flower-shilling

Alleged Proof That the ATO Was Never Officially Gazetted.

GoldenEye

Pro member
Silveroo
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
https://australianmorningherald.com/state-of-affairs/the-i-t-r-institute-of-taxation-research-has-now-received-irrefutable-proof-through-an-exhaustive-freedom-of-information-act-search-that-the-australian-taxation-office-was-never-officially-gazet/
 
Income tax was first introduced in 1915, as a wartime measure to help fund Australia's war effort. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_Australia

Now it's just used to further big gov who in turn enslave people with more stupid laws and regulations.

As far as I can tell most people didn't bother paying it when it was first introduced. It wasn't until the gov shifted the burden to employers did they have any success collecting income tax.

 
The same thing(that the ato is an illegal entity) was published in the Auspost magazine back in the 80's.

The whole thing sounds really good but what can we do with it? If you dont have the financial capacity(to go to court and fight) it does not really help you otherwise most of us would use it-but then that would change a lots of things....
 
It gets much worse than that. Everyone should watch this. They've taken the ATO to court and proved the ATO wasn't a legal entity and the judge dismissed the findings to "protect Australia from financial chaos".

[youtube]https://youtu.be/iwcXPjkaHVA[/youtube]
 
Straight from the horses mouth. 
Take a moment to comprehend the statement.

The ATO's purpose is to contribute to the economic and social wellbeing of Australians by fostering willing participation in the tax, superannuation and registry systems. We are a leading tax, superannuation and registry administration known for our contemporary service, expertise and integrity.
 
Here's another interesting thing relating to the ATO... There is no definition of "Income" anywhere in the 'Income Tax Assessment ACT 1997'. There's a definition for everything else but no definition for "Income".

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s995.1.html

They create a straw-man identity of your person at birth by having your name in ALL CAPS when they issue a birth certificate - Treating you like a corporation. We voluntarily associate with this corporate identity without knowing it and surrender our rights as flesh and blood living beings.

As a flesh and blood living being, you're time and energy is not free. When we trade our time and energy for money, it's not income, it's compensation. If you value your time and energy at $50 per hour and receive $50 per hour for it, where is the profit? There is none. How much income tax would you then pay on zero profit? Zero.

The system has been set up to trick you into working 3-4 months of the year to voluntarily donate your time and energy (compensation) to the ATO. They do this via two main angles:

1.) Corporations are obligated to withdraw tax from your pay via PAYG Withholdings and submit it to the ATO under your straw-man identity. This is why they issue you a tax file number - it's becomes a number assigned to your corporate identity that you accept being responsible for. The only way you can remove this obligation from your corporate employer is to personally request them (in writing) not to, and by not providing them with a tax file number for submission.

2.) Debt. For us to take out a loan, the bank or financial institution with request proof of "income". They do this by requiring you to submit previous income tax returns. The whole system of debt revolves around you being able to prove "income", and traps society into believing and accepting the term "Income" as what would otherwise be referred to as "compensation" - trading time and energy for monies.

Not paying your tax after submitting an income tax return is illegal. You become obligated to your tax debt through this action.

Lying on your income tax return is also illegal. You can be criminally prosecuted for such activities.

The only way around it is to challenge the ATO directly by writing to them and putting the onus of proof back on them. For example:

"I'm looking to voluntarily submit an income tax return, but before I do so, can you please define the word "Income" as it relates to the Income Tax Assessment ACT 1997".

They will never be able to do this because there is no such definition.

It documents your willingness to submit a tax return but you're unable to because it requires you to input your "income" which cannot be defined.

You should also ask for clarification as to how income is defined as it relates to a 'flesh and blood living being' who's compensated for their time and energy. You need to understand legalese and refrain from using the term "Person" or "Individual" because these can also relate to a corporation.

Taxation is theft. But taxation is not theft through voluntary donations. Once you accept your compensation as income by voluntarily submitting and income tax return, and by allowing your employer to submit your declared "income" under your corporate identity, you become obligated to pay income tax.
 
Just a thought, the TFN should be returned to the owner, IE the ATO. Thank you for your offer to provide us with a TFN the offer is declined & the TFN is returned.
In the legal sense, "you" is a corporation. The word is defined as the person/persons.
I'd be interested to see when & why perfectly good old English was changed & the word "you" was switched in.
O/T, but read the inside cover of your passport. It has interesting language.
 
STKR said:
Here's another interesting thing relating to the ATO... There is no definition of "Income" anywhere in the 'Income Tax Assessment ACT 1997'. There's a definition for everything else but no definition for "Income".

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s995.1.html

They create a straw-man identity of your person at birth by having your name in ALL CAPS when they issue a birth certificate - Treating you like a corporation. We voluntarily associate with this corporate identity without knowing it and surrender our rights as flesh and blood living beings.

As a flesh and blood living being, you're time and energy is not free. When we trade our time and energy for money, it's not income, it's compensation. If you value your time and energy at $50 per hour and receive $50 per hour for it, where is the profit? There is none. How much income tax would you then pay on zero profit? Zero.

