Are You An Employee?

What would you do if someone told you for the purposes of taxation, you were not an employee when you went to work as a private-sector worker? Would you believe them?

26 USC § 3401(c) defines an “employee” as follows:

Employee For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.

Admittedly, at first glance you read the word “employee” and go, oh yeah, I’m an employee. But let’s break out some old school grammar and get down to what this says.

The first part of the sentence are the people eligible – “officer, employee, or elected official.” The second part of the sentence are the location limiters – “United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing”

So what we have is…
Officer, employee, or elected official of… the United States
Officer, employee, or elected official of… a State
Officer, employee, or elected official of… any political subdivision thereof
Officer, employee, or elected official of… District of Columbia
Officer, employee, or elected official of… any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing

Are you any of those?

You may be going, “well, it says that the definition ‘includes’!” Of course. In laymen’s thought, why would congress name “Employees of… whatever” if the term “employee” includes all these employees already. If you are an employee of the United States (think, FBI agent or something), then aren’t you already an “employee” by common definition. Of course you are. So why define it again?

The answer is simple, because when words are defined in law, they ignore all common definitions. For instance if Congress decided to say “for the purpose of this chapter, ‘gas’ is to be defined as natural gas” then whenever you read the word “gas” then you would know that the law was not referring to gas that you pump at BP or QuickTrip, but rather natural gas.

Likewise, for Title 26 (tax law) the word “includes” is specifically defined. So, we can conclude that the word “includes” no longer means “in addition to” but rather whatever they defined it to be. In this case, in horrible wording, they defined it to mean inclusive of things within the same scope. Confusing right?

Let’s try to make an example. “For the purposes of this chapter ‘gas’ includes natural gas and bio gas.” So for this, we would conclude that natural gas and bio gas are “gasses” but we could also conclude that gas from landfills is included as well because landfill gasses are a type of bio gas. We could also say that town gas is included because it is a sub-type of natural gas. However, we could not conclude that gas put in your car to be a “gas” under this law.

So, who cares if you are or are not an employee? Well, everyone should! Only these select “employees” are the ones that make “wages” (also a custom term) and wages are taxable. Title 26 does not specify how to handle your money if you are not making “wages.” So if you are not an “employee” and you don’t make “wages” then you are probably paying more taxes then you should, permitting that you read and know the law.

Check it out. You might be surprised.

 

H.R. 1919: Federal Withholding Tax Repeal Act of 2009

As our government spends more and more it seems wise to have more control over the money we have to give them.

There is a new bill out, HR1919, that will make it possible to stop the withholding of money from your paycheck (No more mandatory W-4).

I love this for multiple reasons. First, it will allow you to keep your money and spend it on things you want and need. If you want to, you can invest it and make some money with it. This is versus giving it to the government and earning nothing off of it. (In other words, $500 in your bank account earning interest for a year is better than paying $500 to the government and earning no interest).

Secondly, it will cause the government to be more responsible. It is easier for us to ignore the fiscal doings of government when the money never even hits our pocket. If it is in our pocket and we have to cut a check at the end of the year, we are more likely to wonder where that money is going. I also think that it will make people more aware of how wasteful the government is and how much we TRULY do give up to the government.

Third, and this may not make sense to some of you, it will cut the presumption that we are voluntarily indulging in taxable activities. What is and what is not a taxable activity.

