11 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
skeptic bruh's avatar

I think I get it, but can someone explain how broad this ruling goes? Does this mean (for example) before the IRS or the EPA can fine you, they fist have to take you to court and prove you broke a law first? Does this mean someone could attack federal income tax?

Expand full comment
TexBritta's avatar

I hope cc answers this question because I would like to know too👍

Expand full comment
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

There were no exceptions in the ruling, those new 8,600 IRS agents are not required any longer.

Expand full comment
Seeking Grace's avatar

@Inverted Pyramid

*87,000

I read they were having difficulty filling those positions 😏

Expand full comment
Angus McPherson's avatar

Not surprising. Who would want to be a part of the "tax collectors and sinners" group.

Expand full comment
Valerie's avatar

Oh my gosh that would be fantastic! What a great take! I hope you’re correct.

Expand full comment
Heterodox Introvert's avatar

Re IRS, the collection agency for the Federal Reserve which is a private company:

No surprise, 26 U.S.C. (the federal income tax code) is written with obfuscating legalese. In a Jeff Childers spirit, a dogged legal scholar named Peter Eric Hendrickson unraveled the tax code as it applies to ordinary Americans. Twenty years after its first printing the author made his book 𝐶𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑑𝑒: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐹𝑎𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑡ℎ 𝐴𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑇𝑎𝑥𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎 available to read for f*ree on his website. https://losthorizons.com --

The exploration of the book and supporting info on the website is like a university course. It all takes time to examine, verify if you choose (personally, after my initial 10 hours or so of verification all checked out I gave the author the benefit of the doubt on the rest; your mileage may vary), and learn enough to implement, including -yes, crudely expressed here- ensuring you've got yourself a pair to withstand pushback from the bully agency. On the website there's lots of support via examples of how to handle those people (you do ultimately deal with people, albeit a type with an inflated sense of power; you must stick to the facts). --

Bottom line, your new education will inform you that most ordinary Americans do not have a federal income tax liability. Armed with the proper factual information you can alleviate yourself of this burden. If you think this sounds fanciful, know that some people do not pay federal income tax.🙋‍♀️ Right here in C&C comments section, a few months ago a commenter posted about her success getting a full refund on what she had erroneously paid to IRS: you must scroll to comments by @𝗣𝗲𝗴𝗴𝘆 𝗕 on this page: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/radio-free-america-wednesday-april/comments#comment-54207972 --

Another supporting example from an informed, ordinary American: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB8IUKpxqJ0 --

It's a journey, this thing with historical misinformation and propaganda cowing Americans into paying what they do not owe. Take your time absorbing and assimilating the correct information. When you succeed in your efforts you may want to share in your own way. There will be many who will choose to remain cowed and afraid; there may be others who will see the light. --

Brightest blessings.

Expand full comment
Not That “Karen”'s avatar

I’m no a lawyer, but it is my understanding Chevron applies in cases where the laws passed by Congress contain ambiguity where agencies and, by extension the President, then create regulations that interpret the law and become enshrined in the Code of Federal Regulation and sometimes run amok in doing so, even though, under Chevron, the agency interpretation was supposed to be “reasonable”. I don’t think it applies to income tax in general or specific tax rates, or allowable deductions because those are enshrined in the law as passed by Congress, but it would apply when the IRS creates rules and regulations to interpret complex tax laws. I think it basically means Congress needs to get their act together and ensure the legislation they pass is explicit and clear rather than relying on agencies to draft clarifying regulations. Chevron has only been in existence since 1984.

I have seen an argument that if Chevron is overturned that Congress will simply pass a law giving the agencies the specific authority that previously existed under Chevron.

One other thing to note, this is on a go forward basis, I don’t believe it nullifies anything that has been settled under Chevron in the past.

Expand full comment