Some historical and global examples of tax resistance → United States → Vietnam War, ~1965–75 → Carole Nelson

What happened between the time when Peacemakers was leading the war tax resistance charge and , when the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee was founded? There was another group, simply called “National War Tax Resistance,” that took the reins during the Vietnam War.

Here are some more excerpts from Robert Cooney’s and Helen Michalowski’s The Power of the People: Active Nonviolence in the United States about this transition period:

was, as the CNVA Bulletin declared, “The Year of Vietnam.” Picketing and sit-downs across the country marked the announcement of the first US bombing of North Vietnam on . These continued throughout the month and much effort was expended gathering signatures for a new appeal, the Declaration of Conscience, circulated by radical pacifist groups, urging civil disobedience. The Peacemakers group in Cincinnati organized a “No Tax for War in Vietnam Committee” calling for tax resistance. In a separate group — War Tax Resistance, coordinated by Bob Calvert — was established and at the time included some 200 local tax resistance centers across the country.

A No Tax for War in Vietnam Committee has issued a call for people to refuse to pay for the war in Vietnam. Those of the signers who have taxes due will refuse to pay them, or some portion of them. "Whichever method one uses," the signers said, "we are determined to withdraw as far as possible our support from the war."

From the newsletter of the Syracuse Peace Council

Nonpayment of war taxes, practiced by Quakers and others, disappeared as a pacifist testimony soon after the Civil War and Thoreau’s famous stand against the U.S. foray in Mexico. It first reappeared in World War Ⅱ when a few widely scattered individuals refused to pay federal taxes on the grounds that there was no way to prevent a significant part of their money from being used for military purposes. One resister, Ernest Bromley, was prosecuted and imprisoned for his refusal. Many others began to inform the Internal Revenue Service that payment violated their principles.

The enactment during World War Ⅱ of a measure which required employers to withhold taxes from their employees caused particular difficulties for pacifists and led to the formation of Peacemakers in . A Peacemaker committee promoted tax refusal and provided research, literature, action suggestions, and publicity for those in the tax resistance movement. Although many hundreds of people were refusing to pay income taxes during , the government prosecuted and imprisoned only six: James Otsuka of Indiana, Maurice McCrackin of Ohio, Eroseanna Robinson of Illinois, Walter Gormly of Iowa, Arthur Evans of Colorado, and Neil Haworth of Connecticut. These imprisonments and the seizure of a few cars and houses by the IRS, served to highlight the tax refusal testimony and establish it as a major nonviolent principle and tactic.

Tax resistance, like other forms of opposition to the military, increased dramatically during the Vietnam War. In the federal government levied an additional tax on every private telephone, and in a rare moment of candor, admitted that the money would help subsidize the war in Indochina. Peacemakers, the War Resisters League, and other nonviolent groups urged refusal of this tax and in the following years countless thousands heeded their call. Under the leadership of Bob and Angie Calvert, War Tax Resistance was formed in as a separate organization to investigate all aspects and ramifications of conscientious tax refusal. During the war there were over 200 local war tax resistance centers, as well as a number of “alternative life funds” which rechanneled refused tax money back into the local community for constructive purposes. Many of these continued after the end of the war.

The tactic of claiming enough dependents so that no income tax would be withheld became more widespread as the Vietnam war continued. Often the tax refuser would make clear the moral grounds for the protest by listing, for example, “all the Vietnamese” as dependents. Refusing to pay for war by claiming excessive exemptions brought particularly strong response from the government. A number of people were prosecuted and imprisoned: Jim Shea, Karl Meyer, William Himmelbauer, Mark Riley, Ellis Rece, Carole Nelson, John Leininger, and Martha Tranquilli (a 64-year-old grandmother and nurse). The tax resistance movement continued after the war and grew to include both pacifists and non-pacifists who could no longer in conscience support the military priorities of the government.

Because so much of the tax paid the Federal Government goes for killing and torture, as in Vietnam, and for the development of even more horrible war methods to use in the future, I am not going to pay taxes on 1964 income

From the newsletter of the Syracuse Peace Council

As more and more tax money was directed toward the [Reagan era] military buildup, many activists revived interest in war tax resistance. Protests were organized each year, and individual resisters tried a variety of means to deny the government money for war. In , demonstrations were held in Dallas, Atlanta, San Francisco, Los Angeles and other cities and 24 people were arrested at IRS offices in New York City. The following year, the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee was formed by the Center on Law and Pacifism, Conscience and Military Tax Campaign, WRL, Peacemakers and eighty local groups. featured the largest show of war tax resistance actions in , including Ralph Dull, an Ohio farmer and tax resister , who drove a truckload of grain to the IRS office as payment for his taxes. The IRS instituted a “frivolous returns” penalty to discourage the filing of returns with any but the requested information, and some resisters began an insurance fund, pooling their resources to pay fines and interest charges levied against fellow tax resisters.


