Federal Withholding


C

charlie and grace

Is their a sight that I might find out how much the federal government takes
in a week in federal taxes from paychecks?
 
Ad

Advertisements

F

Fmkeiser

You can download Publication 15 and its supplements at a number of web sites do
a google search. One site is www.irs.gov. There is also a W-4 calculator on the
IRS web site.
 
D

Dale Eastman

Fmkeiser said:
You can download Publication 15 and its supplements at a number of web sites do
a google search. One site is www.irs.gov. There is also a W-4 calculator on the
IRS web site.
Then you might want to find out why the IRS won't answer a simple yes or
no question with a simple yes or no.

1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8
(in addition to any other pertinent sections) to determine my taxable
domestic income?

2) If some people should not use those sections to determine their
taxable domestic income, please show where the law says who should or
should not use those sections for that.

Reason for first two questions: The regulations at 26 CFR § 1.861-8
begin by stating that Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in general terms
“how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from sources within the
United States” after gross income from the U.S. has been determined.
Section 1.861-1(a)(1) confirms that “taxable income from sources within
the United States” is to be determined in accordance with the rules of
26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 (see also 26 CFR §§ 1.862-1(b),
1.863-1(c)). Cross-references under 26 USCS § 61, as well as entries in
the USC Index under the heading “Income Tax,” also refer to Section 861
regarding income (“gross” and “taxable”) from “sources within U.S.”

6 questions the IRS won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html

Some clues as to why they won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/tmachine/explain.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/right.html

All email missing the magic word is deleted unread.
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/misc/spamnot.htm
Hormel makes the good spam.

--

On May 6, 2003, The IRS pushed their way into the home of Larken Rose
and seized $3,000 worth of the video Theft-By-Deception.
According to Mr. Rose, the IRS has vowed to never give the tapes back.

This is a First Amendment violation.

As of November 14, 2003, the IRS has still not indicted
or charged Larken Rose for the commission of any crime.
The website of Mr. Rose is http://taxableincome.net/

If you are within the Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford triangle
and are interested in viewing this video for free, buy yourself
some popcorn & soda, then Contact me by clicking this link:
mailto:[email protected]?subject=screenT-B-D
 
W

Wayne Brasch

Dale,

They did not ask or mention anything about your stupid Section 861 argument.
Answer their question, or leave them alone!

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
 
D

Dale Eastman

Wayne said:
Dale,

They did not ask or mention anything about your stupid Section 861 argument.
Answer their question, or leave them alone!

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
There are two parts to a secret. The second part is what the secret is,
The first part is the knowledge that the secret exists.

There are times when one does not even know what question to ask, and by
the time one does know what questions to ask, it's too late for the
question's answer to do one any good anyway.

If the O.P. doesn't care to ask the question, he can do the same thing I
advise you to do; push the <NEXT> button.

If it does get the O.P. to start asking questions, what difference does
it make to you?

All you IRS collaborators claim we on the other side are wrong anyway,
so what difference does it make if somebody that knows nothing of the
controversey starts studying the controversey?

What difference does it make if a newbie to the controversey starts
asking questions?

Do you have something to hide?
Is that why you don't want people asking questions like the following ones?


1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8
in addition to any other pertinent sections) to determine my taxable
domestic income?

2) If some people should not use those sections to determine their
taxable domestic income, please show where the law says who should or
should not use those sections for that.

Reason for first two questions: The regulations at 26 CFR § 1.861-8
begin by stating that Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in general terms
“how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from sources within the
United States” after gross income from the U.S. has been determined.
Section 1.861-1(a)(1) confirms that “taxable income from sources within
the United States” is to be determined in accordance with the rules of
26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 (see also 26 CFR §§ 1.862-1(b),
1.863-1(c)). Cross-references under 26 USCS § 61, as well as entries in
the USC Index under the heading “Income Tax,” also refer to Section 861
regarding income (“gross” and “taxable”) from “sources within U.S.”

Thank you for giving reason to continue the thread.


--
On May 6, 2003, The IRS pushed their way into the home of Larken Rose
and seized $3,000 worth of the video Theft-By-Deception.
According to Mr. Rose, the IRS has vowed to never give the tapes back.

