How you can resist funding the government → a survey of tactics of historical tax resistance campaigns → conduct labor strikes → see also

Some encouraging signs of anti-militarist direct action from organized labor:

South African port and truck workers are refusing to move weapons from a ship that docked in the country on its way to Zimbabwe, union officials said .

Meanwhile, in the U.S.:

In a major step for the U.S. labor movement, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) has announced that it will shut down West Coast ports on , to demand an immediate end to the war and occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan and the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Middle East. This is the first time in decades that an American union has decided to undertake industrial action against a U.S. war.

I learned today about The Australian Newspapers Digitization Program. It’s just getting started, but naturally I did a little hunting.

(The optical character recognition they’re using is pretty sub-par, or perhaps it’s the quality of their scans that’s the problem. But they’ve taken an approach that I haven’t before seen in on-line digitalization of newspaper archives — they’re inviting users to proofread and correct these automated transcriptions, wiki-style. So over time the archive may improve in quality.)

I found this article from the edition of The Argus about the meeting of a union of unions in New South-Wales devoted to the overthrow of the capitalist state.

The Workers’ Industrial Union of Australia submitted a motion calling for tax resistance — a tactic I haven’t seen much evidence of in the labor movement otherwise (though it was a tactic of Marx-aligned democrats in Germany, and of anti-Czarist revolutionaries in Russia):

[Resolved] That the working class movement throughout Australia refuse to pay State and Federal income taxes on incomes of £500 or under that amount per annum.

The motion passed. An article in the same paper reported that some union activists had already started using tax resistance in the Northern Territory:

Eight cases for the non-payment of income tax were heard . The following were sent to gaol for 28 days:— James Fitzgerald, R.H. Green, K. Spain, John O’Neill, Albert Colley, R.J. Doling. They all admitted having the means, but declined to pay. The defendants are well-known unionists.

One group of miners’ unions took up a similar tax resistance proposal and went further: “It is also suggested that if any member is imprisoned, or has his wages garnisheed, for refusing to pay tax, a general strike will be declared until the member is released, or his money refunded.“

The government of Delhi, India, is trying to extend its sales tax to cover the services lawyers provide to their clients. The lawyers are fighting back.

Lawyers in district courts of the capital observed strike Thursday to oppose the imposition of service tax on law firms.

Around 20,000 lawyers in Delhi abstained from work, paralyzing the lower courts.

No advocate appeared in the cases in Patiala House, Tis Hazari, Karkardooma, Rohini and Dwarka courts.

The cases listed for the day were adjourned, a Delhi Bar Association office bearer said.

“The lawyers of India will not tolerate any attempt by the government to impose service tax on the legal fraternity and shall adopt all peaceful means to oppose such uncalled and unwarranted taxes,” the coordination committee of All Bar Associations of Delhi said in a statement.

A little Googling shows me that the lawyers in Delhi tend to strike at the drop of a hat. They struck to protest a temporary suspension of two lawyers, struck again to protest a change in court procedure regarding adjournments, struck in when miffed at the treatment of two lawyers at the hands of a bailiff, and struck once more in to protest poor security at court. That covers page one of the Google results.

So there may be less to this dramatic-seeming action than meets the eye.

In other news, British mogul Guy Hands has become a taxpatriate.

The financier is now conducting all official business in his capacity as chairman of EMI, the music group, and Terra Firma from his Guernsey offices, where he moved earlier , flying senior executives over to the Channel Islands for key meetings.

He is understood to have sold his London house as part of his commitment not to return to the UK for some time over his unhappiness with rules that make UK citizens living abroad pay tax if they spend more than 90 days in the country.

“He has just taken a conservative view over the 90-day tax rule and decided to stay away, whether that’s for one year, two or three,” said one person close to Mr Hands. “Where he is in the world doesn’t make a great deal of difference.”

Mr Hands’ move to Guernsey was made in frustration at the Government’s decision to increase the top rate of income tax payments to 50pc from next year.

The following account comes from James Mill’s and Horace Hayman Wilson’s The History of British India, , and concerns a mass tax-resistance strike that started .

In order to extend the public resources of the Government, it was thought advisable to impose a tax upon houses in the several towns and cities of Bengal, Behar, Orissa, and Benares: religious buildings were exempted. Such a tax had been levied for some years without any difficulty or obstruction in Calcutta, and it was not expected that any serious opposition would be offered to it in other cities. The Government was mistaken. The measure was regarded as an innovation, and was vehemently opposed. At Benares especially the resistance was most violent, and was curiously characteristic of the peculiarities both of the place and the people.

As soon as the intentions of the Government became known, great excitement prevailed throughout the city, and meetings of the different castes and trades were held to determine upon the course to be pursued. No obstruction was offered to the persons employed to assess the houses; but the shops were closed, every kind of occupation was abandoned, and such numerous crowds assembled on the outskirts of the town, that it was judged expedient by the magistrate to call to the assistance of the police a detachment of troops from the neighbouring cantonments. Their services were not needed, as the people quietly dispersed; but on the same day a solemn engagement was taken by all the inhabitants to carry on no manner of work or business until the tax was repealed. Everything was at a stand: the dead bodies were cast unceremoniously into the river, because there were none to perform the obsequial rites; and the very thieves refrained from the exercise of their vocation, although the shops and houses were left without protection, — the people deserting the city in a body, and taking up their station halfway between Benares and Secrole, the residence of the European functionaries, about three miles distant. A petition was presented to the magistrate, praying him to withdraw the odious impost, and declaring that the petitioners would never return to their homes until their application was complied with: a reference to Calcutta was all that was in the magistrate’s power.

Whilst awaiting for a reply from the Government, the people of Benares continued assembled, and were joined by many persons from the surrounding districts: the number was computed at more than two hundred thousand, comprehending the aged and infirm, women and children. They were supplied with food regularly at the expense of the opulent classes, and were actively enjoined to unanimity and perseverance by their religious guides and teachers. Their conduct was uniformly peaceable; passive resistance was the only weapon to which they trusted. They continued in the open air throughout the day, but many returned at night to their homes.

