11 votes

None Of You Are Employee's Earning "Wages" Subject To A Tax!

The TRUTH About
W-4 WITHHOLDING

Now let's check out one of the major areas where you provide the evidence against yourself, that you are liable for a tax. But let's get some terms straight first. First, remember this very important point: If you are not 'liable' for a tax, then you are not subject to withholding. And if you had no corporate taxable "income", as legally defined by the Supreme Court,, then there is no liability for a tax.

Withholding is taken out of your wages, but, what does that 'word of art' "wages" mean in the IRC (Internal Revenue Code), since 'wages' are subject to withholding?

IRC Section 3401 Definitions
(a) Wages. For purposes of this chapter, (Ch. 24 - withholding at the source) the term "wages" means all remuneration for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash;
(c) Employee. For purposes of this chapter (Chapter 24 - Collection of Income Tax at Source on wages), the term "employee" includes an officer, employee or elected official of the United States, or of any political subdivision thereof, or of the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the foregoing. The term "employee" also includes an officer of a corporation.
(d) Employer. For purposes of this chapter, the term "employer" means the person for whom an individual performs or performed any service, of whatever nature, as the employee of such person,

Notice that the only word that was really defined here was "employee" and even then they used 'employee' in the definition of 'employee'. Also. notice that the term 'employer' does NOT mean the company that you work for! The 'employer' is the one has "employees". And an employee is someone who is an officer, employee or elected official of the United States government, or an officer of a corporation.

IRC 3401(c) plainly states that corporation officers and government employees are definitely considered employees. This section is talking about withholding, of any tax imposed, at the source. Withholding is ONLY allowed on 'employees' (officers, employees or elected officials of the U.S.) Why? Because of the Public Salary Tax Act.

Let's examine that term "employee". It only "includes" government employees and corporate officers, therefore it would "exclude" all workers not in this category. Are you an officer, employee or elected official of the federal government? If you are not, then is the company you work for an "employer", as defined?

Now look at the definition of "employer". You will see that it means someone who has 'employees'. Remember, an employee, as defined, ONLY works for the government, or is a corporate officer. Therefore an 'employer' could only mean a government employer, since no one else could possibly employ 'employees'. The definition of employer says an employer is a "person" with an 'employee' who performs services for him. An 'employee' works for the government. It is the employee that makes the distinction, not the employer! Since an employee can only be a government employee, then the employer can only be a government employer. The employee definition is the controlling definition.

Now look at the definition of 'wages'. Wages are only, as defined, payment for services performed by a employee (government employee or corporate officer) for his employer (government). 'Employees' receiving 'wages' are subject to withholding, since the wages are received from a privileged occupation (government employment privilege or corporate privilege).

The Public Salary Tax Act applies to government employees, doesn't it? So I would venture to say that withholding only applies to government employees.

When you contract to be a U.S. citizen, you agree to become a voluntary slave to help collect revenue. Similarly, when you agree to work for the government, a privilege, you also agree to be a voluntary slave/employee. After all, for this privilege, you also get to pay a Public Salary Tax and get to have that tax withheld from your wages in advance. The government can dispose of a part of your labor, the tax withheld, and you cannot do anything about it, because you voluntarily chose to work for the government.

Slave. A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no freedom of action, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. One who is under the power of a master, and who belongs to him; so that the master may sell and dispose of his person, of his industry, and of his labor, without his being able to do anything, have anything, or acquire anything, but what must belong to his master. (Black's Law Dictionary - 6th Edition)

Person. In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person), though by statute term may include labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers.
Scope and delineation of term is necessary for determining to whom Fourteenth Amendment of Constitution affords protection since this Amendment expressly applies to "person".
Aliens. Aliens are "persons" within meaning of Fourteenth Amendment . . .
Corporation. A corporation is a "person" within meaning of Fourteenth Amendment . . ." (Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition)

According to these definitions, a slave is a 'person', and a person can be an alien or a corporation. The 13th Amendment abolishes 'involuntary' slavery, but not 'voluntary' slavery. A U.S. citizen is a voluntary slave, with no rights to acquire property or income and must "return" a portion of his 'wages' every April 15.

14th Amendment. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and of the State wherein they reside.

Since slaves are persons, could this be read all 'slaves' born or naturalized . . .? A U.S. citizen's name is spelled in all caps. A name spelled in all caps indicates a corporation or a corporate citizen (property).