This is a First Amendment violation.

As of November 14, 2003, the IRS has still not indicted
or charged Larken Rose for the commission of any crime.
The website of Mr. Rose is http://taxableincome.net/

If you are within the Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford triangle
and are interested in viewing this video for free, buy yourself
some popcorn & soda, then Contact me by clicking this link:
mailto:[email protected]?subject=screenT-B-D

6 questions the IRS won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html

Some clues as to why they won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/tmachine/explain.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/right.html

All email missing the magic word is deleted unread.
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/misc/spamnot.htm
Hormel makes the good spam.
 
W

Wayne Brasch

Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code defines what is taxable income and
what is not. Read that with as much fervor as you use when you read and try
to interpret Section 861 and its regulations.

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
 
Ad

Advertisements

W

Wayne Brasch

Dale Eastman said:
Section 61 holds up in court, but your Section 861 argument never has and
never will.!

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
 
D

Dale Eastman

Wayne said:
Section 61 holds up in court, but your Section 861 argument never has and
never will.!
I notice a curious absence of comment from you regarding the fact that
your statement "Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code defines what is
taxable income and what is not" is provably a lie, with the proofs cited.

That makes you a liar.

And as a liar, you go directly from ignoring your lie, to telling me
about the big, bad, (and I might add, corrupt,) courts. You forgot to
tell me about all the sanctions to make your threat complete.

You also forgot to delete the links that prove your statement to be a
lie. That indicates you didn't bother to read them, or, you thought that
citing opinions from the (corrupt) courts would keep people from
clicking the link.

Again, I thank you for keeping this thread going.

It gives the newcomer a little glimpse of the world that most Joe
Sixpack's no nothing about. That's why people like you do their taxes
for them, then they blindly sign that 1040 "under penalties of perjury"
having NEVER looked at the law.
Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
----------------^^^--------^^^^^^^^

Slam, Dunk. $2,000 for what, Three hours max talking on the phone.

The Challenge: Rules of Engagement
http://www.petermacshow.com/challenge/

An eligible tax professional who answers during a live presentation of
The Peter Mac Show on KCXL Radio all six “Questions Regarding
Determining Taxable Income” will receive $2,000. The tax professional
may answer the questions in any way that he or she believes is
consistent with federal law.

An eligible tax professional (hereafter referred to as ETP) is a
Certified Public Accountant (CPA), a licensed tax attorney (working for
the federal government or in private practice), an IRS revenue agent, or
an Enrolled Agent.

The ETP must disclose on the air his/her full name, credentials, and
where he/she works. He or she must answer all six questions and support
his or her answers with reference to federal law. If the six questions
and corresponding answers cannot be fully discussed in a single show,
the ETP must appear on the next edition of The Peter Mac Show. Peter
McCandless, the host of The Peter Mac Show, can have any other guest of
his choosing appear on the show(s) to help cross examine the ETP.



--
On May 6, 2003, The IRS pushed their way into the home of Larken Rose
and seized $3,000 worth of the video Theft-By-Deception.
According to Mr. Rose, the IRS has vowed to never give the tapes back.

This is a First Amendment violation.

As of November 14, 2003, the IRS has still not indicted
or charged Larken Rose for the commission of any crime.
The website of Mr. Rose is http://taxableincome.net/

If you are within the Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford triangle
and are interested in viewing this video for free, buy yourself
some popcorn & soda, then Contact me by clicking this link:
mailto:[email protected]?subject=screenT-B-D

6 questions the IRS won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html

Some clues as to why they won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/tmachine/explain.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/right.html

All email missing the magic word is deleted unread.
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/misc/spamnot.htm
Hormel makes the good spam.
 
W

Wayne Brasch

I am not a liar! You and the others who hold in favor of the Section 861
argument have gotten more people into trouble with IRS than you may know.
The situation is that's probably what you want to do. My goal as a CPA is
to keep people out of trouble with the IRS and the various State
governments. You and the others don't seem to care what may happen to those
people who believe your arguments.

