Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Christians Should Pay Taxes They Owe, But . . .

Should Christians pay taxes that they do not owe?

  • No, they should only pay taxes that the government can prove by law that they owe.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, the government should be supported by our money. So any taxes the government can convince us th

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
B

BereanDAD2003

Guest
Exactly what taxes do they owe?

I've recently come across this URL. Would someone tell me what they think of the presentation at the site? Christian accountants especially welcome!

http://www.861.info

Intrigued by the presentation, in spite of Romans 13:1-7. Actually, I am not sure there is a contradiction.

BereanDAD
 
Hi there!



http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-A-1-N-I-861.html


compared to:


The following are Larken Rose's question, which he claims the IRS won’t specifically answer:

Questions Regarding Determining Taxable Income

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 “taxableâ€Â) from “sources within U.S.â€Â

3) If a U.S. citizen receives all his income from working within the 50 states, do 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 show his income to be taxable?

Reason for question: Section 217 of the Revenue Act of 1921, predecessor of 26 USC § 861 and following, stated that income from the U.S. was taxable for foreigners, and for U.S. corporations and citizens deriving most of their income from federal possessions, but did not say the same about the domestic income of other Americans. The regulations under the 1939 Code (e.g. §§ 29.119-1, 29.119-2, 29.119-9, 29.119-10 (1945)) showed the same thing. The current regulations at 1.861-8 still show income to be taxable only when derived from certain “specific sources and activities,†which still relate only to certain types of international trade (see 26 CFR §§ 1.861-8(a)(1), 1.861-8(a)(4), 1.861-8(f)(1)).

4) Should one use 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2) to determine whether his “items†of income (e.g. compensation, interest, rents, dividends, etc.) are excluded for federal income tax purposes?

Reason for question: The regulations (26 CFR § 1.861-8(a)(3)) state that a “class of gross income†consists of the “items†of income listed in 26 USC § 61 (e.g. compensation, interest, rents, dividends, etc.). The regulations (26 CFR §§ 1.861-8(b)(1)) then direct the reader to “paragraph (d)(2)†of the section, which provides that such “classes of gross income†may include some income which is excluded for federal income tax purposes.

5) What is the purpose of the list of non-exempt types of income found in 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii), and why is the income of the average American not on that list?

Reason for question: After defining “exempt income†to mean income which is excluded for federal income tax purposes (26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(ii)), the regulations list types of income which are not exempt (i.e. which are subject to tax), including the domestic income of foreigners, certain foreign income of Americans, income of certain possessions corporations, and income of international and foreign sales corporations; but the list does not include the domestic income of the average American (26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii)).

6) What types of income (if any) are not exempted from taxation by any statute, but are nonetheless “excluded by law†(i.e. not subject to the income tax) because they are, under the Constitution, not taxable by the federal government?

Reason for question: Older income tax regulations defining “gross income†and “net income†said that neither income exempted by statute “or fundamental law€ were subject to the tax (§ 39.21-1 (1956)), and said that in addition to the types of income exempted by statute, other types of income were excluded because they were, “under the Constitution, not taxable by the Federal Government†(§ 39.22(b)-1 (1956)). (This is also reflected in the current 26 CFR § 1.312-6.)
 
serapha said:
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 217 of the Revenue Act of 1921, predecessor of 26 USC § 861 and following, stated that income from the U.S. was taxable for foreigners, and for U.S. corporations and citizens deriving most of their income from federal possessions, but did not say the same about the domestic income of other Americans.

. . . .

The regulations (26 CFR § 1.861-8(a)(3)) state that a “class of gross income†consists of the “items†of income listed in 26 USC § 61 (e.g. compensation, interest, rents, dividends, etc.). The regulations (26 CFR §§ 1.861-8(b)(1)) then direct the reader to “paragraph (d)(2)†of the section, which provides that such “classes of gross income†may include some income which is excluded for federal income tax purposes.

. . . .

After defining “exempt income†to mean income which is excluded for federal income tax purposes (26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(ii)), the regulations list types of income which are not exempt (i.e. which are subject to tax), including the domestic income of foreigners, certain foreign income of Americans . . . but the list does not include the domestic income of the average American (26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii)).


. . . .

Older income tax regulations defining “gross income†and “net income†said that neither income exempted by statute “or fundamental law†were subject to the tax (§ 39.21-1 (1956)), and said that in addition to the types of income exempted by statute, other types of income were excluded because they were, “under the Constitution, not taxable by the Federal Government†(§ 39.22(b)-1 (1956)). (This is also reflected in the current 26 CFR § 1.312-6.)

So basically the law and the regulations exempt from taxation most domestic income, namely income that a U.S. citizen had, barring a few types of income that primarily come from doing foreign business. Most of the regulations have to do with taxing the income of nonresident aliens.

Sort of sounds like what Jesus said regarding the temple tax that the leaders of Israel required of Jewish citizens. From the NIV in Matthew 17:24-27 we read:

After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax came to Peter and asked, "Doesn't your teacher pay the temple tax?"

"Yes, he does," he replied.

When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. "What do you think, Simon? he asked. From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes--from their own sons or from others?"

"From others," Peter answered.

"Then the sons are exempt," Jesus said to him. "But so that we may not offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours."

Maybe the best thing to do is pay the tax so as not to offend the government (or bring the IRS down on our heads). But as citizens of the nation who are not specifically spoken of as owing the tax, we certainly don't really owe the tax, like the citizens of the Jewish nation shouldn't have owed it (according to Jesus), but only those who were not sons of the nation? I suggest this as an analogy, not as a biblical story to tell us how to interact with courts.

Sounds like robbery to me. I wish I could go fishing and find money in a fish to pay income taxes! (Annoyed sigh).

BereanDAD
 
I wish I could go fishing and find money in a fish to pay income taxes! (Annoyed sigh).


Oh, ye of little faith, perhaps you have not because you ask not.



<grin>


I ask... seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be open unto you.


Where God guides, God provides


~serapha~
 
BereanDAD2003 said:
Exactly what taxes do they owe?
==========================
Church property should definately be taxed at fair market value. They enjoy the benefits of local police, fire, and municipal services. The fact that the church property is not being taxed denies the local government of revenue that must be made up by others who may not be religious. This in effect can be argued that government favors religion and if pushed far enough may be illegal.
 
Back
Top