The system has been set up to trick you into working 3-4 months of the year to voluntarily donate your time and energy (compensation) to the ATO. They do this via two main angles:

1.) Corporations are obligated to withdraw tax from your pay via PAYG Withholdings and submit it to the ATO under your straw-man identity. This is why they issue you a tax file number - it's becomes a number assigned to your corporate identity that you accept being responsible for. The only way you can remove this obligation from your corporate employer is to personally request them (in writing) not to, and by not providing them with a tax file number for submission.

2.) Debt. For us to take out a loan, the bank or financial institution with request proof of "income". They do this by requiring you to submit previous income tax returns. The whole system of debt revolves around you being able to prove "income", and traps society into believing and accepting the term "Income" as what would otherwise be referred to as "compensation" - trading time and energy for monies.

Not paying your tax after submitting an income tax return is illegal. You become obligated to your tax debt through this action.

Lying on your income tax return is also illegal. You can be criminally prosecuted for such activities.

The only way around it is to challenge the ATO directly by writing to them and putting the onus of proof back on them. For example:

"I'm looking to voluntarily submit an income tax return, but before I do so, can you please define the word "Income" as it relates to the Income Tax Assessment ACT 1997".

They will never be able to do this because there is no such definition.

It documents your willingness to submit a tax return but you're unable to because it requires you to input your "income" which cannot be defined.

You should also ask for clarification as to how income is defined as it relates to a 'flesh and blood living being' who's compensated for their time and energy. You need to understand legalese and refrain from using the term "Person" or "Individual" because these can also relate to a corporation.

Taxation is theft. But taxation is not theft through voluntary donations. Once you accept your compensation as income by voluntarily submitting and income tax return, and by allowing your employer to submit your declared "income" under your corporate identity, you become obligated to pay income tax.

All the above is very well put and easily understandable.What happens when you are self employed and/or work for the same company for years with ABN? How does all the above relates to the "person"?
 
dragafem said:
STKR said:
Here's another interesting thing relating to the ATO... There is no definition of "Income" anywhere in the 'Income Tax Assessment ACT 1997'. There's a definition for everything else but no definition for "Income".

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/s995.1.html

They create a straw-man identity of your person at birth by having your name in ALL CAPS when they issue a birth certificate - Treating you like a corporation. We voluntarily associate with this corporate identity without knowing it and surrender our rights as flesh and blood living beings.

As a flesh and blood living being, you're time and energy is not free. When we trade our time and energy for money, it's not income, it's compensation. If you value your time and energy at $50 per hour and receive $50 per hour for it, where is the profit? There is none. How much income tax would you then pay on zero profit? Zero.

The system has been set up to trick you into working 3-4 months of the year to voluntarily donate your time and energy (compensation) to the ATO. They do this via two main angles:

1.) Corporations are obligated to withdraw tax from your pay via PAYG Withholdings and submit it to the ATO under your straw-man identity. This is why they issue you a tax file number - it's becomes a number assigned to your corporate identity that you accept being responsible for. The only way you can remove this obligation from your corporate employer is to personally request them (in writing) not to, and by not providing them with a tax file number for submission.

2.) Debt. For us to take out a loan, the bank or financial institution with request proof of "income". They do this by requiring you to submit previous income tax returns. The whole system of debt revolves around you being able to prove "income", and traps society into believing and accepting the term "Income" as what would otherwise be referred to as "compensation" - trading time and energy for monies.

Not paying your tax after submitting an income tax return is illegal. You become obligated to your tax debt through this action.

Lying on your income tax return is also illegal. You can be criminally prosecuted for such activities.

The only way around it is to challenge the ATO directly by writing to them and putting the onus of proof back on them. For example:

"I'm looking to voluntarily submit an income tax return, but before I do so, can you please define the word "Income" as it relates to the Income Tax Assessment ACT 1997".

They will never be able to do this because there is no such definition.

It documents your willingness to submit a tax return but you're unable to because it requires you to input your "income" which cannot be defined.

You should also ask for clarification as to how income is defined as it relates to a 'flesh and blood living being' who's compensated for their time and energy. You need to understand legalese and refrain from using the term "Person" or "Individual" because these can also relate to a corporation.

Taxation is theft. But taxation is not theft through voluntary donations. Once you accept your compensation as income by voluntarily submitting and income tax return, and by allowing your employer to submit your declared "income" under your corporate identity, you become obligated to pay income tax.

All the above is very well put and easily understandable.What happens when you are self employed and/or work for the same company for years with ABN? How does all the above relates to the "person"?

ABN holders (specifically sole traders) are in the best position to challenge the ATO in the ways mentioned above. Keep in mind that it's different when you register as a company (ACN) because there's seperate tax obligations.

The best response I got back from the ATO was "Income defined within the Act is very broad". I responded: "if it's defined within the Act, can you please show me where?". They couldn't do so. That was 5 years ago. I receive zero correspondence from the ATO. No calls, no letters, nothing. Prior to writing to them, they used to send me reminders and deadlines for my returns to be submitted.

