Talk:Tax protester conspiracy arguments

message: 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)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: 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)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment]] 

message: 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)
thread_title: [[Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment]] reminder

message: 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)
thread_title: Section on civil liability

message: 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)
thread_title:  Some challenged points 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Theory behind 'Minority 'Exemption' arguments