Does the company you work for claim to be the United States or an agency thereof? Then, if he is NOT the United States, you are not an employee and you did NOT receive wages, as defined. And if you did not receive wages, then you are not subject to withholding. Isn't that simple! Give your employer a copy of this chapter and let him decide if he is the United States, or an agency thereof. If he thinks he is not, then he has no obligation to withhold taxes from your paycheck!

Withholding only applies to government employers. Is your employer a government employer?

Where is the statute that authorizes withholding?
IRC Sec. 3402. Income tax collected at source.
(a) Requirement of withholding.
(1) In general. Except as otherwise provided in this section, every employer making payment of wages shall deduct and withhold upon said wages a tax determined in accordance with tables or computational procedures prescribed by the Secretary.

As you can see, withholding only applies to government 'employers' making payments of 'wages'. The IRC defined 'employer' for us: a government employer who has employees (officers, employees and elected officials of the United States).

So if you ARE a government employee, you are required to furnish a W-4 exemption certificate, indicating how much public salary tax you want withheld.

Sec. 3402 (f) (2) Exemption certificates.
(A) On commencement of employment. On or before the date of the commencement of employment with an employer, the employee shall furnish the employer with a signed withholding exemption certificate relating to the number of withholding exemptions which he claims, which shall in no event exceed the number to which he is entitled.

This exemption certificate (W-4) section applies only to 'employees', as defined, working for a government 'employer', as defined in Sec. 3401(d).

If you are not an 'employee', then you qualify to be exempt from withholding on the W-4 withholding certificate.

Remember, these statutes only apply to those who are employees and have wages., as defined.

Think about this. If there is a law that allows the government to tax your income directly, do you need to sign a paper giving them permission to do so? No. Then why would you need to sign a paper, under penalty of perjury, for them to withhold a percentage of your wages up front, if they have a law that says they can do it? You say it is to claim an partial exemption from the withholding of tax.

But what if you did not want to claim an exemption? Do you still need to sign the form? After all, the form only applies to 'taxpayers' that want more or less tax withheld from their paycheck. Are you a 'taxpayer'? Only if you have a tax liability.

Maybe we better check another statute.

IRC Sec. 3401(e) Number of withholding exemptions claimed. For purposes of this chapter, the term 'number of withholding exemptions claimed' means the number of withholding exemptions claimed in a withholding exemption certificate in effect under section 3402(f), or in effect under the corresponding section of prior law, except that if no such certificate is in effect, the number of withholding exemptions claimed shall be considered to be zero.

Wait a second! I thought your employer told you that you had to file the form before you went to work. Then why the exception, that if no such certificate is in effect? If it is required, how could a certificate not be in effect? Because you chose not to sign one! After all, the exemption is a benefit granted by Congress to 'taxpayers'. Are you required to decline a benefit, under penalty of perjury, if you do not want the benefit? What if you do not want welfare or food stamps, do you need to sign a paper declining the benefit, before you don't get it? Why not? Because you cannot be forced to engage in a privileged activity or receive a privileged benefit, just so you can be taxed.

Since the government takes the tax out of your paycheck before you get it, they already have your money. And it is very difficult to get the money back once they have it. The best route is to keep them from taking it out of your paycheck in the first place! There is one situation in which you can stop withholding on your income.

26 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 31.3402(n) Employees incurring no tax liability. An employer shall not deduct and withhold any tax under chapter 24 upon a payment of wages . . . if there is in effect, with respect to the payment, a withholding exemption certificate furnished by the employee which contains the statements that
(a) the employee incurred no liability for the income tax imposed under subtitle A of the Code for his preceding taxable year;
(b) the employee anticipates that he will incur no liability for income tax imposed by subtitle A for his current year.

What is the withholding exemption certificate? It is just the W-4 form. You can claim exempt if you meet the two conditions listed above.

Now I ask you, if you had no corporate income, or if you were an American Citizen and not a U.S, citizen, then did you have a tax liability for last year? No. But remember, the W-4 form is a withholding authorization form. It merely states that you ARE subject to withholding, but are exempt in this particular situation. The form is for taxpayers.

You should also question your "employer's" status as "withholding agent". Ask him if he is an authorized withholding agent. He will tell you yes. Only withholding agents are authorized to withhold tax from your paycheck. What is the definition of withholding agent? The IRC tells us.

