(10) Lying to prevent a crime is a virtue.
Commentary: USA citizenship-based taxation is a crime when applied to people living outside the USA jurisdiction. It is theft at multiple levels: (1) It is territorial theft of another country’s tax base. (2) It is theft to tax a person without representation. (3) It is theft to tax a person for the benefit of others. Furthermore, many of the reporting requirements of FATCA and FBAR cause crimes to be committed. The government of Canada, e.g., has committed a crime by sending the bank account information of Canadian residents and ciitzens to the IRS–it is national origin discrimination which is forbidden in the charter of rights, and it is a violation of their right to privacy.
It may be necessary to lie to prevent the IRS and one’s own local government from committing crimes. One may have to lie to a bank about where one was born. One may have to omit details when filling out forms.
While lying to prevent a crime is a virtue, lying to cover up a crime is politics as usual.
Previous Discussion:
Rahab’s renunciation of citizenship–Was she a harlot, liar, traitor and tax cheat or a heroine of faith?
California genocide and the Indian Tax Revolt of 1851
Fair tax, unfair tax: or When is it paying my fair share?
Is it taxation without representation if you can vote? Damn right!
Previous Petros Principles:
(1) What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them can’t hurt you.
(2) Fear makes the IRS more dangerous than it really is.
(3) Haste is the devil.
(4) Those most hurt by the IRS’s persecution of expats have engaged the services of cross-border compliance condors.
(5) Those least hurt have done nothing.
(6) Home is where you live.
(7) An unjust law is no law.
(8) Don’t feed the beast.
(9) Do the minimum in trying to achieve the least bad outcome.
(10) Lying to prevent a crime is a virtue.
(11) Cynical derision of Homelanders is healthy.
About: Petros is the alias of the founding administrator of the Isaac Brock Society. Petros Principles are guidelines that have helped him and others deal with the United States’ world-wide tax invasion.
Aren’t you lying to an unethical institution when you lie to a bank? PPI, sub prime mortgages, libor, etc, etc.
This is not your minister, or your partner, or a court of law.
Isn’t it discriminatory for a bank to ask for place of birth?
@Jay, if you have lurked here for years, I find it curious that you finally have decided to make a comment when the question of lying comes up. What is so important about this issue that you finally feel the need to speak up?
— you say it is not in and of itself unethical, but unethical when one lies to the IRS–and namely, as a “American” living in another country.
@Jay – “@iota, each individual must decide for themselves what actions lie in their best interest, neither I nor you can decide that for them. ”
That’s what I said, innit. Look upthread a bit.
“There is wisdom in not providing governments with personal data, willy nilly, without regard to the possible consequences of providing said data. On the other hand, intentionally lying on forms can also come with consequences, some of them, perhaps, quite serious. There is unwisdom in lying about material facts on financial forms, unwisdom which may, or may not, be outweighed by other factors. That is a difficult decision that each individual must wrestle with.”
And yet here you are, telling others what they should do.
Personally, I wouldn’t let the IRS bully me into lying to my bank about who I am and who I come from. For me it’s a matter of self-respect, not ethics.
@petros, I never said lying is unethical. I merely said that the advise you gave (which I have quoted twice) is unethical (and legally bogus). I stand by that statement. To wit, lying on a financial form about material facts that do not endanger your life and limb simply to evade your legal tax responsibilities is unethical behaviour. That is not to say you may not feel justified in your behaviour because you feel that your legal tax responsibilities are not themselves immoral. But every first grader is taught that two wrongs do not make a right. Unethical behaviour is unethical, no matter how it is justified. Doing the ethical thing is not always the right thing to do — being ethical and being right are not the same thing.
Further, you do real disservice to the millions of actual slaves around the world. CBT may be an injustice, but it is not a form of slavery.
@Heidi, In Canada, if the bank insists on knowing your place of birth, it is committing National Origin discrimination against so that the USA can violate your privacy rights through extortion. Yes, the financial institution is unethical.
As for the wisest course of action, I suggest we take into account all the Petros Principles. Because the local government will not protect us, we must protect ourselves.
@Jay, You are unaware that time is money? So if the IRS with the help of compliance condor extorts your money from you, it has stolen your life.
Your arguments are not compelling. It makes you seem to agree with the sociopaths who have no feelings for the people that they wrong.
So if my friend with no earned income who is planning to renounce without a SSN ‘forgets’ about some registered accounts with PFICS, does this mean she is a liar?
@Petros, perhaps I have commented here before; perhaps I found this particular statement so outrageous, I felt compelled to comment; perhaps I am in a commenting mood and have been commenting on other blogs this week and was inclined to comment here today; perhaps; perhaps; perhaps. The point being, there’s no reason for you to be suspicious of the veracity of my statement that I have been lurking here for years.
@iota:
Me: “There is wisdom in not providing governments with personal data, willy nilly, without regard to the possible consequences of providing said data. On the other hand, intentionally lying on forms can also come with consequences, some of them, perhaps, quite serious. There is unwisdom in lying about material facts on financial forms, unwisdom which may, or may not, be outweighed by other factors. That is a difficult decision that each individual must wrestle with.”
You: “And yet here you are, telling others what they should do.”
Please reread my comment carefully. You will see I am not telling anyone what to do. I am simply pointing out that both providing too much data to governments and lying to governments are both unwise and one must choose their actions carefully.
