(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.
@PatCanadian, I agree, CBT should be against international law. But I also believe we should have an international tax authority, that taxes both income and wealth, so that the entire world can share the prosperity enjoyed by the few.
@Petros – “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.”
I wondered briefly if he might be a troll. But I’ve concluded he is well-intentioned but naïve.
@Petros, you are incorrect in your assessment of my profession. (Don’t give up your day job to become a psychic!) I am a business man. I own multiple businesses in multiple countries. I file many dozens of tax returns every year, the vast majority of them to U.S. tax authorities.
Oh the joys of the internet where one can be whatever they want to be.
Oh the joys of the Internet, where one can alienate their supporters.
@Jay, So you are my supporter? How can that be? I have no idea who you are.
I am sure this will start a sh*t storm on here , but sorry, I agree with Jay. There is a very good reason your mother told you never to lie when you were growing up. It always comes back to bite you in the a**! Everyone here will have to decide what is the best route for them, but just because a person decides on compliance doesn’t mean they are wrong, nor should they be treated like pariahs by other Brockers.
@Ann#1 – I don’t think anyone’s criticizing Jay for complying, only for being self-righteous about it and condemning other people’s choices as unethical.
@Ann#1, the one thing that has clearly bit people in the ass is telling the IRS the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth. If truth is rewarded as such, then we can clearly argue for the moral superiority of lying.
@jay
You obviously identify with being an American.
Many here do not and do not accept the citizenship the US, a foreign gov has hoisted upon them.
If you have lurked, then you know their stories.
Go pay your taxes to your homeland, we pay ours to ours.
Peter. I generally agree with your principles since mine are similar.
Your penchant for picking fights with anyone who might disagree with you is distasteful and counter productive.
Telling the truth to the IRS in the Offshore amnesty programs where one was forced to relinquish one’s Fifth Amendment rights, was the biggest disaster for the people who were talked into doing it.
There is no fuller disclosure than OVDP. And what happened? Years of pain and suffering at the hands of the IRS and the compliance industry, and huge, disproportionate, extortionate fines. If government were honest, then one could be honest with government. But since government is criminal, then one has to use a number of Petros Principles to protect oneself.
@ Jay…I am sorry but it does infringe on my rights, the rights of my NON US husband, children and employer. The IRS has NO right to their personal info such as SIN numbers or to my employer’s SIN number, highest balances, account numbers, etc. just because I am his bookkeeper. My employment could have possibly been terminated. Most certainly if I had not renounced, I would have had to disclose it (my US connection) at every interview if I had ever gone looking for another job. Do you think anyone would hire me?
My friend is so confused. She has no idea now whether she is virtuous or bad. Or maybe it’s not a white or black issue.
@All, legitimately posting & a friend of IsaacBrock…keep doing so.
The exposed ready to show-all….fine for you, yet unconstitutional,
🙂
Even though I much prefer to be honest, I have to agree with Petros Principle on lying in this case. There is one addition we should consider in dealing with the IRS. ALWAYS LIE CAREFULLY! Be certain they aren’t getting any contradictory information from your financial institution, your tax authority, etc.
@Duke, “Your penchant for picking fights with anyone who might disagree with you is distasteful and counter productive.”
I do not pick fights with everyone who disagrees with me. If a person can show that they are correct then I will concede their point.
But while I am arguing with Jay using rational and ethical arguments, he is coming back with dogmatic statements. One must do this because it is the law or one mustn’t do that because it is unethical, blah blah blah. But he fails to deal with the substance of any of my positions.
@ Peter…I could not and would not lie. Sometimes, Peter, it’s about more than one person and the whole picture needs to be examined. For instance, your profession and how it affects your employer. I agree with Duke about picking fights. Peter, you do know who I am by the way. I was put off by speaking to you when you contacted me because of your postings on another site. This situation is NOT a one size fits. Therefore, there will be more solutions than just the one that you propose. That said, I am told you are a really nice person with lots of cats. I love cats!
And I would add, that I am used to paternalism on internet discussions. One party feels so morally and intellectually superior that they merely assert their position without even a hint of an actual argument.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/08/08/paternalism-and-how-it-works/
@Ann, I on the other hand felt it was necessary to follow Petros Principles because I wanted to protect my wife and employer.
As for picking fights, it is important those who want to attack Petros Principles come up with something besides dogma.
Petros Principles are not about saying that this or that solution is a one size fits all. It is very clearly a set of guidelines that people may use to determine how best to protect themselves.
@PatCanadian, ALWAYS LIE CAREFULLY!
It may be that just simply invoking the 5th Amendment is better than lying. I did that on some of my forms for the IRS.
But we must remember the first Petros Principles when filling out forms: “What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them cannot hurt you.” A number of omissions on 1040 filing are indeed possible. The only lie then would be signing the not wholly truthful tax return.
re lying to banks
I have done so and will continue to do so when ever a bank form or anybody else’s form asks for place of birth or anything else that discriminates against me for where I was born.
I have no problem in doing so as it is none of their damn business where I was born.
I will not subject myself to a foreign countries law while I am a resident citizen of Canada.
were I to live in America then yes I would comply with their laws but as I live in Canada what America wants is foreign to me here and I will not comply.
EVER!!!!!!
if in fact I were to ever receive a letter from the irs it would end up at the bottom of the bird cage.
Mettleman wrote: “if in fact I were to ever receive a letter from the irs it would end up at the bottom of the bird cage.”
Next up: On the ethical treatment of IRS letters.
@Petros Is it unethical to comply with unethical laws?
First of all, taxation is not for the purpose of collecting money to operate the government. It is a Marxist instrument to reduce the middle class to the lowest level the prolitariat in the U.S. is
Social engineering is a Marxist system where they want everyone to be totally equal and to do that the D.C. Pukes in both parties, act as if anyone who can live in a foreign country, must be doing it to evade taxes. I know that is not true of my grandson who has been made to live in Norway in order to keep his job.