IRC 7701(a)(16) Withholding agent. The term "withholding agent" means any person required to deduct and withhold any tax under the provisions of sections 1441, 1442, 1443, or 1461.

Oh really? Well, just what do sections 1441 - 1443 pertain to? In the IRC, Chapter 3 Subchapter A, is where these sections are found. What is the title of this Subchapter A? Nonresident Aliens and Foreign Corporations!

1441. Withholding of tax on nonresident aliens.

1442. Withholding of tax on foreign corporations.

1443. Foreign tax exempt organizations.

1461. Liability for withheld tax. Every person required to deduct and withhold any tax under this chapter is hereby made liable for such tax and is hereby indemnified against the claims and demands of any person for the amount of any payments in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

Is your employer required to withhold tax from your paycheck? Only if you are a nonresident alien or foreign corporation, working for him! Are you either? If you are not, then send an affidavit to your employer titled, "Notice of Withdrawal of Authorization to Withhold Tax". Make a copy of the above sections from 26 USC (United States Code - found in your local law library) and attach them to your letter. You simply state that you are NOT a foreign person earning income in the U.S., and that you want all withholding to cease immediately. Claim that they are not withholding agents, as defined by law, and that there is no legal requirement to withhold tax from your pay. If you employer refuses to honor your request, then you may have to get more aggressive and demand that they prove that you are a foreigner, and that they are withholding agents, as defined by law, OR stop withholding. Do not fall for filling out the W-4 form as exempt, since this form is the form that authorizes withholding and provides evidence that you think you are liable for a tax, and want less tax withheld.

If you are not an 'employee', and your 'income' is not legally defined as "wages", and your employer is not the government, then how does your employer get away with having you fill out a W-4 in the first place? The IRC tells us again!

IRC 3402(p) Voluntary withholding agreements.

(3) Authority for other voluntary withholding. The Secretary is authorized by regulations to provide for withholding -- (A) from remuneration for services performed by an employee for the employee's employer which does not constitute wages, . . . if the employer and employee, . . . agree to such withholding. Such agreement shall be in such form and manner as the secretary may by regulations prescribe. For purposes of this chapter remuneration or other payments with respect to which such agreement is made shall be treated as if they were wages paid by an employer to an employee . . ."

So if you both agree to withholding, then you can have the tax withheld and 'treated as' a tax on wages, even if it is not. The W-4 is simply your voluntary agreement! You are signing a contract.

SELF EMPLOYED

OK. Now what if you are self-employed as an independent contractor? First we must find out what the meaning of self-employed is. Let's check the IRC. (Internal Revenue Code)

IRC Section 217(f) Self-employed individual. For purposes of this section (deduction for moving expenses), the term "self-employed individual" means an individual who performs personal services --
(1) as the owner of the entire interest in an unincorporated trade or business, or
(2) as a partner in a partnership carrying on a trade or business.

A self-employed individual has his/her own 'trade or business'.

Sec 1401. Rate of tax. (a) Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance. In addition to other taxes, there shall be imposed for each taxable year, on the self-employment income of every individual, a tax equal to the following percent of the amount of self-employment income for such taxable year.
Sec. 1402 Definitions. (b) Self-employment income. The term "self-employment income" means the net earnings from self-employment derived by an individual during any taxable year;

Sec. 1402. Definitions.
(a) Net earnings from self-employment. The term "net earnings from self-employment" means the gross income derived by an individual from any trade or business carried on by the individual, less the deductions allowed by this subtitle which are attributable to such trade or business, . . .

OK, now let's review 'trade or business' to see who it applies to.

Sec. 1402(c) Trade or business. The term "trade or business", when used with reference to self-employment income or net earnings from self-employment, shall have the same meaning as when used in section 162 (relating to trade or business expenses) except . . .

Notice this definition does not use 'includes' or 'means', because it is not a definition. It is a reference. In checking section 162, there is no definition of trade or business listed either. Therefore, by default, the general definition for the whole IRC comes into play.

IRC 7701(26) Trade or business. The term 'trade or business' includes the performance of the functions of a public office.

IRC 7701(10)(c) Includes and including. The terms '"includes" and "including" when used in a definition contained in this title shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined.