In this manner . The Government somewhat misconceiving the character of the assemblage, and at any rate deeming it impolitic to yield to any semblance of intimidation, ordered the enforcement of the tax, and the dispersion of the multitude, if necessary, by force. A sufficient strength had been collected for the purpose; but, before the receipt of the orders, time, reflexion, and discomfort had enfeebled the vigour of the opposition, and the people had for the most part returned to their dwellings. The determination of the Government caused them to reassemble, with the avowed determination of marching in a body to Calcutta to petition the Governor-General personally for redress; but this was a much more arduous undertaking than a bivouac in the immediate vicinity of Benares, and could not be prosecuted with the same unity of purpose. Every householder engaged, indeed, either to go himself, to send a representative, or contribute his quota to the expense of the journey; and a number of persons met, and made one march towards Calcutta: but the defaulters were so numerous, and so many of those who had set out deserted by the way, that the leaders were sensible of the futility of the scheme, and wanted only a decent excuse for its relinquishment. This was furnished by the interposition of the Raja of Benares, who, at the desire of the Government officers, repaired to the party, overtook them, and counselled them to turn back, and rest contented with with the renewed representation of their grievances through the usual official channel in a quiet and respectful manner. His advice was followed, and a second petition was presented, to which in due time attention was paid.

In consequence of this opposition, and the universal unpopularity of the tax, it was repealed. In the following year it was revived in a modified form, and limited in its application to the cities of Dacca, Patna, and Murshedabad. In those towns it was to be applied to the payment of a municipal police, to be appointed and maintained by a committee of natives chosen by the inhabitants of each ward in the presence of the magistrate: to these committees also was intrusted the office of assessing the different shops and dwellings of their respective wards, the whole not to exceed a maximum average rate. Some opposition was made to the arrangement at Dacca, but it was finally carried into operation.

Here, the author notes that “The public petitions proceeding from native communities in India which are much intermixed with Europeans are rarely of a genuine native character. They betray more or less European, and particularly professional, prompting. At Benares there were few Europeans, no lawyers; and the petition of the inhabitants was, most probably, of their own unaided dictation. It is a document not without interest, as it not only expresses the sentiments of the people on the occasion on which it was presented, but shows that they were well informed of the proceedings and views of their rulers.” He includes the following translation of the petition in an appendix:

The Petition of all the Inhabitants of the City of Benares, etc., etc., Sheweth, That we, your humble petitioners, have been nourished from our infancy by the fostering care of the British Government, and have been protected from every evil. During the government of Mr. Hastings especially we enjoyed ease and tranquillity, when, by the abolition of the tax on pilgrims, the fame of the Government was extended from one end of India to the other. In like manner, in the time of the Marquis Cornwallis, we enjoyed various advantages: the Sayer and town duties, and other descriptions of oppressive duties, were abolished. The affairs of this province were committed to the administration of Mr. Duncan; and such was the indulgence extended to us, that, for the first time, Vakeels were appointed in the courts of justice on the part of Government, and the claims of Government were henceforward judged and determined in common with the claims of other people. A considerable sum of money was also appropriated for the expense of the Hindoo college, and hundreds of people obtained Jageers, pensions, and donations; the people of all descriptions were secured in the enjoyment of their laws and their religion, together with the customs and usages to which they had been long habituated. The fame of the Government extended itself throughout the world; everything submitted to its will, and the population of the country increased with its prosperity.

When the court of justice was originally established at Benares, the fees payable on the institution of suits were fixed at the rate of five per cent.; but the people claimed the interposition of the Governor-General’s agent at this place, and the fees were reduced in consequence to the rate of one per cent. We fully expected that in a short time these also would be abolished; but after that gentleman went away, they were again increased; and by the introduction of the stamp duties, transit and town duties, by the Phatuckbundee and other new institutions, your petitioners were reduced to distress and wretchedness.

During the last five years, the seasons have proved unfavourable; the harvests have been injured by drought, hail, and frost; and the price of every article of consumption has increased two-fold. In this state of things, Regulation ⅹⅴ., , is introduced; and the tax it imposes, by affecting all ranks of people, has thrown the subjects of your Government into consternation. Accordingly, a number of people, in the confident expectation of obtaining that indulgence which Government has always been accustomed to extend to its subjects, exposed themselves to the inclemency of the season; and, with nothing to cover them but the heavens, bowed their faces to the earth in supplication; in this state ot calamity, several of them perished. We presented some petitions, setting forth our distresses, to the magistrate; and, as we did not obtain our object, we petitioned the provincial court; but, from our untoward fate, we were again unsuccessful. In this state of trouble, the proclamation of , was issued, under the impression that your petitioners were in a state of disobedience to the Government; which we humbly represent was never even within our imagination. In implicit obedience to this proclamation, as to the decree of fate, we got up, and returned to our homes, in full dependence upon the indulgence of the Government. We set forth our distresses as below stated: we hope that you, under the authority vested by Government in its officers, upon the exercise of which the welfare of the country depends, will be pleased to translate this our petition, and forward it to the Right Honourable the Governor-General in Council, that, under the provision contained in clause 1st, Regulation ⅹⅼⅰ., , we may obtain relief. The indulgent disposition which is invariably manifested by the Government, induces us to entertain a confident hope that the petition of its afflicted subjects will be complied with.

[The following representation relates to Regulation ⅹⅴ., , and the proclamation of .]

