the "Tax Court Due Process Tool Kit".

The press release issued by the U.S. Attorneys office in Concord New Hampshire can be read here.

Schiff has contended that he has the silver bullet for taking care of the IRS and to stop paying the income tax every time he comes up with a new package to sell. The only ones that seem to get shot by his many silver bullets are those who follow his illogical, ludicrous and ridiculous conclusions and theories from his mis-interpretation and out of context reading of the tax laws, court cases and U.S. Constitution and Steve Swan received a big shot from Schiff's silver bullet gun!

Schiff has always self-proclaimed himself to be the "Nations leading authority on the Federal income tax". Ironically on January 21st, 2004 Schiff filed a brief in the District Court of Nevada Civil Case CV-S-01-0895-PMP (LRL) claiming "Insanity" in his defense for failing to pay his Federal Income Taxes! He contends he suffers from a mental disease or defect and exhibits symptoms of chronic severe delusional personality disorder!

The full brief can be read here.

You must never take some Self-Proclaimed Guru's word for anything. You must always look at the "Evidence" yourself for what it is, not for what you want it to be or some Guru says it is. You must always read Court decisions i.e. "case law" yourself for what they say and refer to, not for what you want them to say and mean or some Guru says they mean.

As you can see when you are brought up and charged criminally for following some Guru's theories the Guru will always leave you out in the cold to fend for yourself stating "If I told him to go rob a bank, would he do it? What is he, an idiot?" while he cops a plea of "insanity" in an attempt to save himself no matter what harm it does to those who rely on him!


Wednesday, February 04, 2004

"Schiff Pleads Insanity"
"For not paying Federal Income Tax"

Schiff admits he has been Wrong all along!

Schiff followers left out in the cold to fend for themselves!

On January 21st Irwin Schiff filed a brief claiming "Insanity" in his defense through his Attorney for failing to pay Federal Income Taxes.

The case is being litigated in the District Court of Nevada Civil Case CV-S-01-0895-PMP (LRL). The Federal government is seeking judgment to collect the Federal Income Tax in the amount of $2,276,244.78 for the years 1979-1985 Schiff has failed to pay in which he was convicted of in October of 1985 and Affirmed in December 1985.

In his brief Schiff claims that he suffers from a mental disease or defect and exhibits symptoms of chronic severe delusional disorder. He further contends through descriptions of his behavior through his doctor that he has chronic acute bipolar disorder, depression and a delusional personality disorder. He claims his distorted beliefs have grown out of stress from his business failures.

He claims that his delusional beliefs will continue unabated in the future along with a significant element of Paranoia. He further contends that his beliefs system in not under his voluntary control and he has little or no ability to alter his beliefs and additionally claims his behavior is not rational and unlikely to remit.

Along with his brief Schiff filed approximately 400 pages of exhibits to support his claim and plea of insanity including some of his own court quotes as:

"Noboby knows this except me, apparently, but I'm educating the public."

"That's all I have been doing all my life is litigating. One of these days I hope to get it right."

(He never has Emphasis mine)

Additionally filed within the 400 pages of exhibits to support his claim and plea of insanity were affidavits even one from one of his own attorneys stating:

"When confronted with contradictions in his conclusions, Schiff either ignores the challenge or moves on to new exhortations of what the law is and his omniscient 'expertise' on the meaning of income, taxable income, the court's applying the wrong standard, banking and/or money."

"Schiff's belief system appears to be completely circular: within that system Schiff is right, the government and the courts are wrong and he remains impervious to rational discussion."

"My attempts at rational discussions with Mr. Schiff have been more difficult than any"

"Stints of incarceration for years, IRS levies for hundres of thousands of dollars, substantial sanctions and fines imposed by (1) the Second Circuit for bringing frivolous appeals and (2) the United States Tax Court for presenting groundless and frivolous arguments demonstrate that Schiff's belief system is impervious to negative feed back. Schiff's expectation seems to be that someday the federal courts will experience an epiphany and acknowlege that he has been right all along."

