Tax protester statutory arguments

<p>Tax protesters in the United States have advanced a number of arguments asserting that the assessment and collection of the <a href="/facts/Income_tax_in_the_United_States/HLJSgzLe">federal income tax</a> violates <a href="/facts/Statute/10qGu7zM">statutes</a> enacted by the <a href="/facts/United_States_Congress/mJlU46K7">United States Congress</a> and signed into law by the <a href="/facts/President_of_the_United_States/oMsfmLb1">President</a>. Such arguments generally claim that certain statutes fail to create a duty to pay taxes, that such statutes do not impose the income tax on wages or other types of income claimed by the tax protesters, or that provisions within a given statute exempt the tax protesters from a duty to pay.
</p><p>These statutory arguments are distinguished from, although related to, <a href="/facts/Tax_protester_constitutional_arguments/zWxMTY5B">constitutional</a>, <a href="/facts/Tax_protester_administrative_arguments/IL7QhTvV">administrative</a> and general <a href="/facts/Tax_protester_conspiracy_arguments/UQjko7aJ">conspiracy</a> arguments. Statutory arguments presuppose that Congress has a constitutional power to tax income (and typically accept the validity of the <a href="/facts/16th_Amendment_of_the_U.S._Constitution/8Ead95AS">16th Amendment</a>, unlike some other theories) but has not passed a statute doing so, or has done so in a way that renders certain types of income not liable to taxation.
</p>

Tax protester statutory arguments open-in-new

Tax protester statutory arguments