First. By Regulation ⅹⅹⅲ., , the expense of the police establishments was to be defrayed by a tax levied from the merchants, traders, and shopkeepers, who were considered one of the most opulent classes of the people; but, by the rules in Regulation ⅵ., , the Regulation above mentioned was rescinded, and it was declared that the tax was a source of vexation to the contributors. The Vice-President in Council accordingly resolved to abolish this tax, and to substitute the duties on stamp paper in the room of it. Sire, when the vexations to which the people were exposed by being subjected to the tax, are so fully known to you, there can be no necessity for us to employ much detail in representing them; and let it be understood, that the persons who then were affected by Regulation ⅹⅹⅲ., , are not now in a condition better calculated to submit to it. In the new Regulation, the tax includes every one; thousands who have not wherewithal to subsist, are affected by it; hence, to extend the tax to everybody, will be the cause of general ruin.

Secondly. The protection of the people is the duty of the Government. The Governments to which we were formerly subjected, established the transit and other duties upon traders to defray the expenses of protecting us; in other words, for the support of the police. Expenses of other descriptions were defrayed by the produce of the Baitoolmaul; and, although these duties still continue to be levied in Benares, the expense of the roads and the general protection of the country, such as the establishment of police, and so forth, was also provided for at the settlement of the province; besides this, the stamp duties were established to defray the expense of the police, as well as the Phatuckbundee, which has, however, been abolished by the proclamation of . These various resources for the support of the police, well merit the attention of the Government.

Thirdly. In Regulation ⅹⅴ., , it is stated, that, as the tax had been introduced in Calcutta, it should be also introduced into Benares. Sire, the ground of Calcutta is the particular property of Government; it was originally Government property, and became inhabited according to the usages established in England; all consented to pay the tax on the same principle as if it were a ground-rent; and every one, according to his means or pleasure, took ground, and built upon it. But it is otherwise in Benares, where the ground is the property of its inhabitants, who have held it by purchase or other means from time immemorial.

Fourthly. In Regulation ⅹⅴ., , it is declared, that all places of worship are to be exempted from the tax; and the whole extent of the city of Benares as contained within the Punchkos is, in fact, a place of worship; there positively is not a point of ground within it which is otherwise. Let this be ascertained by a reference to the Shaster. Besides this, former Governments, on all occasions of exercising their authority, treated this city with peculiar indulgence; and the British Government also has done the same, as is instanced in the exemption of Brahmins from capital punishment; hence, the city of Benares should be especially exempted from the tax on houses.

Fifthly. The means of procuring subsistence in these times, such as they are, are well known to Government. From the annihilation of the profits of our labour, from the increase of the taxes, from calamities which have raised the price of every article of consumption, from the abolition of the Tehseeldarry system, and from the bankruptcy of the merchants, your petitioners are reduced to such a state, that multitudes are unable to clothe and feed themselves, or support and educate their families: hence numbers, who supported themselves in a respectable manner, have been robbed of their respectability by distress. Had it not been for the native colleges of Calcutta and Benares, there would not have been an educated or well-bred man to be found throughout the country. How, then, is it possible to pay the tax?

Sixthly. Thousands of people in these times have not a kouree in the world; and if, in order to realise the tax, their household property shall be sold, as is prescribed in the Regulation, to what extremities will they not be reduced?

Seventhly. Since the commencement of the English Government, the rules contained in the Shera and Shaster, together with the customs of Hindostan, have invariably been observed: it will be found in the Shera and Shaster, that houses are reckoned one of the principal necessaries of life, and are not accounted disposable property. Even creditors cannot claim them from us in satisfaction of their dues; and in this country, in the times of the Mohammedan and Hindoo princes, houses were never rendered liable to contributions for the service of the state.

Eighthly. Men of business possess no ostensible property but their houses. Houses are the foundation of all worldly affairs, whether in the collector’s office, or in courts, or in mercantile transactions. If the tax is enforced, what with providing the means of paying it on the one hand, and what with the apprehension of future innovations from the interference of Government on the other, such general distrust will be excited, that there will no longer be any reliance on the security of property: all mercantile transactions, all worldly affairs, will be overturned, and the public at large will become distracted.

Ninthly. By the usages of this country, the rights of the Government as they were exercised in the times of the Mohammedan and Hindoo princes, do not weigh heavy upon its subjects: hence it is, that under the English Government, in the sale of estates to realise the public revenue, the houses of the landholders are exempted. If the tax is enforced, the public mind will, for many reasons, be filled with apprehensions.

Tenthly. Although Government certainly devotes particular care and expense to the protection of the inhabitants of the cities, yet the town and transit duties, the mint and stamp duties, the registry of deeds, the duties arising from the quarries and the Abkaree, &c., &c., all of which multiply in proportion to the extent of the population, are levied in a greater degree from the inhabitants of cities than from those who live in the interior.

Eleventhly. If the tax is enforced, the rent of houses will increase; and many of the people, who are come from distant places to reside in this city and rent the houses they occupy, will no longer continue to remain in it. People will build no more stone houses; and in that case, many classes of workmen, such as carpenters, blacksmiths, masons, &c., will be left without employment, and the city will be depopulated.

Twelfthly. Those who, from the fame of the justice and protection to be found under the English Government, are come from distant countries to reside in the city of Benares, and whose residence in it adds to the population of the place, and benefits thousands, will by the introduction of the tax be disheartened. They will go away, and multitudes will be ruined.

Thirteenthly. The Regulations enacted by the Marquis Cornwallis were extended to Benares, and we, your petitioners, satisfied with those Regulations, lived happy and contented; the whole country increased in fertility and population, and the resources of Government were improved, at least so it appeared to us, though we know not if it appears so to the wisdom of the Government.