@WhiteKat, I would suggest that she has in this act done something virtuous, even if it were only a form of self-preservation. But it is much more than that. It is a defiance of a foreign government’s importunity.
I still don’t understand why anyone would want to reward their bank for agreeing to rat on them by allowing them to profit from your money. Put your money elsewhere, like a non-reporting credit union.
@Jay, I am left to conclude (1) you have not lurked here for years; or (2) you have lurked here and read the horror stories and do not care. You talk about lying being “legally bogus”. But I put up a post that we must distinguish between what is legal and what is moral. Laws are man made. Morality is based upon nature-and is not created by law. So the argument that you must file good faith forms to the the IRS, that is a criminal organization, is extremely weak. It is based upon the idea that positive law could possibly be higher than natural law, which it is not.
See: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/01/14/privacy-says-who/
@BlackKat, if she quote forgets unquote, then that is fraud, isn’t it? If she genuinely forgets, that is not, though her genuine forgetfulness may not make her any the less legally responsible.
@Petros, I do not agree with CBT. If it were in my power to do so, I would enact legislation that abolishes CBT in favour of RBT. And if what I have read is believed, the IRS seems to be using form crimes to onerously penalize citizens beyond proportion.
But Petros, you are putting words and arguments in my mouth that I never made. I understand you are upset that I have been critical of one of your statements, but there’s no need to let your emotions run away with you. In many ways, we are in agreement with one another. I visit this forum regularly because I commend your protests against an unjust tax regime and because I want to be kept informed of developments in this area of tax law.
@Jay -“Please reread my comment carefully. You will see I am not telling anyone what to do. I am simply pointing out that both providing too much data to governments and lying to governments are both unwise and one must choose their actions carefully.”
You’re backtracking. When you frame your opinions as ethics-based judgments, you’re telling people what to do. But I can believe that you don’t realize that.
Next course of study: Rhetoric 101. 🙂
Personally, I prefer honesty. There are exceptions, however. For example, the IRS will take your life savings to pay off USA debt. If one does not even live in USA, this is criminal on the part of the US/IRS. Lying under this type of circumstance can be life saving.
@iota, pointing out that a behaviour is unethical is not telling someone what to do. I have often behaved in unethical ways, aware at the time that my behaviour was unethical, but feeling fully justified that my behaviour was right and correct, despite it being unethical.
Choosing one’s correct, right, best course of action can often be difficult. Ethics is but one of the tools we bring to bare to determine our best course of action.
@Bubblebustin – ‘I still don’t understand why anyone would want to reward their bank for agreeing to rat on them by allowing them to profit from your money. Put your money elsewhere, like a non-reporting credit union.”
I don’t want to close my bank accounts just because the IRS doesn’t approve of them. And I don’t want the banking system in my country to be driven to its knees by IRS withholding, almost certainly precipitating another extremely destructive financial crisis when we’re still struggling to recover from the last one.
@Jay, you believe that USA extraterritorial taxation is a moral and legal obligation upon all those whom the USA deems its citizens. Thus, there is a fundamental disagreement between you and Petros Principles. I believe that the US extraterritorial taxation is a human rights violation.
@Jay – “@iota, pointing out that a behaviour is unethical is not telling someone what to do.”
I thought that’s probably what you thought. You’re mistaken. Pointing out that (in your opinion) something is unethical is inevitably going to be heard by those listening as judgmental and condemnatory. Add Social communication 101 to the syllabus. 🙂
” I have often behaved in unethical ways, aware at the time that my behaviour was unethical, but feeling fully justified that my behaviour was right and correct, despite it being unethical.”
Wow, sounds like you need to stop living inside your own head so much. the IRS won’t give a fig whether you’re being ethical or unethical. All they want to know is are you rich and can they stick you for a penalty.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/10/23/astroturfing-is-real-sharyl-attkisson/
I believe USA extraterritorial taxation is a Homan Rights Violation and should be against International Law.
Why not be honest if asked and tell the IRS to come and get you?
What do you have to lose? In Canada at least, the IRS can’t collect if you were a Canadian citizen at the time you incurred the tax. Worried about being arrested at the border? Don’t travel there.
@Petros, my beliefs have nothing to do with it. U.S. citizens have a legal obligation to file tax returns, per U.S. law. I do not consider filing, or not filing, taxes ipso facto a moral issue. But intentionally lying on financial forms and signing them simply to evade tax liability is unethical, no matter how your gussy it up with justifications.
For the record, I am opposed to CBT, but I do not think it is a violation of fundamental human rights. It may be a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights, and I am watching, with great interest, to see how the Supreme Court of Canada rules on your case.
People who have relatives in the USA may not wish to be “totally honest” as it may be necessary for them to cross the that unfortunate border. In those cases, better to file and renounce. Then travel to US as little as possible.
@Bubblebustin – “Why not be honest if asked and tell the IRS to come and get you?
What do you have to lose? In Canada at least, the IRS can’t collect if you were a Canadian citizen at the time you incurred the tax. Worried about being arrested at the border? Don’t travel there.”
What’s dishonest about refusing to lie about who I am and where I come from?
As it happens, because I’ve had my bank accounts for so long, none of them have my place of birth and none have ever asked me. So I’ve had it comparatively easy, for which I am suitably thankful.
I have concluded that Jay must be a compliance condor. His arguments and sophistry and inability to deal with rational argumentation is en par with what would learn in the office of a compliance condor, at any rate.