"Includes" means that ONLY terms in the same category that the definition applies to the term. It 'includes' ANY function of a public office, but EXCLUDES anything not within the term "performing the functions of a public office". i.e. The definition: "Fruit includes apples", would 'include' oranges, but would exclude corn. Even though only the term 'apples' was in the definition of fruit, it does not exclude other 'types' of fruit.

What is a 'trade or business'? The definition 'includes the performance of the functions of a public office'. That's all! If you are not performing the functions of a public office, then you are not self-employed! If you are a CPA, is that performing the function of a public office? Not the last time I checked. What if you were a CPA with a contract with the IRS or the Dept. of Agriculture? Would you then be performing the functions of a public office? Yes. WHY? Because you are technically working for the public office of the IRS, and performing their functions.

You are not an 'employee' working for an 'employer', but you ARE 'self-employed' by the government when you are contracting your services to them. If you don't contract with the government, then you are just a private entrepreneur. Private individuals contracting with other private individuals are never 'self-employed'. BUT, you can volunteer to be in that category if you like paying income tax. Just file a return, and confirm the presumption.

Remember, these are called 'words of art' in the legal profession. They are used to make special definitions for words that apply only to certain statutes. That's partly why they call the government regulations 'codes'. The words have special meanings that only those within the circle know the meaning to. The words do not mean the same as those found in the dictionary.

SUMMARY

"Employees" are defined as officers, employees, or elected officials of the United States. Only employees have wages.

Only wages, as defined, are subject to withholding of tax at the source.

If you are an "employer", defined as one who has employees, then you employee officers, employees and elected officials of the federal government, and therefore you must be the government. If you are not the government, you cannot have employees, as defined.

W-4's are only for 'taxpayers', who presume they are liable for a tax.

W-4's are voluntary consent forms (contracts) you file agreeing to the withholding of public salary tax.

Withholding agents are only REQUIRED to withhold from foreign persons or corporations.

Withholding only applies to government employers and their employees, and to corporate officers, who are subject to an income tax.

Only (government) employees and corporate officers receive 'wages'.

You are engaged in a 'trade or business' only when contracting with the government.

You are 'self-employed' only when you contract your services to the government as an independent contractor.

The W-4 withholding form is for 'employees', as legally defined, working for 'employers', as legally defined, when such employees are receiving 'wages' as legally defined, upon which a tax has been imposed.

The W-4 withholding exemption is a benefit granted by Congress to 'taxpayers'. You are not required to accept a benefit.

There are two conditions to meet to be exempt from withholding. That you had no tax liability last year, and that you expect no liability this year.

Also, if your employer is NOT a government employer, and you ARE a U.S. citizen, then you did NOT receive wages subject to withholding.

Remember, if you don't owe any tax, or did not receive 'wages', or are not a foreign person, then you are not subject to withholding of tax! But you can volunteer!

http://www.usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap11....

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Actually, none of us are

Actually, none of us are supposed to be liable for taxes on our earnings, only from investment income (or 'gain'). The salary or wage we receive from employment is an equal exchange of value; there is no gain.

Perhaps the foremost authority on the original intent of the income tax and the 16th amendment is Phil Hart, a structural engineer and former member of the Idaho state legislature, who actually went to the Library of Congress in Washington and read the documents pertaining to the debate at the time. He spent months researching the subject using original documents and Supreme court decisions. He wrote a book called "Constitutional Income - - do you have any?" and later produced a DVD version.

Of course as you might imagine, this did not endear him to the IRS; he sued them for trying to collect this unconstitutional tax, and withheld payment of taxes for several years in the late 1990's. His case made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, but they declined to hear it. At that point having little choice he paid his back taxes and penalties and resumed filing annual income tax returns.

Now, of COURSE the IRS is going audit him in subsequent years, right? Anyone could see that coming. And they did. In addition to his "income" from his business, he reported income from the sale of his book, "Constitutional Income". You'd think the IRS would be satisfied, right? Oh no. In their audit they demanded from Mr. Hart the names and addresses of every person who purchased a copy! He refused their request, with the result being the IRS disallowed ALL of his business expense dedcutions (as in EVERY SINGLE DEDUCTION) for an 8 year period! All in retribution for not giving them the names of those who bought his book.

He lost re-election to the legislature over the bad publicity (he's a hero to liberty lovers here in Idaho, but not so much to the sheeple who just take what the newspaper says as gospel) and now the IRS is trying to take his home over $500,000+ they claim he still "owes".