Fourteenthly. As a number of persons continued for some time assembled together to complain, Government conceived there was a disturbance, and it was so declared in the proclamation of . Sire, if an order be passed, relating particularly to one individual, and other persons combine to support him, it might in that case be denominated a disturbance. As the introduction of the tax affected every individual of every class, every one presented himself to obtain justice. Thousands of men and women, all the old and the infirm, Brahmins, devotees, and Pundits, who have no occupation but prayer and penance, abandoned their houses and were among them. None were armed, even with a stick. The manner and custom in this country, from time immemorial, is this: that, whenever any act affecting every one generally, is committed by the Government, the poor, the aged, the infirm, the women, all forsake their families and their homes, expose themselves to the inclemency of the seasons and to other kinds of inconveniencies, and make known their affliction and distress, that the Government, which is more considerate than our parents, may observe their condition and extend indulgence to its subjects. Besides this, when the Brahmins in general are involved in distress, it is incumbent on all Hindoos to abstain from receiving sustenance, and any one who presumes to deviate from this custom, must incur general opprobrium. If your petitioners, by assembling together in this manner, can be considered to have created a disturbance, it is our misfortune.

[The next representation respects the houses of Benares.]

First. Many Mohullahs are upon ground which pays revenue to Government, and ought accordingly to be exempted.

Secondly. Many houses and several parts of the city are held by grants from the native princes and from the Honourable East India Company, and these are of the same nature as Ultumgah; besides which, thousands of people subsist on the bounty of Government.

Thirdly. Many of the Seraies and other public places were built by the Mohammedan princes or by their principal officers, and ought to be exempted.

Fourthly. There are hundreds of houses in this city, the proprietors of which pay rent for the ground they are built upon, while the owner of the ground receives the rent as his right; which right has never been disputed by any Government. The house having been built by its proprietor, he holds it, like household furniture, exempt from taxation; the materials of which it is built are liable to town and transit duties, and to the quarry duties, which are, of course, paid upon requisition. Many pieces of ground, and several of the houses above mentioned, are let to Government by the proprietors, and such proprietors cannot in consequence be called upon to pay the tax.

Fifthly. Many houses have been purchased by their present proprietors at public auction, with the permission of Government.

Sixthly. Many houses which belonged to the Baitoolmaul, have been purchased by their present proprietors from the Government, who, on paying the value of them to Government, were put into possession.

Seventhly. Many houses are still in the Baitoolmaul, and the occupants pay rent for them to Government.

Eighthly. Many houses have been bestowed upon Brahmins and Fucqueers; and these houses, like Kishnapun, and, according to established rules, must be exempted.

Ninthly. Many benevolent and humane people lend their houses for the accommodation of pilgrims and travellers, in the hope by so doing to obtain the blessing of Providence; many lend them out of civility to their friends. If the tax is enforced, civility and benevolence will be excluded from the world.

Tenthly. Many houses have been built by persons of rank in former times; these houses are deserted and fallen to ruin. Those to whom these houses have lineally descended, are unable to repair them; they inhabit, perhaps, but one room, without even the means of subsistence: such persons surely deserve indulgence.

Eleventhly. Many houses are mortgaged, and in the possession of the mortgagee. The tax cannot be paid by the mortgager, because he is without the means of paying it; nor can it be paid by the mortgagee without diminishing the legal profit derivable from the established rate of interest.

Twelfthly. Many houses belong to the Nawaub Vizier and other persons of distinction, such as Manmundil and Raujmundil.

Thirteenthly. Several men of rank, such as the Moghul princes, reside in Benares by order of Government; they have either received their houses from Government, or have built them themselves.

Fourteenthly. Many of the buildings of this city are either Hindoo or Mohammedan places of worship, or pious bequests. After exempting buildings of these descriptions and the houses above mentioned, it will appear, upon inquiry, that the produce of the tax will not be worth the consideration of Government, which expends lakhs of rupees for the welfare of its subjects and for the general prosperity of the country.

Our existence and everything we possess have been bestowed upon us by the liberality of Government. Your humble petitioners feel themselves totally unable to contend, even in litigation, with a Government so powerful; but perceiving that the Government is always disposed to be kind and indulgent, we have presumed to represent what our imperfect understandings have suggested to us. The indulgence of Government has given us the power to make this our representation; and, at all events, we hope for its indulgence and the forgiveness of our offences.

In The New York Times earlier this week, Robert Zaretsky drew some parallels between today’s American “TEA Party” movement and France’s Poujadism half a century ago.

Pierre Poujade

One difference Zaretsky doesn’t mention is that Pierre Poujade’s conservative, populist, pro-imperialist, anti-tax movement actually put some skin in the game, whereas thus far the “TEA Party” has been all talk.

In , Poujade led his “Union for the Defense of Shopkeepers and Artisans” in a tax resistance campaign. “Tens of thousands of taxpayers, mostly in southern France, where his strength is greatest, have refused to make their first installment in payment of taxes on last year’s income.” He also occasionally called for brief strikes in which Poujadists would shutter their shops. In some areas, so it was reported, “unabashed Poujade vigilantes went right on chasing tax collectors down the roads, mobbing police and defying troops assigned to escort them.” According to another account:

The loudspeaker is [the movement’s] symbol and it all started in earnest one bright morning… when a loudspeaker mounted on a truck brought awful tidings to the pleasant little town of St. Cere near Toulouse in south-west France.

“Attention,” it blared. “Attention. The tax inspector is in town.”

There was a rumbling sound as the steel curtains with which French shops are shuttered at night were rolled down all over St. Cere. Then, amidst ominous quiet, a strange procession wound its way through the medieval streets.

At the head of it marched the tax inspector, carrying a bulging briefcase. He was followed by 80 black-uniformed members of the Republican Security Corps with gas masks dangling from their shoulders and submachine guns at the ready. After them, looking just a little scared, came the entire citizenry of the town.

The tax inspector rapped on steel curtain after steel curtain, demanding to be let in to see the books. Nowhere did he get an answer. When they found that even the bistros were locked, the hapless inspector and his guards gave up their mission and beat a humble retreat from St. Cere.

The tax-hating citizens had revolted against the Government of France, and won.