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
 
O

OnryAnRkst

Wayne Brasch wrote,
You and the others don't seem to care what may happen to those
people who believe your arguments.
No one relying on Section 861 tells anyone to "believe our arguments."
We say, "Read the law for yourself." (The opposite of what most tax
professionals say.) When several people read the tax code and come
to the conclusion that it doesn't tax their income, there's a problem
with the code itself. And it's not an "argument," either -- it's what the
LAW says. You're blaming the victims here. "You read the law, and it
LOOKS like it says your income isn't taxable? You should be PUNISHED!"

Aak.

How many tax professionals do you know who actually SHOW their
cients the law that taxes their income? H & R Block sure doesn't do it . . .

--OnryAnRkst

http://NoGov4me.net
 
Ad

Advertisements

D

Dale Eastman

Wayne said:
I am not a liar!
Yes. You are. Two wit:
"Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code defines what is taxable income
and what is not."

To which I replied:
"We interupt this lie to give a contrary position using the codes and
regulations themselves."

http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/senter.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html#sec61
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html#reg61

But then you are SO freaking sure of your position, you can't be
bothered to read the words that prove you wrong.
You and the others who hold in favor of the Section 861 argument have
gotten more people into trouble with IRS than you may know.
The IRS is a criminal rogue agency.
The do a lot of huffing & puffing & threatening the good citizens, and
they even manage to hurt some of them, but they won't answer a
reasonable yes or no question with a yes or no.

1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8
(in addition to any other pertinent sections) to determine my taxable
domestic income?
The situation is that's probably what you want to do.
What I want to do is stay alive.

Quote from the late Robert A. Heinlein:
From the story: If This Goes On

....secrecy is the keystone of tyranny. Not force, but secrecy...
censorship. When any government, or any church for that matter,
undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must
not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and
oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is
needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no
amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No,
not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything - you can't conquer a free
man; the most you can do is kill him.

And you are doing all these good deeds Pro Bono?

No?

Then at how many dollars an hour?
You and the others don't seem to care what may happen to those
people who believe your arguments.
Argument?
There is no argument.
There are regulations like 1.861-8T(d)(2)(ii) and 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii)
There are six questions the IRS won't answer.

Here's the first two of six questions:

http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html
1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8
(in addition to any other pertinent sections) to determine my taxable
domestic income?

2) If some people should not use those sections to determine their
taxable domestic income, please show where the law says who should or
should not use those sections for that.

Reason for first two questions: The regulations at 26 CFR § 1.861-8
begin by stating that Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in general terms
“how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from sources within the
United States” after gross income from the U.S. has been determined.
Section 1.861-1(a)(1) confirms that “taxable income from sources within
the United States” is to be determined in accordance with the rules of
26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 (see also 26 CFR §§ 1.862-1(b),
1.863-1(c)). Cross-references under 26 USCS § 61, as well as entries in
the USC Index under the heading “Income Tax,” also refer to Section 861
regarding income (“gross” and “taxable”) from “sources within U.S.”


How sweet it is, when the prior posts are left in the reply.

And again, yet, still.


On May 6, 2003, The IRS pushed their way into the home of Larken Rose
and seized $3,000 worth of the video Theft-By-Deception.
According to Mr. Rose, the IRS has vowed to never give the tapes back.

This is a First Amendment violation.

As of November 14, 2003, the IRS has still not indicted
or charged Larken Rose for the commission of any crime.
The website of Mr. Rose is http://taxableincome.net/

If you are within the Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford triangle
and are interested in viewing this video for free, buy yourself
some popcorn & soda, then Contact me by clicking this link:
mailto:d[email protected]?subject=screenT-B-D

6 questions the IRS won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html

Some clues as to why they won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/tmachine/explain.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/right.html

All email missing the magic word is deleted unread.
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/misc/spamnot.htm
Hormel makes the good spam.
 
R

Richard A. Macdonald

OnryAnRkst said:
No one relying on Section 861 tells anyone to "believe our arguments."
We say, "Read the law for yourself." (The opposite of what most tax
professionals say.) When several people read the tax code and come
to the conclusion that it doesn't tax their income, there's a problem
with the code itself.
You assert that the Tax Code (26 USC) does not tax your income:

You have a Military Pension

26 USC 61(a)(11) lists pensions as Gross Income

You have not claimed to be 100% disabled so it is not exempted under 26 USC
122.