111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1919
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the withholding of income and social security taxes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 2, 2009
Ms. FOXX (for herself, Mr. PAUL, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, Mr. BARTLETT, Mrs. MYRICK, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. PENCE, Mr. KINGSTON, and Mr. WILSON of South Carolina) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means——————————————————————————–
A BILL
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the withholding of income and social security taxes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Federal Withholding Tax Repeal Act of 2009’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) At the onset of the Civil War, Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1861, which imposed a tax on personal incomes and to assure timely collection, taxes were ‘withheld at the source’ by employers.
(2) The need for Federal revenue declined sharply after the war and in 1872, the income tax was abolished and along with it, the Federal withholding mandate.
(3) With passage of the 16th amendment to the Constitution, Congress swiftly passed legislation creating a Federal income tax, withheld before employee salaries were paid.
(4) In response to growing taxpayer criticism of the withholding mandate, Treasury Secretary William G. McAdoo stated that ‘it would be very advantageous to . . . do away with the withholding of income tax at the source’ because it would ‘eliminate a great deal of criticism which has been directed against the law’; a statement reflecting the sentiment which ultimately led to the repeal of Federal withholding authority in 1917.
(5) In the 1920s and 1930s, income taxes were due on March 15 following the end of the tax year and could be paid either in one lump sum on that date or in quarterly installments.
(6) With the onset of World War II, fearing that taxpayers might refuse to pay the higher tax rates and surcharges associated with funding the war effort, Federal officials, lawmakers, and political leaders such as President Franklin D. Roosevelt used the military crisis to draw on Americans’ sense of patriotism and resurrect the Federal withholding authority as a ‘temporary wartime measure’.
(7) The campaign to reinstitute a permanent system of withholding overcame public hostility with the passage of the Withholding Tax Act of 1943 which incorporated suggestions proffered by Beardsley Ruml to eliminate individuals’ 1942 tax liabilities by counting amounts paid or withheld in 1943 as tax payments for that year.
(8) Since that time, Congress has stubbornly refused to repeal the Federal withholdings mandate contained in the Withholding Tax Act.
(9) In fiscal year 2007, the Internal Revenue Service refunded overpayments amounting to over $248,625,001,000 more than actual individual income tax liabilities, effectively denying interest payments otherwise owed to taxpayers and amounting to a hidden tax.
(10) These overpayments are returned annually in the form of tax refunds to taxpayers who often confuse the payments as a reward.
(11) According to an April 2007 report released by the Joint Economic Committee, millions of families, many in the bottom fifth income percentile, have either zero tax liability or receive a net transfer from the Government due to the refundable portion of the Earned Income Tax Credit or the Child Tax Credit. Those without Federal tax liability would benefit the most from keeping their entire paycheck, rather than temporarily surrendering portions to the Government.
(12) The absence of the Federal withholdings mandate leaves employers and employees free to negotiate alternative, private means of collecting and paying Federal income taxes, thereby allowing individuals to voluntarily earn interest on their withhholdings.
(13) The Federal withholdings mandate allows the Federal Government to disguise tax increases and hampers Federal accountability and transparency by requiring the assistance of an intermediary tax collector.
(14) Complying with the Federal withholdings mandate imposes costly burdens and legal liabilities on employers forced to act as de facto IRS agents, without compensation for lost time and resources.
(15) Referring to the Federal withholding mandate in his work Public Finance in Democratic Process: Fiscal Institutions and Individual Choice, 1986 Nobel Prize winning economist James Buchanan stated that ‘The individual who does not have possession of income before paying it out cannot’ sense ‘the real cost of public services in a manner comparable to that experienced in a genuine act of outpayment.’.
(16) In CATO Institute study, Charlotte Twight has noted that ‘[W]ithholding is the paramount administrative mechanism enabling the Federal Government to collect, without significant protest, sufficient private resources to fund a vastly expanded welfare state.’
(17) The Federal tax withholding mandate was listed by Human Events in 2005 as the fourth ‘Most Harmful Government Program’ and seventh ‘Worst Tax Law’ in 2006.
(18) The National Taxpayers Union notes that the incremental nature of withholding masks the true cost of Federal income taxes, which would be much more apparent if individuals had to write monthly, quarterly, or annual checks to the Federal Government.
SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

The purposes of this Act are–

(1) to increase transparency and accountability in the Federal tax system by providing the public with a more accurate account of–

(A) the annual tax burden; and
(B) the Federal budget deficit;
(2) to decrease the overall tax burden and increase the personal wealth of taxpayers by allowing for the personal collection of interest during the fiscal year on overpayments that are otherwise used by the Federal Government to partly avoid interest payments;
(3) to decrease the burden on employers by freeing them from the task of collecting income tax withholdings from their employees; and
(4) to end the deceptive practice of masking higher tax rates from taxpayers.
SEC. 4. REPEAL OF FEDERAL INCOME AND SOCIAL SECURITY TAX WITHHOLDING MANDATE.

(a) In General- The following sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are hereby repealed:

(1) Section 3102 (relating to deduction of social security tax from wages).
(2) Section 3202 (relating to deduction of railroad retirement tax from compensation).
(3) Chapter 24 (relating to income tax withholding).
(b) Requirement of Estimated Tax Payments for Employee Social Security Taxes- Subsection (f) of section 6654 of such Code is amended by striking ‘minus’ at the end of paragraph (2) and inserting ‘plus’, by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4), and by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:

‘(3) the taxes imposed by section 3101(a) and 3201(a), minus’.
(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to amounts paid on or after the first January 1 occurring after 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. CONTINUED VOLUNTARY TAX WITHHOLDING.

(a) Authority of the IRS- Nothing in this Act may be construed to limit the authority of the Internal Revenue Service to accept voluntary tax payments from employers electing to continue collecting Federal income taxes from employees.
(b) Voluntary Employer Participation- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent voluntary employer sponsored withholding of Federal income taxes on behalf of employees.
(c) Voluntary Employee Participation- Nothing in this Act shall be construed–

(1) to require any employee to participate in an employer Federal income tax withholding system, or
(2) to prevent any election of an employee to opt in to an employer Federal income tax withholding system, with all terms and conditions for participation being negotiable between the employee and employer.

If you support such an idea, I urge you to write your Representative.

How the Criminal IRS works

If someone accuses you of something, the burden of proof is on them, right?