Defiance soon was carried further than that. Angry “Poujadistes” began resorting to physical violence against stubborn tax inspectors who insisted on seeing the accounts. They also took to spiking forced tax sales by refusing to bid until the auctioneer had lowered the price of whatever was up for sale to a laughably small figure. Thus a tax delinquent might buy back his own shop for, say 10 cents. At an auction the other day, a brand-new car went for one franc, or less than one-third of a cent.

The movement has got its members elected to office in almost three-fourths of France’s departmental chambers of commerce. It has secure the support of most of the provincial press, often by threatening mass cancellations of subscriptions, while its own monthly publication, L’Union, has a circulation of 450,000.

Here’s a Life magazine article about the Poujade movement, featuring pictures of some of the resisters, and the detail that “some priests ring church bells to warn of the arrival of the revenuers.” Another brief wire service note shows that the Poujade phenomenon started to cross national boundaries and develop copycat movements elsewhere, perhaps not by accident.

Like the anti-tax, anti-big-government right-wing in the United States today, the Poujadists didn’t seem to mind certain expensive big government projects:

Poujade presented a seven point program to enable France to hold Algeria, hinged on the presence of a large army, strong measures of repression of the independence movement, severe punishment for those who advocate autonomy, and unspecified “reforms” to overcome the unrest of the natives.

When hecklers yelled, “How can you reduce taxes by starting a full fledged war in North Africa?” Poujade’s men quickly silenced them.

The Poujadists briefly formed a political party, and more than fifty of its slate were elected to the Chamber of Deputies (including a young Jean-Marie Le Pen). The movement was short-lived, though. The party was organized on rigidly authoritarian lines and didn’t have much of a platform beyond its complaints.

Poujade decided to bet everything on a single, high-stakes roll of the dice: he’d call for a reenvocation of the States-General (which hadn’t convened since ) as a way of overriding the existing government with a populist revolt. The American parallel would be if the “TEA Party” people were to call for a Constitutional Convention to rewrite the United States Constitution more to their liking. He couldn’t pull this off, and lost credibility. A year after their surprisingly strong showing at the polls, people were already asking “what ever happened to the Poujadists?”

Some bits and pieces from here and there:

Some items of note:

  • At the Liberty & Power blog, Robert Higgs takes a look at the Obama’s proposed military budget and finds that, as usual, it’s bigger than it looks. It includes a 4.5% increase to the Pentagon’s budget, but also hides a lot of military spending in other categories (for instance the nuclear weapons spending in the Department of Energy, or what other countries call “defense” that the United States had to reinvent as “homeland security,” or our spending on foreign militaries via the State department). Higgs estimates that about a third of U.S. military spending is not reflected in the Pentagon budget.
    • In a follow-up post, Higgs reflects on how he struggled, during his time delving into the budgetary arcana, to keep the real-world effect of all of those numbers in mind. “Data are fine things; I’ve devoted much of my professional life to their examination and analysis. Yet it behooves all of us to realize that data may sometimes clothe madness or veil inhumanity, and to beware the power of numbers to lull us into an immoral sleep.”
  • War Resisters’ International reports on a campaign called “Tag War.” This campaign attempts to draw attention to businesses that profit from contributing to war and violent conflict.
  • Greek kiosk owners are throwing a one-day strike to protest an increase in tobacco taxes.

Some bits and pieces from here and there:

In other news, amidst the other tax resistance actions in Greece, officials of the Greek tax agency have gone on strike.

The two-day strike coincides with the last two working days of the tax year, which amplified its effect.

The article reporting on the strike also notes a rise in the number of people who are turning in their car license plates rather than renewing their registration at an increased rate.

A few updates on the Household Tax resistance campaign in Ireland:

  • There’s now talk of the Civil and Public Service Union threatening to go on strike if the government attempts to deduct the tax from the salaries of resisting members.
  • Resister Joe Conway puts the movement in historical context:

    I believe this to be a defensible form of civil protest against a measure that hits the poorest hardest.

    Tax resistance — such as the withholding of this latest charge — has been used for centuries. Our forefathers risked eviction or death when they refused to pay tithes or exorbitant rents during the Land War. American colonists refused to pay taxes to their putative overlords. French peasants risked everything when they refused to pay the corvee — an enslaving tax on their labour. When there is an unjust tax, resistance is a political right and a moral stance.

    I will be donating the €100 to two good causes in Tramore looking after our young people and our aged. I am infinitely happier to give the money to those who deserve it rather than conspiring in the transfers to Frankfurt or Paris to further fatten the bondholders’ wallets.

  • Fewer than 20% of the households in Ireland have registered and paid the tax so far, with the registration deadline looming at the end of this month. It will be at least October before the government is equipped to pursue the hold-outs.

And here’s a news dispatch from :

Tax Resisted.

Irritated Stokers.

A Steamer Held Up.

Paris, April 9.

The objection of five stokers to pay income tax has prevented the La France, the largest French Transatlantic liner, leaving Havre. When the men refused payment the Revenue authorities garnisheed their wages to the extent of 34 francs apiece. The stokers referred the matter to their trade union, and as the whole engine-room staff made common cause with the stokers the passengers were disembarked and sent to Paris.

A cable from that was printed in New York Times said that the strike was resolved when the company said it would pay the stokers’ taxes on their behalf. At first the union had rejected this idea. The Times report included these paragraphs:

The strike of the stokers, who were joined in sympathy by the rest of the crew, raises the question of the manner in which tax collectors can collect Finance Minister de Lasteyrie’s new income taxes. The stokers refused to pay. The tax collector thereupon attached their wages, obliging the company under French law to subtract the arrears of the uncollected tax.

A principle is therefore involved, because if in order to assure normal communications the Government urges that satisfaction be given the men there seems no reason, it is pointed out, why other categories of French citizens should not also begin a fiscal strike when dissatisfied with high taxation.

One point, however, is stressed, namely, that if the men’s wages alone were reckoned these would not be sufficiently high to bring them within the taxable category at all. In order to make up the necessary total the tax collector added certain allowances and the fact that the men are fed at the company’s cost. It is this to which the men object and it is possible that the Finance Ministry will finally decide in their favor.