I guess the point is, even if you're right, and do your research, it doesn't matter. The IRS is an out of control rogue agency and needs to be eliminated.

If you want to read more about Phil Hart or buy his book or DVD here is the link:
http://www.constitutionalincome.com/

Best of luck to you.

I am not opposed to civil disobedience.

Just know the consequences.

To advise someone of this strategy without informing them of the potential consequences, would be acting in the same manner as those you oppose.

Leading a sheep to the slaughter house.

They never escape, even though there is a chance of escape.

God Bless.

Unfortunately they run roughshod

over those people who raise legitimate arguments, in spite of the black letter law. I'm sure you have read these books: cracking the code by Pete Hendrickson and Income tax shattering the myths by dave champion

The argument you put forward was similar to CTC.
The competing argument is found in Income tax shattering the myths.

Both are excellent reads in and of themselves, even if no action is ever taken on behalf of the reader, both teach a great deal about american civics.

State ordained corporations

do not have to employ people who are not operating with flags attached to their names or persons thereby subjecting them to U.S. codes or statues which limit employer liability.

That was a long winded post.

It is the same old argument, over and over again with these IRS posts and who's liable for the tax.

Let me sum it up quickly and painlessly:

There are two sets of rules on this land mass called America:

1. The Constitution for the united States (for non-gov't employees)

2. US Codes Title 1 - Title 51 (for gov't employees while on the clock) When they are not on the clock, those statute do not apply to them, period!

If you are not on the gov't clock and receiving pay to abide by THEIR internal statutes, which include Title 26, then those statutes do not apply to you.

Because you possess a Certificate of Live Birth, a Drivers License, and a Social Security No. it lets the foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES run wild with the presumption that you are one of their own employees.

Your Ace in the Hole is this:

Just because you possess those foreign ID badges, does not mean at the time of the complaint, or at the time you made the money they say you owe in taxes, that you were acting in the capacity as an agent of gov't, or acting through that 'title' as an agent, officer, employee, or elected official of their corporation.

The only way they could prove otherwise, would be to cough up an employment contract with your signature (and no, Social Security, Drivers Licenses, and Certificate of Live Birth, are not contractual in nature) and payroll records that would prove at the time of the complaint, that you were receiving pay to abide by those statutes.

If an IRS Ass-Clown contacts you and says you need to file some tax papers, you inform them that you are not an employee; they have no jurisdiction, and you charge a fee to file tax papers for THEIR benefit. I've helped people send these jokers fee schedules in the past that issue charges of $5,000.00 per/hour, and they always go away. If they don't like your price they can F**k Off! You are not an unpaid tax collector, and filing tax papers is operating in the capacity of an agent of gov't.

They can NEVER prove that when you made the money they say you owe taxes on, that you made it while on the gov't clock, or made it while acting in the capacity of an agent of gov't, and that means you are not subject to Title 26 of THEIR code.

Send them an Affidavit and default their ass; you'll win long before you ever get to court.

"I've yet to see any evidence that would prove at the time I made the money you say I owe, that I was operating in the capacity as an agent of your corporation. Do you have any such evidence that would prove I am contractually obligated to file tax papers, and that I am also obligated to do it for free?"

Don't get so wrapped up in all this statutory code crap; it does not apply to you. If you REALLY understand and believe this, you will have no problem conveying and nice big F**k Off letter to them if they do contact you.

Edit: The only other way they can prove you are liable for the tax, is if you voluntarily file that 1040 and swear under penalty of perjury that you owe them that money.

Just stop filing; it's easy.

Send them a fee schedule and inform those clowns, that

Forced Compliance is Acceptance of your Terms and Conditions; and all they have to do to agree with your terms, is to contact you one more fu**ing time in any way shape or form.

Your terms could simply be a fee of $50,000.00/hour; it is your time, you can charge whatever the hell you want. If they don't like your prices, they can F**K OFF!

For starters, you are all over the place on this.

Get it straight.

Second, I will not read the rest until you correct a glaring error that I see so far has you off a wrong tangent.

Section 3402 is in Subtitle C - Employment Taxes.

But you are speaking as if it is operating on Subtitle A - Income Taxes.

Yes, 3402 DOES require the witholding of "an" income tax on employees.

