“Collection Due Process” is a taxpayer’s first avenue of appeal if the
tries to collect. But typically it just rubber-stamps the
In a series of hearings in ,
Congress heard allegations that the
abusing taxpayers during the process of collecting taxes. The resulting
distrust of the tax bureaucracy led Congress to create a special adversary
proceeding providing for judicial review of
collection decisions. The proceeding is beguilingly titled “Collection Due
Process” (and commonly referred to as
“CDP”). My study of
CDP’s structure, operation, and of 976
court decisions issued demonstrates that it has failed to fulfill its promise. Of the
over 15 million collection decisions during the review period, courts have
reviewed at most 3,000 and have reversed only 16. That is a reversal rate of
about one in a million.
Sheldon Richman at The Future of Freedom Foundation’s
Freedom Daily has been examining Constitutionalist
tax protester (“show me the law!”) arguments with appropriate ruthlessness in
a series of articles titled
Beware Income-Tax Casuistry.
Now, in The Flimflam of Income-Tax Denial he responds to his critics.
These articles are important because they come from a libertarian, anti-tax,
anti-state perspective, and because they are a fairly thorough debunking — if
any of the show-me-the-law set are capable of being argued out of their
beliefs, reading these articles is probably about the closest they’ll get.
The heated reaction in blog land to ’s Associated Press article on war tax resistance has cooled to a
snarky simmer in the right-wing blogs.
For instance, Mark Noonan at
Blogs for Bush
wonders “what Gross would say about someone in his San Francisco refusing to
pay his city taxes over a moral objection to San Francisco providing
sex-change benefits? My bet is that liberals only consider war immoral.” Then
he goes on to make a more radical case for collective responsibility than I’m
used to seeing in such places:
Be that as it may, I’d like to advise Mr. Gross that the only way he can be
morally excused from future American actions is to renounce his citizenship
and leave the country with absolutely nothing (yes, that includes no clothes…
which might make entry into another nation difficult, but we’re talking about
having perfect, liberal morality and so that is a small price to pay). Mr.
Gross can’t be excused from moral culpability for actions prior to such
renunciation and departure no matter how much taxes he chooses to dodge — you
see, in a democratic Republic, we all bear our
aliquot portion of
responsibility for each and every action of government. Every time a soldier
in Anbar pulls a trigger, each of us gains a bit of moral responsibility for
where that bullet winds up — true, those who directly ordered the man to pull
the trigger bear a larger responsibilty than Mr. Gross, but Mr. Gross does
bear his portion of responsibility.
Robbie at UrbanGrounds
says in response to those who refuse to pay taxes because they don’t want to
fund the Pentagon: “I Don’t Think My Tax Dollars Should be Used to Fund the
ACLU So I’m going to quit paying my taxes.”
When a commenter asks “Do you really not know that the ACLU is supported by its
members and not your tax dollars?” a hilarious song and dance begins…
Thanks to Claire Wolfe at
for plugging The Picket Line.
Find Out More!
For more information on the topic or topics below (organized as “topic →
sub-subtopic”), click on any of the ♦ symbols to see other pages on this site that cover the topic. Or browse the site’s topic index at the “Outline” page.