From the Aspen [Colorado] Democrat:

Refuse to Pay Poll Tax

Birmingham, Ala., . — The plant of the Dimick Paint company at North Birmingham, employing 200 men, closed down because a deputy tax collector served garnishment on the employees for the non-payment of poll tax. Many of the men quit work causing the plant to shut down. Efforts are being made to resume operations . The men persist in their refusal because they claim the tax is an unjust one and not constitutional. The citizens all side with the strikers.

(The New York Times, in its version of the article, called it, more correctly I think, the “Dimmick Pipe Company” and added: “A large number of the men are from the North, and were not apprised of the Birmingham system of paying poll tax until they found that, on notices from a Justice of the Peace, $5.80 had been held back from their wages to pay the Tax Collector. The men became indignant and many of them quit work, causing the plant to shut down.”)

Labor strikes as a tactic to amplify a tax resistance campaign is one of the topics I’ll be covering in my upcoming book on the tactics of successful tax resistance campaigns. The book is coming along well, but I’ve still got a lot of work ahead before it’ll be ready.

The Peace Community of San José de Apartadó has attempted, for over a decade now, to maintain a neutral oasis of nonviolent resistance on the front lines of the civil war in Colombia.

A new monograph from the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict analyzes the community, its formation, its practices, and how it has met the many daunting challenges it has faced.

Among the tactics the community practices is economic noncooperation with the guerrilla, paramilitary, military, police, and other armed factions:

Refusal to let or sell property
The PCSJA refuses to give or sell survival goods or property to armed groups. The small shops in La Holandita, for example, do not sell products to any actor that carries arms or to any person known to belong to an armed group, including the national army and the police. Villagers are well aware of the fact that selling goods to armed individuals (let alone land) would be a favor to them and would further enable their activities, including perpetrating violent acts. Refusing to sell goods puts armed groups in a tough spot. After all, neutrality is about not joining armed groups or providing information.
Peasant reverse strike / farm workers’ strike
Although not formally on strike, campesinos of the PCSJA refuse to work as jornaleros (day laborers) for others, especially for those who have any sort of link with armed actors (which is often the case with large landowners) or deal with any illicit crops that feed the war, such as coca crops. At the same time, campesinos only work for themselves and for the Community, meaning that they are engaging in a reverse strike (one step further than a strike).

In other news:

General Strike!

what’s being billed as a “general strike” to protest against Trumpism is scheduled for today

As I mentioned yesterday, The Sparrows’s Nest Library and Archive has made a lot of material from the poll tax rebellion in the U.K. — posters, pamphlets, newsletters, and such — available on-line (also available at the Internet Archive).

Today I’m going to start reproducing some excerpts from this material that concern specific tactical and strategic activity and decision-making by the people involved in this successful tax resistance struggle.

3D: Don’t pay! Don’t collect! Don’t implement!

3D was the newsletter of the “3rd September Steering Committee” which was one of the coalitions of groups organizing the poll tax resistance. Its first issue (undated, but probably published around ) included an update from Danny Burns about the progress of the resistance movement in Bristol and Avon. Some excerpts:

In , campaigns started to get off the ground in Bristol. By there were around 12 local groups and a federation was formed to coordinate them. In we have over 50 affiliated groups. We have had a heartening response from local trade union branches and are starting to involve a whole range of Bristol-wide voluntary organisations.…

In the community charge registration officer for Bristol informed us that they normally take 10,000 people to court each year for non payment of the rates. Their own estimates based on ability to pay suggest that even without a non payment campaign they will have to take 60,000 people to court. With such a campaign it is likely to be over 100,000. Our interpretation of the English law shows that every one of these cases will have to go to a civil court for a liability order, and every one can be challenged in court. This will not be remotely possible for them to implement.

But are we going to achieve these levels of non payment? We are convinced because the initial returns of our canvass (which we hope by will have gone door to door in every household in Bristol) show that 95% of the population are opposed to the tax. The vast majority have indicated that they will either be unable to pay the tax or it will cause them severe financial difficulty and in some areas up to 70% have said they will refuse to pay as long as they are part of a mass non payment campaign.

These results have been reflected in the level of activity on the ground. In Easton (my local anti poll tax union) in a single ward over 300 households have actively joined the union (50p per household); when we have finished the canvass we expect the figure to be nearer five hundred. This is over 25% of the local population and is nearly ten times the membership of the local ward Labour Party.

How has this been achieved at a local level? A small core initially called a public meeting, leafletting all 2,000 households. This meeting formed the embryo of an anti poll tax union. Following this a “no poll tax here” poster was produced, which was distributed to all households. The anti poll tax union then identified all the houses who had put the posters up in their windows and talked to them directly (about 100).

The vast majority joined the anti poll tax union, and by this stage we felt strong enough to break down into 12 neighbourhoods. Leafletting for further local and regional meetings and rallies was organised from this base until with the onset of the Avon-wide canvass.

At this stage we identified street representatives for the whole area. Ultimately these will be the key to creating the local support and communication which is necessary to keep people from feeling isolated in their struggle.

Back to the Avon Federation! How are we organised? All anti poll tax unions and affiliated organisations have a right to two voting delegates at the federation. We hold federation meetings on a three weekly basis. We usually get between 50 and 60 people to each of these delegate meetings. We have recently set up an action group which is working on setting up new groups in every area where there are no groups.

There is a regular petition in the Centre of Bristol which collects names and addresses from the whole of the city. These are later divided into areas and form the basis of the new groups. These areas are then leafletted; a public meeting is advertised and then local people are left to get on with it (obviously with the support of the federation).