This comes from the Minnesota Daily, and gives some rare insight into the government’s anxiety about war tax resisters at the time, and the difficulty it had in responding to the threat in an effective way:

Tax Refusal Case Could Set Precedent

by Steve Brandt

The case of Carole Nelson, a young Minneapolis woman who refuses to pay her federal income tax to support war, could set an important precedent, Richard Oakes, her attorney, said during an interview .

“The government is kind of flailing around, looking for ways of prosecuting tax refusals,” Oakes said. “They’re exploring various civil and administrative ways to get at this thing.”

Nelson refused to obey a U.S. District Court order requiring her to give tax information to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) .

She is scheduled for a court hearing to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court for refusing to obey the order.

Although Sally Buckley, the first war tax resister to be prosecuted locally, was tried under criminal statutes, Nelson’s case has so far been conducted under civil law.

If Judge Earl Larson finds her in contempt of court, he could order her to go to jail with a six-month maximum term until she is ready to pay.

He could also issue a light sentence, ask her to think her refusal over, and then give her another chance to provide the information or he could give her a straight contempt sentence.

All three actions could be challenged in court, Oakes said.

Although he said issuing a fine is rare in contempt cases, Oakes thinks Larson might impose a fine against Nelson comparable to the taxes he thinks she owes.

Paradoxically, since Nelson has said she has very little in assets, she may own [sic] no tax. The amount she owes cannot be figured until she supplies the IRS with the requested information.

The case is also complicated by the fact that the Washington-based Justice Department lawyer prosecuting the case for the IRS, John Hines, would rather not have to prosecute her.

At a previous hearing, Hines told Nelson, “I want to do this even less than you can imagine. I read Thoreau too.”

“Hines is a decent guy,” Oakes said, noting that Hines could have asked for a contempt citation at that hearing. “He’s got some personal sympathies. I don’t think he’d like to see her got to jail.

“The government is quite upset about this case,” Oakes added. “You can be accused of bank robbery and they won’t fly a guy in from Washington.”

One of Nelson’s friends remarked after the hearing that the cost of flying Hines to Minneapolis probably exceeds whatever tax she may owe.

Oakes said he believes the government’s attention to the case rests on the fact that “taxpaying is basically a voluntary act.

“If everybody quit paying their taxes, the government would go out of business,” he added.

Hines confirmed that the case costs more to pursue than the government expects to gain in tax from Nelson but added that not to prosecute “would set a precedent that we could not afford.

“We have good precedents on our side,” he said. “It’s an important case to us only in the publicity that would come if we lost it.”

According to Ed Hedemann’s list of court actions taken against war tax resisters, Nelson served 10 days for her refusal to turn over records to the IRS. Here is a follow-up on her sentencing from the Minnesota Daily:

War Tax Resister Sentenced to 10 Day Jail Term for Contempt of Court

War tax resister Carole Nelson was held in contempt of court for refusing to obey a court order directing her to provide the federal government with information about her financial status.

U.S. District Court Judge Earl Larson sentenced Nelson to imprisonment for a maximum of 10 days “or until she purges herself of the contempt,” (by complying with the order). Her attorney, Richard Oakes, called the relatively light sentence “nothing short of fantastic.

“I’m amazed. I consider this a victory,” he said.

Nelson was ordered by Larson to present herself to the Internal Revenue Service and fill out a form on her financial status. She did not comply.

Justice Department tax division attorney John Hines had asked Larson for incarceration of Nelson until she complied with the order. The maximum imprisonment for contempt is six months.

Hines said the statute the government was trying to get Nelson to obey was intended to combat organized crime.

“I don’t want her (Nelson) to go to jail. But I’ll do anything to fight organized crime,” Hines, who is involved mainly in organized crime tax cases, said.

In his closing statement Oakes said, “I think the government fears the publicity in this matter more than the consequences. This is not a person who ought to be incarcerated.”

Oakes also argued that the government could get the information it wanted about Nelson from social security and other government records.

In a statement read from the witness stand, Nelson said it was “a perversion of justice to be here to show cause why I should not be charged with contempt of court for refusing to be an accomplice to killing.”

She is basing her refusal to provide the information on her Christian beliefs. She has sworn that she has no assets.

If each person obeyed or disobeyed laws according to his conscience, “it would let every citizen be a law unto himself,” Larson said.

Larson said the contempt citation was the first he has issued in the 11 years on the bench.

Oakes said he expects no further prosecution of Nelson.