But this is NOT the same income tax as imposed on all individuals with taxable income in section 1 located in Subtitle A.

You can't mix sections from subtitles.

You are generally on the right track, but took the "wrong turn at Albuquerque."

Get back on the right path, or else you are dooming yourself and those who follow you to legal and financial trouble.

It seems your material IS good for Subtitle C taxes, but you seem to have been sidetracked from Subtitle A taxes.

You'll need to cover BOTH if you want your OP title to stand up to scrutiny.

I did not write this

I posted the link to where it originated from. I took it as pulling it all together when it references other subtitles. Specifically when it references Withholding Agent.

You have some additional resources to research from?

samadamscw makes a good point.

The best resource material is the IRC (Internal Revenue Code) itself, along with the statutes and amendments in their historical context related to income taxes and social security.

There is nothing wrong with the IRC, except that it is written in such confusing fashion as to make the impression it applies to everyone, which it does not.

You did give very good advice, Hapexamendios,"read, read, read, and read some more."

That is key.

"Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge..." - Jesus Christ (Luke 11:52)

The key of knowledge is reading the black and white and determining what is actually true and is backed up by irrefutable facts and evidence. So read the laws.

It is actually reading the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, that is waking people up and restoring knowledge to the People; thus enabling a possible resurgence of freedom and potentially Liberty, if the reading of the Bible is also included. "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty." (2 Corinthians 3:17) No where else.

To learn the difference between freedom and liberty, go here:

http://www.35thavenuebaptist.org/radio-broadcasts.html

Freedom is the ability to do what you want to do.
Liberty is the ability to do what you ought to do.
"Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." 2 Corinthians 3:17

You might find lots of sovereignty references

in the posts by vinceableworld and The South

https://www.google.com/#psj=1&q=site:dailypaul.com+vinceable...

Help build the world's best encyclopedia of Liberty - the RonPaulWikiProject
-
“The final test of a leader is that he leaves behind him in other men the conviction and will to carry on.”
-- Walter Lippmann

All That...

...is worth less than a cup of coffee in keeping you out of prison. The "system" is beyond broken and such information is useless. One would do better focusing on jury selection techniques and strategies as the final hope for justice.

This usually fails when it is applied inconsistently

They'll bring in an example of your signing a voluntary agreement to make yourself liable where you signed without explicitly reserving your rights.

Very few people study this material enough to apply it consistently, i.e. Wesley Snipes.

Your signature is one of the most powerful things you have, and you can use it to free or to enslave yourself.

"To keep it, every man must know the law."

Help build the world's best encyclopedia of Liberty - the RonPaulWikiProject
-
“The final test of a leader is that he leaves behind him in other men the conviction and will to carry on.”
-- Walter Lippmann

Not True

You are following the law as THEY laid out. You volunteer your earnings when you sign a W-4. My current employer has tried to get me to sign a W-4 a couple of times now. Even getting legal involved. When I pointed out that I do not meet the legal requirements of an employee, and that they do not meet the legal requirements of a withholding agent, or even an employer that was laid out in IRC 7701a(16) did they refrain from forcing me to sign it.

The corporate attorney even acknowledged that the w-4 is voluntary as there is no law requiring one to be signed. It is up to you to follow the law and show the employer that they get no benefit from having "employees" and are taxed heavily for engaging in such acts.

Now if you work for a government or an agency of the government then you are absolutely required to sign a W-4 because of the Public Salary Tax Act.

The Point is That "They"

...don't even seem to follow their own laws. Nothing wrong with testing the law and other forms of activism though. If one's view is that the entire notion of an income tax is immoral and unconstitutional, then simply playing ball in their court is a form of legitimizing them and their laws. You won a battle and that's great, but others who attempt to do the same might instead find that they've stepped on a landmine.

I Agree

I implore strongly on anyone who wishes to follow this route to read, read, read, and read some more. As you really have to get your ducks in a row so to speak. You will most likely be grilled by your employer's attorney as to what you are doing. I said I am simply following the law as I have read it through the IRS Code.

The legal definitions are right there in black and white. Some may not want to rock the boat. But I can't with good conscience continue to have my labor fund the killing of innocence in foreign lands that have not done me or my family harm.

Of course I don't know your situation but ...

in most cases ...

you are putting your employer at substantial risk and as a consequence, your job is now at risk.

I hope you understand that.

God Bless.