"Based on all the foregoing and Occam's razor, I was forced to conclude that Mr. Schiff probably suffers from a severe delusional disorder or other mental disease or defect."

Schiff lastly stated through his Attorney in his conclusion of the 8 page brief that:

"Based on the prior incarcerations, sanctions, fines, reported decisions rejecting Schiff's theories, Schiff's Deposition Transcripts instanter, revocation of probate transcript, Declaration of William A. Cohan and attached psychological reports rendered by Dr. Ortega and Dr. Barry there exists a genuine dispute as to a material issue of fact precluding summary judgment: i.e., whether Mr. Schiff suffers from a mental disease or defect relevant to the issue of 'willfulness' and/or guilt and/or his liability vel non for civil fraud penalties."

You can read the full brief here.

Irwin Schiff Self-Proclaimed himself to be the Nations leading authority on the "income tax". Does that make him so? NO! He now claims Insanity!

Schiff claims to have written and self-published more books on the "income tax" then any other author. This may be so. Does this make him an expert? NO! He now claims those books were written from being mentally diseased with a delusional personality disorder.

Does his books mean his theories were sound and based on logic and solid evidence? NO! He now claims Insanity in regards to his beliefs!

I am not a doctor nor have I ever gone to medical school. So if I proclaim to be the Nations leading authority on heart surgery does that make me so? NO! I can write 10 books on heart surgery. Does that make me an expert? NO! Would you want me operating on you? I bet the answer is NO!!!!!

You must never take some Self-Proclaimed Guru's word for anything. You must always look at the "Evidence" yourself for what it is, not for what you want it to be or some Guru says it is. You must always read Court decisions i.e. "case law" yourself for what they say and refer to, not for what you want them to say and mean or some Guru says they mean.

As you can see the Guru will always leave you out in the cold to fend for yourself while they cop a plea to save themselves no matter what harm it does to those who rely on him!


Thursday, January 15, 2004

"Gross Income Defined"
"Sections 61(a) vs 22(a)" Irwin Schiff is Wrong!

Many believe because of Irwin Schiff that wages, salaries & tips are not income and are not taxable as such. Why? Because Irwin Schiff says so that's why and "he's the Self-Proclaimed leading authority on the income tax" self-proclaimed I mind you. He takes completely out of context what was actually said so it would say what he wanted it to say and mean instead of what it actually really says and means. Now it is a well, known fact that courts give great attention and importance to what the actual intent was of Congress regarding statutes they enacted.

Schiff has always contended that Congress removed the enforcement provisions from the code when they went from the 1939 code to the 1954 code by removing wages, salaries and tips from the list in section 22a "Gross Income Defined" of the 1939 code when they changed it to and became section 61a "Gross Income Defined" of the 1954 code. Irwin Schiff now has proved his own theory on "Gross income Defined" of the 1939 Section 22a vs 1954 Section 61a code wrong.

Schiff is now using a footnote not a part of the actual decision of C.I.R. v. Glenshaw Glass 348 US 426 (1955) and "House Report No. 1337 and Senate Report No.1622" to back his theory that he does not have income in its "Constitutional Sense" because in the Glenshaw Glass case they refer to "House Report No. 1337 and Senate Report No. 1622" in the footnote. His new contention is that what was meant by the intent of Congress in this report is that "income" in its "Constitutional Sense" means only corporate profit even though that is not what they said. Corporate profit is mentioned nowhere in either the "House Report No. 1337 and Senate Report No. 1622 or in the "C.I.R. v. Glenshaw Glass" case.

Now here is why you must verify everything and not take some Self-Proclaimed Guru's word for anything. In the 1939 code they listed wages salaries and tips as items of income. When they changed to the 1954 code they removed these items but added "not limited to" to the statute meaning that gross income was not just limited to the items listed and added "and similar items" to Compensation for services. Now even thou they removed wages, salaries and tips from the listed items that does not mean they are not considered Gross income. Of course Schiff ignores this fact.

