| Revision as of 15:10, 19 September 2007 editFamspear (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers31,315 edits rv the usual tendentious editing by Mpublius, back to last version by Arthur Rubin.← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:15, 19 September 2007 edit undoMpublius (talk | contribs)350 edits Undid revision 158961741 by Famspear (talk)Next edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| According to a resume published by Cryer on his web site, he graduated with honors from ] (LSU) Law School in 1973, and was inducted into the LSU Law School Hall of Fame in 1987. Cryer's resume further claims that he is a member of the ] (a law school ]), that he served as a Special Advisor and Draftsman at the Louisiana Constitutional Convention in 1973 and that he has argued cases before the ]. Finally, according to Cryer's resume, he opened a solo law practice in 1975 and gained experience in many different civil and criminal matters.<ref name="cryer">http://www.truthattack.org/CRYER--MotiontoDismiss.pdf</ref> | According to a resume published by Cryer on his web site, he graduated with honors from ] (LSU) Law School in 1973, and was inducted into the LSU Law School Hall of Fame in 1987. Cryer's resume further claims that he is a member of the ] (a law school ]), that he served as a Special Advisor and Draftsman at the Louisiana Constitutional Convention in 1973 and that he has argued cases before the ]. Finally, according to Cryer's resume, he opened a solo law practice in 1975 and gained experience in many different civil and criminal matters.<ref name="cryer">http://www.truthattack.org/CRYER--MotiontoDismiss.pdf</ref> | ||
| ⚫ | On an internet web site, Cryer claims that most wages are not taxable under existing income tax law under the theory that the income tax is a form of excise tax, a tax on a free exchange of labor for money does not conform to the definition of an excise. Cryer states: | ||
| ⚫ | ::The income tax law, although it is carefully written to APPEAR otherwise, does not actually tax your wages, salaries and fees that you earn yourself because the Constitution does not allow the federal government to tax those earnings.<ref></ref> | ||
| ==Indictments== | ==Indictments== | ||
| Line 30: | Line 34: | ||
| On July 11, 2007, Cryer was acquitted. | On July 11, 2007, Cryer was acquitted. | ||
| ==Cryer's arguments and treatment by other courts== | |||
| ⚫ | On an internet web site, Cryer claims that most wages are not taxable under existing income tax law under the theory that the income tax is a form of excise tax, a tax on a free exchange of labor for money does not conform to the definition of an excise. Cryer states: | ||
| ⚫ | ::The income tax law, although it is carefully written to APPEAR otherwise, does not actually tax your wages, salaries and fees that you earn yourself because the Constitution does not allow the federal government to tax those earnings.<ref></ref> | ||
| The argument that wages and other compensation amounts are not taxable has been routinely rejected by courts as frivolous. In ''Parker v. Commissioner''<ref>724 F.2d 469, 84-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9209 (5th Cir. 1984).</ref>, the taxpayer's argument -- that wages are not taxable -- was rejected by the ]. The taxpayer was charged double costs for filing a frivolous appeal. In ''Perkins v. Commissioner''<ref>746 F.2d 1187, 84-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9898 (6th Cir. 1984).</ref>, {{usc|26|61}} was ruled by the ] to be “in full accordance with Congressional authority under the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution to impose taxes on income without apportionment among the states”. The taxpayer’s argument -- that wages paid for labor are non-taxable -- was rejected by the Court, and was ruled frivolous. In ''Granzow v. Commissioner''<ref>739 F.2d 265, 84-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9660 (7th Cir. 1984).</ref>, the taxpayer’s argument -- that wages are not taxable -- was rejected by the ], and was ruled frivolous. In ''Waters v. Commissioner''<ref>764 F.2d 1389, 85-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9512 (11th Cir. 1985).</ref>, the ] upheld a judgment of the United States Tax Court in which the Tax Court made a finding that "petitioner is yet another in a seemingly unending parade of tax protesters bent on glutting the docket of this Court and others with frivolous and groundless claims . . . and he has instituted and maintained this proceeding primarily for delay." The Court of Appeals stated: "As detailed in the Tax Court opinion in this case, it is clear beyond peradventure that the law is well established and long settled that wages are includable in taxable income." The taxpayer’s argument -- that income taxation of wages is unconstitutional -- was rejected by the Court of Appeals. The taxpayer was required to pay damages for filing a frivolous suit. | |||
| ==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
Revision as of 16:15, 19 September 2007
 | The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Tommy K. Cryer , aka Tom Cryer (born September 11, 1949 in Lake Charles, Louisiana) is an attorney in Shreveport, Louisiana who was charged with and later acquitted of willful failure to timely file U.S. Federal income tax returns.
