Tax resistance in the “Peace Churches” → Quakers → 20th–21st century Quakers → Frances Crowe

, war tax resisters in New England have been gathering at the Woolman Hill Conference Center in Deerfield, Massachusetts. The Greenfield Recorder is covering the conference.

The conference’s theme is “Taking Control of Change: Embracing Simplicity” and is emphasizing simple living both as a tax resistance technique and for its other benefits.

’s article mentions Ruthy Woodring, Randy Kehler & Betsy Corner, Aaron Falbel, Frances Crowe, Daniel Staub, Juanita Nelson, Erik Schickendanz, and Daniel Sicken.


A new issue of NWTRCC’s newsletter — More Than a Paycheck — is out featuring an article I wrote about how to craft a persuasive and motivating tax resistance message. (It’s a distillation of a Picket Line entry from .)

Also in the newsletter are some notes about IRS policy and foibles, an update on the ongoing attempts by war tax resister Daniel Jenkins to find a legal forum that will rule that conscientious objection to military taxation is a human right, and the latest on All Saints Church’s struggle to maintain its freedom of speech and its tax-exempt status at the same time.

Daniel Sicken gives a report from the New England Regional Gathering of War Tax Resisters and Supporters. And some of those who gathered there — Ruthy Woodring, Aaron Falbel, Frances Crowe, and Daniel Staub — are profiled briefly. Here’s Frances Crowe’s profile:

“I suddenly woke up about five years ago and made a big sign that said ‘Does Our Lifestyle Demand War?’ and hung it on my door.” Frances then proceeded to work at changing her lifestyle, starting by not using her car for two days a week. As she walked more, she found she could use her car less and less — and liked walking more and more. It became something of a meditation, with the added bonus of meeting people along the way. She changed from a Friends Meeting that was some miles away to one within walking distance, and dropped her YMCA membership where they use so much heat and air conditioning. She doesn’t want to fly anymore and takes the train instead. She’s still working on many things, like buying food that is grown locally. She’s really working to reduce her footprint on the planet, and at the same time redirecting taxes from war to funding real human needs like schools, peace and justice work, and rebuilding the new society in the shell of the old.



Some bits and pieces from here and there:

War Tax Resistance

  • Erica Weiland notes that while there may not be an ongoing military draft conscripting soldiers in the U.S., if you are a U.S. taxpayer, you have already been drafted.
  • Peg Morton writes of the opportunity she had to help the war tax resistance of John Lindsay-Poland through her participation in the War Tax Resisters Penalty Fund.
  • The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists published an interview with long-time anti-nuclear activist Frances Crowe. In that interview, she touches on her war tax resistance:

    I no longer pay federal taxes, but I do file. I set up a trust, and put everything in my children’s names, so I own nothing. But the government does take money out of my social security, and I donate a sum equivalent to my federal taxes to charity.

    So, I try to put a third of my “tax money” into repairing the damages of war — I’ve been helping a woman go to school in Afghanistan, and I gave a thousand dollars for her to pay for tuition this year. I do things like that, and help this cancer clinic in Iraq. And a third goes to peace centers in this country. It costs me money, but it’s worth it for my conscience.

  • American Quaker war tax resister Joseph Olejak explains how he came to take his stand, and how his Meeting supported him when he went to jail for it:

Other Links of Interest


Some tax resistance news from here and there:


Some links from here and there:


Some links from here and there:

In other news, the group ADNic is promoting a Nicaraguan tax resistance / consumer strike campaign with a series of graphics. Here are some examples (translations mine):

Resistencial Fiscal. Educación y Difusión (Paso No. 5). Asume un rol activo en la resistancia fiscal y ten en mente que Ortega usa tus impuestos para matar. #ParoDeConsumo #SOSNicaragua

Tax resistance: Education and Outreach. Step 5: Take an active role in tax resistance and keep in mind that Ortega uses your taxes to kill. #ConsumerStrike #SOSNicaragua

Resistencial Fiscal. Esta es su ganacia. Producto / Impuesto: Ron, 36%; Cervezas, 42%; Licores, 37%; Aguardiente Granel, 42%; Cigarros, 309%; Tabacos, 43%. Reduciendo tu consumo, le estás dando un golpe directo al régimen ¡Los impuestos son su oxígeno! #ParoDeConsumo Unidad Nacional

Tax Resistance. This Is Their Profit. Rum: 36%, Beers: 42%, Liquors: 37%, Grain alcohol: 42%, Cigarettes: 309%, Tobacco: 43%. By reducing your consumption you strike a direct blow against the regime. Taxes are their lifeblood! #ConsumerStrike, National Unity


A new edition of NWTRCC’s newsletter is out, with content including:

Here are some more details on the passport-revocation front, as found in a recent Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report.

According to the details of the newish law concerning passports and tax scofflaws, when the amount of someone’s overdue taxes rises above a certain threshold ($52,000 last I checked), the IRS must notify the State Department, whereupon the State Department must not issue a new passport to that scofflaw or renew their existing passport (unless the scofflaw is taking certain specified steps to pay up or contest the tax debt), and may revoke any existing passport that person has.

That’s all the law allows for. It does not specify under what circumstances the State Department should revoke existing passports, or even mandate that they do so at all. It is merely an option. Now it emerges that the IRS hopes to put more teeth into that provision on its own initiative. It plans to send requests to the State Department, on a case-by-case basis, asking State to revoke the passports from people the IRS believes might thereby be prodded into paying what they owe.

This process is not something that was explicitly authorized by the law, but TIGTA didn’t seem to think that was a problem. “There is no law or regulation that directly authorizes the IRS to prioritize taxpayers to be referred to the State Department for revocation; however, we believe it is reasonable for the IRS to provide the State Department with taxpayers for possible revocation to comply with the law.”