8 comments on “Kent Hovind Discussion: Certificate of Incorporation – Is The IRS A Government Agency? (1-23-15)

  1. shannon dennison May 4, 2015 4:53 am

    who owns the irs ?.. the share holders do and they are mostly the vat. and
    rch… they own it and they r pirates .. look at their paychecks.. who
    authorizes them?

  2. Davy Matheny May 4, 2015 5:07 am

    rudy…there is no law that requires you to pay federal income tax. if you
    find one there is a website that will pay you 1 mill.. check it out it
    maybe worth your time.

  3. shannon dennison May 4, 2015 5:21 am
  4. shannon dennison May 4, 2015 5:42 am
  5. LoneStar1776 May 4, 2015 6:29 am
  6. genesis777 May 4, 2015 6:33 am

    Back in 1913 when the jew banking cartel of Schiff, Warburg, Morgan,
    Rothschild, Mellon and others hijacked our nation they created this income
    tax system- It is incorporated in Puerto Rico, it is not a government
    agency, it is the collection arm of the jew banking cartel-

    Yes, we really do put people in jail for debts that aren’t even theirs in
    this nation- Notice on all of the documentation it will state Federal
    Income tax…Does he earn a salary from the government? If not, he has no
    federal income…

    Kent is being charged through his fictitious straw man corporation under
    equity law, not common law as this nation was founded upon…Tell him to
    look at all of his documentation, he will see his name is addressed in all
    CAPS, That is because his corporation is the one being charged, and he
    unwittingly is taking responsibility for it -

    They have been running this scam for over a hundred years, he should file a
    suit against the judge, the IRS and everyone else involved in his
    persecution, do it in Federal Court, you can take everything that judge
    owns, as the judge is a contractor-

  7. mmmirele May 4, 2015 7:00 am

    Bogus. If you make this argument to the IRS, you could be liable for a
    $5,000 fine. Here’s a discussion from a 2008 court case (footnote 2, page 4)

    2 The only purportedly “private” entity named as a defendant in this action
    is the Internal Revenue Tax and Audit Service, Inc. a/k/a “IRS Corp.”
    Plaintiff contends that his social security benefits, once levied for
    payment of his delinquent taxes, were “passed on” to the “IRS Corp.” There
    is no allegation in the complaint that the “IRS Corp.” acted in an unlawful
    manner. As such, plaintiff fails to state a claim for relief against the
    “IRS Corp.” To the extent, however, that plaintiff is claiming that the
    Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the government, but rather, a
    private corporation, known as the “IRS Corp.,” the Court notes that this
    line of reasoning has been consistently negated by several other courts.
    See, e.g., Snyder v. IRS, 596 F.Supp. 240 (N. D. Ind. 1984); Crain v.
    Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984); Salman v. Jameson, 52 F.3d 334
    (9th Cir. 1995). Moreover, the claim that “[t]he Service is not an agency
    of the United States government but rather a private corporation or an
    agency of a State or Territory without authority to administer the internal
    revenue laws” has been identified by the IRS as a “frivolous position” that
    can result in a penalty of $5,000 when asserted in a tax return or included
    in certain collection-related submissions. Notice 2007-30, 2007-14 I.R.B.


Comments are closed.