Political Dysfunction – The IRS Detailed in Spades!

Exclamation MarkEnlighten me, how is the taxpayer to “understand and meet” “tax obligations” when the agency who collects those tax obligations refuses to answer questions, actively hinders transparency, denies accountability and refuses scrutiny?  Through forced taxation, collected by fear of the stick, America has been abused since the IRS was created out of whole cloth, not from the U.S. Constitution, but the demented minds of a president and complicit Congress.

Under the heading of “Statutory Authority,” we find the following:

The IRS is organized to carry out the responsibilities of the secretary of the Treasury under section 7801 of the Internal Revenue Code. The secretary has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce these laws. The IRS was created based on this legislative grant.

Section 7803 of the Internal Revenue Code provides for the appointment of a commissioner of Internal Revenue to administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.”

Progressive

Progressive and progressivism is a political philosophy that empowers a more extensive and more intrusive government, a government without any shred of decency, and a government as intrusive as possible into your daily life.  Progressivism has been the catchphrase for all sorts of political hooliganism and liberty theft at all levels of government.  These abuses by the government have been made possible because, as everyone knows, progress, the root of progressivism, is a good thing; it is progress, right?  Not quite, according to the politicians and the bureaucrats who think they own you and me.Lemmings 1

Progress is defined as moving forward or onward towards the desired destination.  Also, progress can be advancement or development towards a better, or more complete, “modern condition.”  Archaic definitions sometimes provide critical insight into a word, and in this instance, the archaic meaning of progress was a state journey or official tour, especially by royalty.

Progressive means something relating to or characterized by progress without the political connotations, using new ideas, findings, or opportunities.  In the classroom, progressive relates to an educational theory marked by an emphasis on the individual child, informal class procedures, and encouraging self-expression to the point of sacrificing educational opportunities.  The meaning of progressive also refers to making progress, moving forward or advancing, increasing in severity or extent, expanding the base rate of something, and a few other definitions specific to the sciences of computers and lenses for glasses.Lemmings 4

President Woodrow Wilson (D) was a progressive, and many of his political detractors were regressive.  The distinction was drawn on a political scale to aid in differentiating and scorning political opponents concerned about the spread of government.  We need to be clear that any time anyone talks about progressive taxes, they discuss expanding the base tax rate.  Making tax increases sound more pleasant is a key to twisting the meaning of words and exercising tyranny on a population.

Regressive

As you might have probably guessed, regression is the exact opposite of progression.  Regressive relates to regression production, decreasing the rate as the base increases, and is characterized by simplifying structures in an evolutionary process.  Regression is the act of regressing. Regressing relates to the act of reasoning backward, moving backward to a previous and possibly worse or more primitive state.  It is also a privilege of going or coming back to something.Plato 2

Regressive is most used in refusing to cut taxes, so the opponents to “progressive” taxes are automatically regressive.  In actuality, progressive is all about increasing government size, government taxes, and government bureaucracy; thus, the opponents of progressive taxes should own and explain why being regressive is a good thing.  Yet, they never do, and representative governments across the globe are worse for this plastic language.  The consequences of ever bigger government and taxes, fees, surcharges, fines, etc., dreamed up as “progress.”

Tax Gap

Bait & SwitchDue to proposed legislation, the media has been quick to jump onto the tax bandwagon. The media are trying to drum up a lot of hype for the proposed bill, calling it fairness, catching the tax cheaters, working to bring “fairness” to the tax system, and progressing the tax system to close the loopholes improve tax enforcement.  The “tax gap;” is $600 million in mostly tax errors because the tax system is too complicated.  How do you tell the difference between tax cheaters and honest people trying to obey the tax authorities?  Therein lies the problem, to the IRS, everyone making an error is guilty until proven innocent, and either way, you will pay something to the IRS to get out of trouble.

What is the problem?  The IRS is going to use its newfound enforcement ability from this legislation to punish and abuse.  Congress is always talking about closing loopholes, but what they mean is allow political cronies and connections to keep doing what they are doing and force the rest of America to pay for the privilege of being abused.

