Talk:Tax protester conspiracy arguments

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:Taxation B‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Alternative Views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

Tax protester conspiracy arguments → Tax protester conspiracy arguments in the United States This article deals almost exclusively about this phenomenon in the United States. Please discuss at Talk:Tax protester#Requested move. —  AjaxSmack  06:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment

A request for comment has been opened on the general topic of tax protester theories, and whether the articles that address them are NPOV. bd2412 T 18:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment reminder

Just a reminder that I have proposed to call for a conclusion to this discussion on tax protester rhetoric on February 6. If anyone has anything more to add to the discussion, speak now! bd2412 T 16:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Section on civil liability

I made some editorial changes to the new section on "civil liability." Actually, this section arguably would go better in another article, such as Tax protester arguments, as it does not really relate directly to the "conspiracy arguments" side of this topic. Also, while the section is basically accurate, it needs some sourcing. Famspear (talk) 14:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Some challenged points

An editor has challenged the continued inclusion of the following things asserted to be common tax protester claims:

• Some specific event in U.S. history, such as the Civil War, the Great Depression, or the passage of some national debt threshold, actually caused the United States to cease to exist under the Constitution; all actions in the name of the U.S. government since that event are part of a conspiracy by those in power to retain the appearance of constitutional authority.
• The United States never actually achieved independence from Great Britain, and secretly continues to operate under British rule.
• The government prosecutes only people who are not sufficiently well informed to make the above arguments, and secretly settles with those who are.
• The United States Supreme Court grants certiorari only to cases wherein the tax protester has a poorly-defended argument.

It is easy to find informal sources where such arguments are made (like this message board), but not so easy to find these deeply fringe arguments discussed in reliable sources. bd2412 T 14:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Theory behind 'Minority 'Exemption' arguments

Isn't the supposed reason minorities are/should be exempt from.some taxes is that they had no role in their enactment and hence represent "taxation without representation"? Obviously there were no African American or Native Members of Congress at the time of the adoption of the Sixteent Amendment so the argument is that since they had no representation at the time of its adoption then federal income taxes do not/should not apply to them. The problem about putting this into the article is determining just what is a reliable source for, or for what is, a conspiracy theory, and to be valid points in an article, reliable sources must be found and referenced. 2600:1004:B11D:F2D:0:4E:2B29:D401 (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)