These approaches have proved very effective and it is likely that by we will have around 80 affiliated groups.…

The lead editorials in issue #2 and #3 urged people to spur their trade union branches to organize workplace anti-poll tax groups. This was in part because local government workers would be called on to enforce the poll tax, and also to bear the brunt of budget cutting if the tax could not be collected. But also, this was because councils would probably try to seize unpaid poll tax from the paychecks of workers, and unions could act to try to prevent or ameliorate this. The editorial noted:

In London a trade union dayschool has been organised to raise the issue of Poll Tax in workplaces and union branches. The Greater London Association of Trades Councils and the All London Federation support this initiative. Such dayschools should be called in other areas as a step in building the campaign in workplaces.

Another article in issue #2 noted one way government workers were refusing to cooperate with tax enforcement. Several clerical workers in inner London social security offices were refusing orders to register recipients on the poll tax rolls. In doing so, they were defying their union leadership, which was sticking to a compliant line. Union workers in other parts of the Kingdom “have now been threatened with suspension from the union for debating and overwhelmingly carrying a motion calling for DSS workers to refuse to make ‘poll tax deductions’ from claimants.”

Another article in the same issue mentioned actions to disrupt local council meetings at which the councils were setting poll tax rates. These included mass protests, resignations of councillors, blockades, and burning an effigy of Margaret Thatcher. The article also mentions “ ‘harassing’ sheriff officers to stop poindings” in Scotland.

A theme developing in these reports is the challenge of partisanship. On the one hand, Labour, the ostensible opposition party, was only willing to offer rhetorical resistance to the poll tax, while its elected officials on the local councils were busy implementing it. On the other hand, the Socialist Workers Party was trying to hijack the anti-poll tax resistance movement to try to bolster its standing — attempting to turn all of the anti-poll tax actions into SWP rallies, and to wrest control of the movement leadership. (This reminds me a lot of the American Scylla and Charybdis for left-leaning activists of the feckless Democrats/MoveOn liberals on one side and the noxious ANSWER tinpots on the other.) At one point, a number of officers of the All Britain Federation of Anti-Poll Tax Unions resigned their posts, complaining in an open letter that they had been marginalized by SWP leadership.

Issue #3 noted that “housing staff all over Sheffield walked out following the threat of disciplinary action against area managers who refused to tell staff to attend Poll Tax training events.” It also reported that the annual delegate meeting of the National Union of Journalists had signed on to a campaign of “Mass non-payment of the Poll Tax”

Another article in that issue noted some of the actions resisters were taking to defend against government reprisals:

The… Campaign has co-ordinated the closing of their bank accounts — no handbag snatchers here, thanks Maggie!

The campaign is threatening to mount a picket and refuse to let anyone in to the home who tries to sell off their possessions to recover the £398 Lothian Council is demanding from them!

In the wake of the poll tax riots, some of the poll tax resistance opposition leaders were embarrassed, and tried to distance themselves from association with the violence by throwing those arrested under the bus. The “Trafalgar Square Defendants’ Campaign” took a different tack: coordinating the legal defense of those on trial.

On the Trafalgar Square Defendants’ Campaign was launched at a meeting at Conway Hall in London, attended by defendants, solicitors, and anti-Poll tax activists.

It was agreed that the campaign would:

  • unconditionally support all those arrested
  • be run by and accountable to those arrested
  • be independent of all other organisations
  • demand the support of the whole anti-Poll Tax movement and other sympathetic organisations.

The meeting also agreed to seek out and contact all defendants, co-ordinate legal defence, publicise what happened at the demonstration from the point of view of those arrested, and call for donations and fund-raising for a bust fund for legal and welfare costs.

Issue #4 began by reporting on some encouraging non-compliance statistics, and on the difficulties councils were having in their pursuit of defaulters:

Medina council, on the Isle of Wight, was the first to make themselves look immensely foolish for not investing in a decent stock of first class stamps.

So the magistrate ruled that insufficient notice of the summons had been given — the cases collapsed amid street parties.

South Tyneside and Wandsworth took fright and shelved their plans to issue summonses immediately. All this gives us more time to organise against court cases. If we get only 1 in 37 people down to the courts the system will become inoperable.

Tactics mentioned in a sidebar included marches, leaflet distribution, “hundreds of people stop[ping] the bailiffs,” a 28-hour occupation of a sherriff’s office, and labor strikes.

Meanwhile, the Trafalgar Square Defendants’ Campaign “now has the support of the whole anti-poll tax movement” in its campaign “to force the prosecution, police, and media onto the defensive” which included, in addition to its legal work, pickets of right-wing media outlets and demonstrations at jails where defendants were being held.

Issue #5 led off with an article on resisting the bailiffs (collection agents). Excerpts:

It quickly became clear that a large number of South West councils were going to use the same bailiffs — a company called Roach and Co. based in Bristol. The Avon Federation moved into action. We watched their movements for a week and identified all their cars (they had a series of Nissan vans).

We looked them up in the Companies Register. We examined their premises and discovered that their compound was at the end of a cul de sac (ideal for pickets…). We put this information out to local groups who in themselves turned up a load of information about the bailiffs — some knew them personally, others had useful “dirt” for the press campaign.

The action began on . In the previous week Roaches had been both to Bishops Lydeard (a small village near Taunton) and Barri (in South Wales) to deliver a “walking possession” notice. This meant (in two cases where they had been able to gain access to the houses) that they were in a position to take people’s possessions.

We called a blockade for . People turned up from APTUs across Bristol. No vehicles were able to leave the compound, and we got massive press coverage. In fact a number of vehicles left from the bailiffs’ private homes. They were spotted by our people crossing the Severn Bridge at . They never arrived, but the van was discovered sometime later with its tyres let down.

Meanwhile in Barri and Bishops Lydeard, the whole community was mobilised. In Barri over fifty people were outside the houses of the threatened families; telephones on the window sill; another two hundred people ready to respond to a phone call; vehicles roaming the area watching for bailiffs; kids, prams, icecream vans creating a carnival atmosphere.