Your Pension falls under 26 USC 863(a) as Gross Income from wiithin the
United States that becomes Taxable Income after allowed deductions are
subtracted.

Then your taxable income is taxed under 26 USC 1.

So enlighten me as to where in the Tax Code your military pension is
exempted.
 
O

OnryAnRkst

Richard A. Macdonald wrote,
You assert that the Tax Code (26 USC) does not tax your income:

You have a Military Pension [etc.]
See:

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

You asked about Section 61. When that didn't work, you switched to
Section 863. Are you going to run to the "residual income" bullshit
next? I might agree with you that under certain conditions my
deferred compensation (not "pension" as you incorrectly identify it)
might be taxable under Section 863. Those conditions do not exist.

Feel free to pull another rabbit out of your hat.

--OnryAnRkst



http://NoGov4me.net
 
W

Wayne Brasch

It is not the job of IRS to take their time to answer questions that have
already been decided on in various Courts throughout this country.

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
 
D

Dale Eastman

Wayne said:
It is not the job of IRS to take their time to answer questions that have
already been decided on in various Courts throughout this country.
"1. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) mission is to provide America's
taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their
tax responsibilities"
http://www.irs.gov/irm/page/0,,id=86623,00.html

Here's the first two of six questions:

http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html
1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8
(in addition to any other pertinent sections) to determine my taxable
domestic income?

2) If some people should not use those sections to determine their
taxable domestic income, please show where the law says who should or
should not use those sections for that.

Reason for first two questions: The regulations at 26 CFR § 1.861-8
begin by stating that Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in general terms
“how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from sources within the
United States” after gross income from the U.S. has been determined.
Section 1.861-1(a)(1) confirms that “taxable income from sources within
the United States” is to be determined in accordance with the rules of
26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 (see also 26 CFR §§ 1.862-1(b),
1.863-1(c)). Cross-references under 26 USCS § 61, as well as entries in
the USC Index under the heading “Income Tax,” also refer to Section 861
regarding income (“gross” and “taxable”) from “sources within U.S.”

You're still avoiding the issue, that I called you a liar, and cited why.
Wayne Brasch wrote:
I am not a liar!
Yes. You are. Two wit:
"Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code defines what is taxable income
and what is not."

To which I replied:
"We interupt this lie to give a contrary position using the codes and
regulations themselves."

http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/senter.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html#sec61
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html#reg61

My goal as a CPA is to keep people out of trouble with the IRS and
the various State governments.
And you are doing all these good deeds Pro Bono?

No?

Then at how many dollars an hour?

Section 61 holds up in court, but your Section 861 argument never
has and never will.!
I notice a curious absence of comment from you regarding the fact
that your statement "Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code
defines what is taxable income and what is not" is provably a lie,
with the proofs cited.

That makes you a liar.

And as a liar, you go directly from ignoring your lie, to telling
me about the big, bad, (and I might add, corrupt,) courts. You
forgot to tell me about all the sanctions to make your threat
complete.

You also forgot to delete the links that prove your statement to be
a lie. That indicates you didn't bother to read them, or, you
thought that citing opinions from the (corrupt) courts would keep
people from clicking the link.

I thank you for keeping this thread going.

--
On May 6, 2003, The IRS pushed their way into the home of Larken Rose
and seized $3,000 worth of the video Theft-By-Deception.
According to Mr. Rose, the IRS has vowed to never give the tapes back.

This is a First Amendment violation.

As of November 14, 2003, the IRS has still not indicted
or charged Larken Rose for the commission of any crime.
The website of Mr. Rose is http://taxableincome.net/

If you are within the Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford triangle
and are interested in viewing this video for free, buy yourself
some popcorn & soda, then Contact me by clicking this link:
mailto:[email protected]?subject=screenT-B-D

6 questions the IRS won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/6Questions.html

Some clues as to why they won't answer:
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/tmachine/explain.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/block/block.html
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/tax/right.html

All email missing the magic word is deleted unread.
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalereastman/misc/spamnot.htm
Hormel makes the good spam.
 