Schiff further ignores the implementing regulation 26 CFR Section 1.61-2, which specifically adheres to the intent of Congress regarding Section 61a of the 1954 Code as recorded by "House Report No. 1337 and Senate Report No. 1622":

26 CFR 1.61-2
Section 1.61-2 Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, and similar items.

(a) In general. (1) Wages, salaries, commissions paid salesmen, compensation for services on the basis of a percentage of profits, commissions on insurance premiums, tips, bonuses (including Christmas bonuses), termination or severance pay, rewards, jury fees, marriage fees and other contributions received by a clergyman for services, pay of persons in the military or naval forces of the United States, retired pay of employees, pensions, and retirement allowances are income to the recipients unless excluded by law.

But here is where Schiff proved his own theory to be incorrect. Schiff as usual only reads what he wants the evidence to say instead of reading what the evidence actually says as he does with all case law and statutes.

Congress stated their intent very clearly in "House Report No. 1337 and Senate Report No. 1622".

Section 61. Gross income defined
This section corresponds to section 22(a) of the 1939 Code. While the language in existing section 22(a) has been simplified, the all-inclusive nature of statutory gross income has not been affected thereby. Section 61 (a) is as broad in scope as section 22(a). Section 61(a) provides that gross income includes "all income from whatever SOURCE derived." This definition is based upon the 16th Amendment and the word "income" is used in its constitutional sense. Therefore, although the section 22(a) phrase "in whatever form paid" has been eliminated, statutory gross income will continue to include income realized in any form. Likewise, no change is effected by the elimination of the specific reference to compensation of the President and judges of courts of the United States, and the compensation of such individuals will continue to be taxed in the same manner as that of other taxpayers. In view of the fact that certain types of income are excluded from gross income by other sections of the income tax subtitle of the new code, section 61(a) contains a clause excepting such income from the general definition of gross income. After the general definition there has been included, for purposes of illustration, an enumeration of 15 of the more common items constituting gross income. It is made clear, however, that gross income is not limited to those items enumerated. Thus, an item not named specifically in paragraphs (1) through (15) of section 61(a) will nevertheless constitute gross income if it falls within the general definition in section 61(a).

You can read the report as contained in Westlaw here. It is clear that using the statement that wages are not taxable since they are not listed in Section 61a would be an incorrect stance. This is why Section 61a says "Gross Income from whatever SOURCE derived". So that is why you must find out whether your income comes from a taxable SOURCE. Why do you think under the index "INCOME" "SOURCES of Income" is listed in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC)? SOURCES within the US and SOURCES without the US. You can have wages salaries and tips and unless they come from a taxable SOURCE then your income is not taxable.

This is not complicated. If you argue that "Gross Income" in its "Constitutional Sense" does not include wages, salaries and tips you will be Wrong and you will lose every time as Irwin Schiff has done repeatedly. So it is evidently clear that Irwin Schiff has missed the point and he has many believing and doing the same.

Irwin Schiff Self-Proclaims himself to be the Nations leading authority on the "income tax". Does that make him so? NO! Schiff claims to have written and self-published more books on the "income tax" then any other author. This may be so. Does this make him an expert? NO! Does this mean his theories are sound and based on logic and solid evidence? NO! I am not a doctor nor have I ever gone to medical school. So if I proclaim to be the Nations leading authority on heart surgery does that make me so? NO! I can write 10 books on heart surgery. Does that make me an expert? NO! Would you want me operating on you? I bet the answer is NO!!!!

You must never take some Self-Proclaimed Guru's word for anything. You must always look at the "Evidence" yourself for what it is, not for what you want it to be or some Guru says it is. You must always read Court decisions i.e. "case law" yourself for what they say and refer to, not for what you want them to say and mean or some Guru says they mean.