Tax Enforcement

QuestionLong have I been concerned that the agencies of the Federal Government have become weapons against the citizenry.  With Lois Lerner and the 501 (C) (3) debacle still ongoing at the IRS, this concern about government weaponizing has only strengthened.  Yet, what do we find from politicians on both sides of the aisle; crickets, platitudes, double-speak, and an attitude of not caring.  What do we see from state and local government officials who are in a position to protect the citizen from run-away government, even less.  With the proposed legislation being kicked around, granting money to a Federal Agency with a history of sleight of hand, deviousness, and abuse of power, seems to be the worst mistake possible.  Why are the legislatures not taking the IRS to task and scrutinizing them more closely, ending the farrago of Lois Lerner and holding real people accountable for real crimes?

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

Did you hear? The IRS Edition

Millstone of Designed IncompetenceFLASH:  20 May 2021, President Biden wants to spend $80 Billion on expanding the workforce of the IRS by 87,000 new employees over 10-years.  Riddle me this, $919,540.23 is the approximate amount per employee; Would someone tell me why the IRS needs to spend so much per employee?  Does this announcement seem particularly worrisome?  If not, please cease reading now, as I will never convince you to be wary of the Department of Internal Revenue Service. However, with its incredible price tag, if this announcement worries you, let’s discuss a few topics an expanded IRS means.

Where is the money to expand the IRS coming from?

Simple question.  I want clear and concise answers.  While President Biden thinks some of those funds will come from “catching tax cheats,” cheating taxes is a game for lawyers, and I want to know what the president means by “Tax Cheats.”  For example, will he further chase the rich people who are not paying their “fair share;” if so, when will Biden and Obama belly up and write a check for all the back taxes they owe?  When will the Clinton Machine be forced to become accountable for all the tax money avoided?  Are “tax cheats” regular people who missed a box, forgot to include some income, or cannot fathom how to fill out their taxes and made honest mistakes?IRS

Until Big-Tech did an excellent job of cleaning OIG reports for the IRS, I used to have an OIG report claiming that the Federal Employees owing the most in back taxes was the IRS.  Are they in the “Tax Cheat” category, or will the IRS employees continue to be exempt from audits and “fair share” taxpaying because the agency is overwhelming voting Democrat in every election?  The more I dig into the IRS; the more questions arise about “fairness,” transparency, accountability, and responsibility.

Politicized or unpoliticized, the IRS is a weapon.

Ziggy - IRS Non SequiturThere is a massive problem in the IRS; the “IRS Targeting Controversy” has never been settled at the IRS.  On 09 Feb 2018, the last non-profit targeting case was settled. The plaintiff sees no remuneration for the legal fees. The government had to admit it was wrong to target non-profits based upon political leanings.  The IRS is hoping lawmakers will see this last settlement and give them a break.  Yet, the core problems of being or not being a political weapon, the core complaint of the scandal, was never addressed!  The leadership in Congress stopped scrutinizing, and the IRS got away with browbeating people based upon political leaning.

Never forget, Lois Lerner, the IRS official at the center of the non-profit targeting scandal, who had contact with the U.S. President (Obama), pled the Fifth Amendment, and none of the elected officials did anything to get to the truth!  I will not allow the elected representatives off the hook to enable the IRS to become a weapon or remain a political animal!  America deserves better and can only obtain better through asking questions and demanding concise and truthful answers after transparent audits and investigations that conclude with punishment for wrongdoing!

Non-Sequitur - GovernmentThis leads to a simple question: Is the IRS a political weapon for Democrats and Liberals, or is it an apolitical unit of the government?  Let us test the current IRS leadership for a potential answer to this question.  17 June 2021, The Daily Signal reports that the IRS denied tax exemption to a Christian Group because the Bible the group adheres to is associated with the GOP (Republicans).  If that decision has you scratching your head, wait until you check out the rest of the story.

From The Daily Signal story, we find the following pretzel logic from the IRS.  The link is live; see the letter for yourself!

In an 18 May denial letter, IRS Exempt Organizations Director Stephen A. Martin said Christians Engaged is involved in “prohibited political campaign intervention” and “operate[s] for a substantial non-exempt private purpose and for the private interests of the [Republican Party].”

A “legend” at the top of the letter shows nine letters of the alphabet being used as shorthand to represent something. In this letter’s example, oddly, “D” represented “Republican.”