Ad

Advertisements

O

OnryAnRkst

Wayne Brasch wrote,
It is not the job of IRS to take their time to answer questions that have
already been decided on in various Courts throughout this country.
Nice defense of unresponsive bureaucrats. So much for that
"public servants" crap, huh. What do you pay taxes for, anyway?
The IRS mission is to "provide America's taxpayers top quality
service by helping them understand and meet their tax
responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and
fairness to all." To some people that apparently means "ignoring
taxpayers questions about what is required of them under the law."
God forbid an AGENT of the IRS should stop picking his nose
long enough to answer a TAXPAYER'S question!

Of course we all know how fruitless it is to ask the IRS anything
when they admit their own agents routinely contradict each other
on phone interviews. . .however it is even more ridiculous to tell
people that they need to research court decisions because the IRS
refuses to answer questions about what the law requires of them.
Nice blind faith in "government" you have there, Wayne . . .

--OnryAnRkst

http://NoGov4me.net
 
J

JPaul

Wayne Brasch said:
I am not a liar! You and the others who hold in favor of the Section 861
argument have gotten more people into trouble with IRS than you may know.
The situation is that's probably what you want to do. My goal as a CPA is
to keep people out of trouble with the IRS and the various State
governments. You and the others don't seem to care what may happen to those
people who believe your arguments.
Well there are those that believe that if they must choose between
following the law and getting "into trouble with the IRS," that they
choose to follow the law. Some feel that it is an honor, duty, and
true demonstration of patriotism and adherence to the rule of law as
written to be willing to suffer the wrath of the gestapo organization
know as the IRS. Many know and cannot ignore the fact that the IRS,
and it's minions of mind controled and programed CPA's, EA's, and
Attorney's, is a lawless collection agency for the illegal Not Federal
No Reserve. They choose to follow the law AS WRITTEN and not be
coerced by the threats and propoganda of these illegal government
jackbooted thugs. They do not believe that they should go along to get
along and pay government foot soldiers like yourself so you can drive
a BMW for helping with these ILLEGAL activities. Who do YOU think you
are actually working for???
 
R

Richard A. Macdonald

JPaul said:
Well there are those that believe that if they must choose between
following the law and getting "into trouble with the IRS," that they
choose to follow the law. Some feel that it is an honor, duty, and
true demonstration of patriotism and adherence to the rule of law as
written to be willing to suffer the wrath of the gestapo organization
know as the IRS. Many know and cannot ignore the fact that the IRS,
and it's minions of mind controled and programed CPA's, EA's, and
Attorney's, is a lawless collection agency for the illegal Not Federal
No Reserve. They choose to follow the law AS WRITTEN and not be
coerced by the threats and propoganda of these illegal government
jackbooted thugs. They do not believe that they should go along to get
along and pay government foot soldiers like yourself so you can drive
a BMW for helping with these ILLEGAL activities. Who do YOU think you
are actually working for???
Obviously since you are talking about the law, Title 26 of the
USC also known as the Internal Revenue Code, and not
Treasury Regulations could you elucidate and enlighten us as
the where your income is exempted? Which section in the
LAW is it written in please.
 
Ad

Advertisements

W

Wayne Brasch

JPaul said:
"Wayne Brasch" <[email protected]> wrote in message

Well there are those that believe that if they must choose between
following the law and getting "into trouble with the IRS," that they
choose to follow the law. Some feel that it is an honor, duty, and
true demonstration of patriotism and adherence to the rule of law as
written to be willing to suffer the wrath of the gestapo organization
know as the IRS. Many know and cannot ignore the fact that the IRS,
and it's minions of mind controled and programed CPA's, EA's, and
Attorney's, is a lawless collection agency for the illegal Not Federal
No Reserve. They choose to follow the law AS WRITTEN and not be
coerced by the threats and propoganda of these illegal government
jackbooted thugs. They do not believe that they should go along to get
along and pay government foot soldiers like yourself so you can drive
a BMW for helping with these ILLEGAL activities. Who do YOU think you
are actually working for???
I do not drive a BMW and I work for myself and all my clients.

Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top