Friday, January 09, 2004

"Meaning of Income" Irwin Schiff is Wrong!

Many believe because of Irwin Schiff that in the Merchants Loan and Trust v. Smientanka 255 US 509 (1921)decision, the Supreme Court said "income" as used in the 16th Amendment means a "corporate profit". Why? Because Irwin Schiff says so that's why and "he's the Self-Proclaimed Nations leading authority on the income tax" Self-Proclaimed I mind you. He takes completely out of context what was actually said so it would say what he wanted it to say instead of what it actually really says.

The United States Supreme Court didn't say any such thing. What they said in Merchants Loan and Trust v. Smientanka is "the word income must be given the same meaning in all the Income Tax Acts of Congress that was given to it in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909". From that statement Irwin Schiff jumps to the illogical, ludicrous and ridiculous conclusion that since the Supreme Court said and included the word "corporation" in their statement/decision along with the word "income" that the word "income" can only be associated with "corporations" and "income" can only be profit received by "corporations".

The real actual name of the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909 referenced by the Supreme Court is the "Tariff of 1909" [36 Stat 11]. The Tariff was enacted August 5th 1909, which was "An Act to provide revenue, equalize duties and encourage the industries of the United States, and for other Purposes". The word Tariff means "Customs, duties, toll or tribute payable upon merchandise to the general government is called tariff; the rate of customs, &. also bears this name and the list of articles liable to duties is also called the tariff". [Bouvier's Law Dictionary].

Now read Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States of "America" to understand what Congress can regulate is. "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes".

Now read Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17 of the Constitution of the United States of "America" to understand what Congresses only Jurisdictional authority is. "To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And".

The meaning of "income" in its Constitutional Sense means "money" received from and through commerce. That is what the whole "Tariff Act of 1909" revolved around was duties and imposts on importing goods from and exporting goods to other countries and making money from without the U.S. from foreign countries and foreigners "resident and Nonresident aliens" and foreign corporations making money from within the United States. Go to a Law library and read the "Tariff Act" from the Statutes at large. [36 Stat 11]

The provisions for the taxing clauses in the Constitution such as apportionment and uniformity only apply when the Federal Government is trying to tax the States of the Union, which they are not doing in regards to the income tax. The apportionment and uniformity clauses do not apply to their territorial jurisdiction such as the District of Columbia (DC, United States - seat of Government), Guam, Puerto Rico, or any of its other territories.

For further proof of the Federal Government's jurisdiction authority go to the United States Department Of Justice's, United States Attorneys Manual, Title 9 Criminal Resource Manual and read the sections pertaining to Federal Jurisdiction:

Section 664: Territorial Jurisdiction
Section 665: Determining Federal Jurisdiction
Section 666: Proof of Territorial Jurisdiction

This is not complicated. If you argue that "Income" in its Constitutional Sense means only "corporate profit" you will be Wrong and you will lose every time as Irwin Schiff has done repeatedly. So it is evidently clear that Irwin Schiff has missed the point and he has many believing and doing the same.

Irwin Schiff Self-Proclaims himself to be the Nations leading authority on the "income tax". Does that make him so? NO! Schiff claims to have written and self-published more books on the "income tax" then any other author. This may be so. Does this make him an expert? NO! Does this mean his theories are sound and based on logic and solid evidence? NO! I am not a doctor nor have I ever gone to medical school. So if I proclaim to be the Nations leading authority on heart surgery does that make me so? NO! I can write 10 books on heart surgery. Does that make me an expert? NO! Would you want me operating on you? I bet the answer is NO!!!!!

You must never take some Self-Proclaimed Guru's word for anything. You must always look at the "Evidence" yourself for what it is, not for what you want it to be or some Guru says it is. You must always read Court decisions i.e. "case law" yourself for what they say and refer to, not for what you want them to say and mean or some Guru says they mean.


Home