According to a resume published by Cryer on his web site, he graduated with honors from Louisiana State University (LSU) Law School in 1973, and was inducted into the LSU Law School Hall of Fame in 1987. Cryer's resume further claims that he is a member of the Order of the Coif (a law school honor society), that he served as a Special Advisor and Draftsman at the Louisiana Constitutional Convention in 1973 and that he has argued cases before the Louisiana Supreme Court. Finally, according to Cryer's resume, he opened a solo law practice in 1975 and gained experience in many different civil and criminal matters.
On an internet web site, Cryer claims that most wages are not taxable under existing income tax law under the theory that the income tax is a form of excise tax, a tax on a free exchange of labor for money does not conform to the definition of an excise. Cryer states:
- The income tax law, although it is carefully written to APPEAR otherwise, does not actually tax your wages, salaries and fees that you earn yourself because the Constitution does not allow the federal government to tax those earnings.
Indictments
In October of 2006, Cryer was indicted on two counts of tax evasion (26 U.S.C. § 7201). In March 2007, two counts of willful failure to timely file tax returns (26 U.S.C. § 7203) were added to the charges. The indictment alleged that Cryer evaded over $73,000 in taxes in 2000 and 2001 by using a trust to receive payments of dividends, interests and stock income.
Cryer files motion to dismiss tax evasion charges
Cryer filed a motion to dismiss the tax evasion charges against him, “on the basis that as a matter of law revenues received by him are not taxed or taxable under the Income Tax laws..., nor are any revenues received by him within the powers of the federal government to tax and that revenues received by him are exempt from taxation by excise under the Constitution....”
Cryer argued that Article I, section 9, clause 4 of the federal Constitution forbids direct taxes:
- “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken....”
The government responded by stating that Cryer, “asserted various tax protester claims...and courts have rejected and discredited these claims.” The government rejected Cryer's claim that the income generated from his law practice is not taxable, citing Commissioner v. Kowalski, 432 U.S. 437 (1977) (payments are considered income where the payments are undeniably accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which taxpayer has complete dominion); Lonsdale v. Commissioner, 661 F.2d 71, 72 (5th Cir. 1981) (rejecting taxpayer's contention that the “exchange of services for money is a zero-sum transaction”); Reading v. Commissioner, 70 T.C. 730 (1978), aff'd, 614 F.2d 159 (8th Cir. 1980) (monies received from the sale of one's services constitute income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment).
On March 19, 2007, the Court denied Cryer's motions to dismiss the charges against him.
Trial proceeds with altered allegations
The prosecution dropped its allegations of tax evasion against Cryer on July 9, 2007. Cryer was then tried on two counts of willful failure to file tax returns.
Cryer acquitted
Cryer did not make any of his arguments about the legality of the income tax to the jury itself. Instead he asserted that he really did not believe that he owed the taxes, so there was no criminal intent. According to the New Hampshire Union Leader:
- Cryer convinced jurors that he genuinely believed he was not liable for the $73,000 in taxes the government says he owes for tax years 2000 and 2001. Absent proof of criminal intent, the jury acquitted him.
On July 11, 2007, Cryer was acquitted.
Notes
- ^ http://www.truthattack.org/CRYER--MotiontoDismiss.pdf
- Tom Cryer's position on his website
- See Superceding Indictment, docket entry 37, March 28, 2007, United States v. Cryer, case no. 5:06-cr-50164-SMH-MLH-ALL, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport Division.
- ^ Memorandum Order, March 19, 2007, docket entry 35, United States v. Cryer, case no. 5:06-cr-50164-SMH-MLH-ALL, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport Division.
- Senz, Kristen. Louisiana lawyer beats tax charges; worries for Browns. Union Leader Thursday, Aug. 9, 2007.