In Bishop Lydeard half the village decided to take the day off. All the roads in were sealed off by the community. All cars going through were required to identify themselves. The bailiffs never got near the village.

These scenes prove that the non payment figures are not just empty statistics which will crumble as the threats get stronger. The community is proving its strength — this has inspired people throughout the South West. It has sent shockwaves through council and government.

Another article gave some advice about how to do outreach to defendants as councils began to take non-payers to court:

At the court we must do our best to make sure that people know what is going on at all times, through leaflets and personal contact.

A team of activists should take on the job of approaching defendants on arrival, explaining the situation to them and directing them to our solicitors and “McKenzie friends”.

Council officials will be doing the same, attempting to “help” make arrangements for people to pay out of court. We should organise creches for kids and refreshments for hungry bellies.

This level of organisation will be difficult to maintain over several weeks. In Leeds we are planning for individual anti-Poll Tax groups to run things on separate days — organised well in advance so activists can take time off work.

Normally the courts will deal with the cases of all those who attend before proceeding against non-attenders. Sometimes as at South Tyneside they have attempted to adjourn the cases of all those present till a later date, enabling them to proceed with the absentees very quickly.

We will argue against this, explaining that people have arranged time off work or organised childcare to enable them to be present and have a right to have their cases heard.

People can be represented by either solicitors or McKenzie friends. McKenzie friends are lay representatives who can take notes and give advice to the defendant. They do not have an automatic right to address the court but may be allowed to do so in the interest of time.

Liability orders may be sought from several people at once. Since each person still has the right to question council officials and give their own defence this does not necessarily save the courts time.

It goes without saying that people should always ask for their cases to be heard separately.

Usually the local authority is asked to make its case and then those summoned can offer their defence. The local authority has to prove to the court that the sum claimed is due and that it has not been paid. Therefore the magistrate shouldn’t grant a liability order unless they are satisfied that:

  • The Council has passed a resolution fixing the Poll Tax.
  • Your name is entered in the “Community Charge Register” showing what type of Poll Tax you are liable to pay (the local authority can prove this either by producing a copy of the register certified by the registration officer; or by evidence given by a local authority officer who has inspected the register).
  • The Poll Tax has been demanded in accordance with the law i.e you have been served with a “demand notice” (a Poll Tax bill) and a further notice.

Service of the demand and reminder must be proved either by sworn oral evidence by a council official with personal knowledge of the relevant postings or who can actually produce a record of the posting or by a “certificate” signed by a duly authorised officer.

Each of the above presents us with the opportunity to give the council officials and their witnesses a rigorous cross-examination.

When all this has been accepted as proven the opportunity falls to the defendant to offer a defence. Political arguments won’t wash, but they can still take up time.

There is a good chance of getting an adjournment if you have a rebate application pending or if you have applied for a review of the rebate decision. Both cases are looked on with more sympathy if they were made before the summons was received.

More than half of those attending court have managed to get adjournments or withdrawals of liability orders because of outstanding rebates and reviews.

There were also brief mentions of pickets, the occupation of a bailiff’s office, a courtroom occupation, labor strikes, and marches.

Axe the Tax: Anti-Poll Tax Campaign

Today I continue my scan through some of the material at The Sparrows’ Nest Library’s archive of Poll Tax resistance ephemera.

The first issue of the newsletter of the Sherwood and District Anti-Poll Tax Campaign noted “We have already produced lots of stickers and badges and are also responsible for the ‘No Poll Tax Here’ posters which are going up everywhere.”

Though I have yet to see this mentioned explicitly in any of the anti-Poll Tax material, the “No Poll Tax Here” signs, which were designed to be hung in people’s street-facing windows, were echoes of similar signs that were used during the Reform Act tax strike of 1832. One problem with a tax strike is that it is relatively invisible. It is difficult to tell if your neighbors are on strike with you or if you’re out on a limb by yourself. Stickers and badges and signs and other such distinguishing marks can help overcome this invisibility.

That newsletter also mentions frequent door-to-door “membership drive” outreach, an information stall outside the local co-op, and a variety of public meetings. The second issue also recommended this monkeywrenching:

The latest news with the banks is that they are over-worked with applications, so apply for your direct debit [automatic payment of the poll tax], but put Margaret Thatcher’s address, and let’s put a spanner in the works.

Another article reported that government enforcement efforts were being successfully snagged:

Many Scottish councils are now abandoning the use of bailiffs raids against those fined for non-payment, because they have proved so violently unpopular, and — in the face of large scale community mobilisations against them — completely ineffective.

Their plans to turn, instead, to ‘arrestments’ direct from people’s bank accounts have also run into trouble. [In]  — the head of Scotland’s clearing banks announced that they “would be unable to cope with thousands of requests to trace the bank account details of thousands of non-payers.” Even if councils insisted on the costly and time-consuming process, he couldn’t guarantee they would be able to find even 5–6% of the names.

Faced with a seeming dead-end in either direction, and an ever growing back-log of court action, Scottish councils are rapidly running out of options. Eric Milligan, head of Lothian region Labour council’s finance department, spoke for many councils when, in , he admitted: “Such is the scale of the non-payment movement in our region, that we may have to write-off large sums of outstanding poll tax.”

Elsewhere, dole office workers in London have been on strike in protest at management plans to get them to pass claimants details from DSS files straight to poll tax officials. They’ve been joined by other groups of dole office workers who plan to refuse to process “arrestments” of unpaid poll tax from non-payers who are signing on. And in Edinburgh, a group of local government workers are among the latest to announce plans to mount walk-outs if any employee in their department is penalised for non-payment.

Fight Back! was the newsletter of the St. Ann’s Anti Poll Tax Union. One issue included this note:

S.A.A.P.T.U. supports the non-violent “Robin Hood” invation of the Council office meeting when the Poll Tax was set at £390 by Labour councilors. Three people form Hyson Green and Sherwood A.P.T. groups face charges of assault for throwing “custard pies” at councillors.