Now, I'm not completely disregarding the potential for being challenged in the future, so I keep my records and receipts in case that time comes and ensure I have some funds aside, should they be required, but I don't intend to pay income tax ever again. I have the email records of me stating I'm willing to voluntarily submit a return and their failure to show me where income is defined within the Act, so it could easily be argued with evidence that I wasn't avoiding anything.

Here's another interesting thought experiment: If we consider ourselves as complex machine's required for our work, then all forms of maintenance and runnings costs are tax deductible. Food, shelter, and any maintenance required to keep us healthy and in good working order. This includes our psychological health. Anything that would improve your quality of life could be seen as proactive maintenance for your mental health. It doesn't matter if I change my spark plugs, or service my vehicles at earlier intervals than what's recommended, the cost of me doing so is tax deductible. Now, if my car became depressed and I needed to take it out to dinner every week to keep it operating at optimal performance, that too would be tax deductible. You can use your imagination to see how this could cover every cent of expenditure in your daily life.

I dunno. I would never encourage people to not pay tax because there could be real implications for not doing so, but I think everyone should at the very least challenge them to show you where income is defined within Act. Even going beyond that and asking them to define income as it relates to the Act (accepting it's not defined within the Act).

I mean, they're the fkn tax office! They should be able to define income as it relates to the income tax assessment Act...But they won't and they can't. Then it puts you in a position where you need to ask yourself what you're actually declaring if you do choose to submit a tax return.
 
STKR said:
Here's another interesting thought experiment: If we consider ourselves as complex machine's required for our work, then all forms of maintenance and runnings costs are tax deductible. Food, shelter, and any maintenance required to keep us healthy and in good working order. This includes our psychological health. Anything that would improve your quality of life could be seen as proactive maintenance for your mental health. It doesn't matter if I change my spark plugs, or service my vehicles at earlier intervals than what's recommended, the cost of me doing so is tax deductible. Now, if my car became depressed and I needed to take it out to dinner every week to keep it operating at optimal performance, that too would be tax deductible. You can use your imagination to see how this could cover every cent of expenditure in your daily life.

It's absolutely ridiculous that every cent spent on living isn't tax deductible.

Put it this way. If I purchase an excavator for a business, every cent I spend on it is not taxed. Why should a piece of machinery receive better tax treatment than a human?

It's even more ridiculous that travel to an from employment isn't a tax deduction. It couldn't be more black and white that this was a legitimate expense incurred.

Profit should be calculated after ALL expenses are deducted.
 
Administrator said:
STKR said:
Here's another interesting thought experiment: If we consider ourselves as complex machine's required for our work, then all forms of maintenance and runnings costs are tax deductible. Food, shelter, and any maintenance required to keep us healthy and in good working order. This includes our psychological health. Anything that would improve your quality of life could be seen as proactive maintenance for your mental health. It doesn't matter if I change my spark plugs, or service my vehicles at earlier intervals than what's recommended, the cost of me doing so is tax deductible. Now, if my car became depressed and I needed to take it out to dinner every week to keep it operating at optimal performance, that too would be tax deductible. You can use your imagination to see how this could cover every cent of expenditure in your daily life.

It's absolutely ridiculous that every cent spent on living isn't tax deductible.

Put it this way. If I purchase an excavator for a business, every cent I spend on it is not taxed. Why should a piece of machinery receive better tax treatment than a human?

It's even more ridiculous that travel to an from employment isn't a tax deduction. It couldn't be more black and white that this was a legitimate expense incurred.

Profit should be calculated after ALL expenses are deducted.

Let?s look at it from a slightly different angle. Correct me if I?m wrong, but the maintenance of your personal ?machine? is not a tax deduction, but the maintenance of your employee is.

 
There was actually a case in NZ where they couldn't define income either. It was quite comical because the person argued they didn't earn any chickens that year, therefore they weren't required to pay income tax.

Here's an excerpt from the article:

The New Zealand tax inspector shook his head and blinked at the American grinning at him across the table. "What do you mean ?it?s chickens!??," he sputtered. "What the hell have chickens got to do with it?"

The American just smiled. "Well, you show me in the New Zealand Income Tax Act where it says that chickens are not a legal form of income. And seeing as my client didn?t earn any chickens last year, he doesn?t owe you any tax."

..... They also mention the requirement to lodge a tax return wasn't published in the Gazette...

"If they?re required to file a form at all, it must be published in the Gazette, there must be a volume date and page number that this public obligation exists and the public has to have public notice of it. It?s never been published, so obviously there?s no requirement.

"If somebody doesn?t file a form, they?ll get a letter saying ?why didn?t you file??, and the answer is ?I didn?t know there was an obligation to file. If there is it must be published in the Gazette. Please give me the volume date and page number and I?ll be happy to do it?."

Here's the article. It relates to Australia and NZ tax laws:

http://www.investigatemagazine.com/FEB00%20Tax%20NZ.htm
 
Back
Top