Specifically, you educate Christians on what the Bible says in areas where they can be instrumental, including the areas of sanctity of life, the definition of marriage, biblical justice, freedom of speech, defense, and borders and immigration, U.S. and Israel relations,” Martin wrote. “The Bible teachings are typically affiliated with the D party and candidates. This disqualifies you from exemption under IRS Section 50I(c)(3).”

Ziggy - IRS AuditTo me, it matters not that the letter D represents republican.  America is a Republic, and any political action taken can be connected to a Republican government.  Not necessarily the “GOP” as the Republican Political Party.  If the IRS official cannot ask questions, the voices inside his head speak louder than his abilities to make logical decisions. In that case, he does NOT deserve his position, having been promoted above his maximum level of incompetence!  In making this decision, the IRS official has declared that the democratic party does not ever use biblical teachings to reach conclusions.  Is Speaker Pelosi and President Biden aware of this fundamental change in political foundations?

Feel free to tell me in the comments section, do you feel the IRS Non-Profit Targeting Scandal of 2010 thru 2013 has been handled effectively and properly closed?  Better still, was it appropriate for Lois Lerner to plead the Fifth Amendment and not have legal actions taken? Finally, do you honestly trust the IRS to be an apolitical, unpoliticized, and neutral agency engaged in honest and forthright government business?

Details about the IRS.

Government Largess 3From irs.gov, we find the following, and it raises more questions than answers.  Under the heading, “The IRS Mission,” we find the following, poor grammar, wrong sentences, and detestable language and all:

Provide America’s taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and enforce the law with integrity and fairness to all.

This mission statement describes our role and the public’s expectation about how we should perform that role.

            • In the United States, the Congress passes tax laws and requires taxpayers to comply.
            • The taxpayer’s role is to understand and meet his or her tax obligations.
            • The IRS role is to help the large majority of compliant taxpayers with the tax law, while ensuring that the minority who are unwilling to comply pay their fair share.”

Would someone at the IRS tell me, how are you “providing top quality service” when you cannot reach the IRS by phone, the office hours are limited, and answers are forced to come from hired third parties?  I have been forced into multiple-day issues with the IRS Website, no answers, no contact information, and no assistance until I hired someone who answered my questions at $100 an hour.  If the IRS reads this article, that is not how you define “top quality service.”

QuestionWhat is “fair share?”  Using this phrase, the IRS declares it is already politicizing the payment of taxes, as the expression “fair share” has been captured for more than a decade by the Democratic Party.  Using this phrase in your mission statement demands a straight and correct answer in the rest of your marketing materials.  Yet, no explanation has ever been found.

Enlighten me, the second bullet point, how is the taxpayer to “understand and meet” “tax obligations” when the agency who collects those tax obligations refuses to answer questions, actively hinders transparency, denies accountability and refuses scrutiny?  What are “compliant taxpayers?”  Through forced taxation, collected by fear of the stick, America has been abused since the IRS was created out of whole cloth, not from the U.S. Constitution, but the demented minds of a president and complicit Congress.

Under the heading of “Statutory Authority,” we find the following:

The IRS is organized to carry out the responsibilities of the secretary of the Treasury under section 7801 of the Internal Revenue Code. The secretary has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce these laws. The IRS was created based on this legislative grant.

Section 7803 of the Internal Revenue Code provides for the appointment of a commissioner of Internal Revenue to administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.”

Gravy TrainAt least the grammar and sentence structure are better. However, having read sections 7801 and 7803 of the Internal Revenue Code, I have serious reservations.  For example, how did the IRS become the sole government agency in charge of defining an employee, controlling the employee/employer relationship, and acting as the force behind employment law?  When did Congress provide you with this authority?

Dont Tread On MeI repeat, only for emphasis, the following:
“The IRS governs every action made in an employment situation, and the IRS has given great latitude to the employer, making you the property of the IRS, with control granted to your employer. As a result, the IRS remains a danger to every American and the globe.  Why is the United States the only industrialized nation to not allow options to the employee/employer relationship, squashing innovation, curtailing small business opportunities, and unequally tipping the scales for large organizations?  Look to the IRS!  Want to point fingers, thank President Woodrow Wilson (D), his complicit Congress, and his executive orders!”

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.