For instance, if someone accuses me of murdering someone via a gun they need to prove this fact beyond a doubt. They need to provide video surveillance of me doing the deed, the weapon I used and my fingerprints on it, ballistics, witnesses, and so on. What they cannot do, at least not in America, is to say that I committed 1st degree murder and then throw me in the slammer (that is what happens commonplace in Communist countries, of which, unfortunately, we are quickly becoming). They also cannot show generic data and say that it proves me guilty – such as saying that I own a gun and therefore I shoot people or that I was in the same city at the time of the murder therefore I did it.

If that is indeed the case, then why is the IRS allowed to provide evidence against you which doesn’t even include my name, my SSN, or any of my specific account data? If you have no idea what I am talking about, check these two pictures out below.

I know the documents are small but please notate that I didn’t black out anything on these forms. This is a RACS006 (aka, Summary Record of Assessments or RACS Report 006) that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) gave to me to “prove” that I filed my 2007 tax year return in a frivolous (incorrect and unlawful) manner.

So how is it that my guilt is being proven by a form which does not even mention me in any way? What this form IS, is a computer printout of thousands of returns that were processed that day. If you look at the first page on the first full line and you should be able to see that 337,122 items were processed for withholding for a total of $22,002,348,789.51 in tax.

So again, obviously since this is dealing with billions of dollars, where is MY information? Where are MY specifics on what I did wrong? Where is MY guilt? Of course, I’ve asked for my specifics and they state that they are right there in the RACS006. So if anyone can find my data and my guilt and my liability in the above documents, I will send you money via Paypal for your concerted efforts (no joke).

Let’s face it folks. When your government takes your money and then accuses you of being a fraud and won’t tell you how they came to that determination, you are living in a power-hungry Communist State. A place where freedom is shunned and the State has the right and the privledge to call its citizens (aka, slaves) to whatever it wants and do whatever it wants for the “betterment of the State.” Only in a freedom loving State is the government responsible for doing what not only is lawful, but what can be understood by it’s people. Only in a freedom loving State are the citizens innocent until proven guilty – even if the big bag government or the scary IRS says something negative against them.

I don’t like the income tax. Every time we talk about these taxes we get around to the idea of ‘from each according to his capacity and to each according to his needs’. That’s socialism. It’s written into the Communist Manifesto. Maybe we ought to see that every person who gets a tax return receives a copy of the Communist Manifesto with it so he can see what’s happening to him. – T. Coleman Andrews, Comissioner of the IRS from 1953 to 1955 who resigned after coming into opposition to the income taxes as we know it.

Of course, along with the RACS006 report, I asked for the evidence that was used to support their claim. I was sent a form (which I am not going to post due to too much sensitive data) that now shows my name and that they are assessing a penalty against me. It says nothing of how much I actually owed or how I should have filled out my 1040. All it says is that I have been penalized. The equivalent of this for the murder example scenario above would be the official document that has been pencil whipped saying that you have been determined as the murderer, but has no evidence to incriminate you.

So again, where is it that you get my liability, Uncle Sam? And for you people out there, when are you going to wake up and learn the truth about the IRS and start reclaiming your property like these people here ($10M returned to it’s owners who decided to find out what the tax laws said)?

A Discussion Regarding Taxation on Private Sector Earnings

Taken from a college student’s paper regarding taxation. Author wishes to remain anonymous. I know that the subject of taxes is confusing and somewhat boring but I urge you to read through this and think about it. All sources are listed at the bottom if you want to see the sources used. Enjoy and thank you to the author of this paper.

—

Even though those whom disagree often site the sixteenth amendment as the law allowing the Congress to tax private sector labor as income, the taxation imposed on the pay of private sector workers is improper because Article 1 Section IX of the United States Constitution prohibits Direct taxation without apportionment, and numerous Supreme Court decisions espouse that trading labor for money is a natural right.

Taxes are a necessary evil. In order for Governments to function, they require a revenue stream – the debts of the government need to be paid, the members of the armed forces need to be paid, and the normal day to day operations of the Government need to be paid. The Constitution of the United States gives Congress the power to generate a revenue stream through the laying and collecting of taxes; this power is given in Article 1 Sec 8 Cl. 2, which states:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;” 

Then, in Article 1 Sec 9 Cl 4; “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” And in Clause 5 “No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.” The Founding Fathers, understanding the need of the Federal Government to have a positive inflow of

How Do you Become Liable for Income Taxes?

How do you become liable for Income Taxes…. and what can you do about it?

Ever wonder how you end up paying so much in taxes and get so little back? Well, what would you do if someone told you that you may not owe taxes and provided you with the law to prove it. To find out more, click the graphic above.

Tea Party Spin:The Story Inside The Story

Yesterday, thousands across America celebrated “tax day” by attending tea party protests. The protests were held in opposition to activities-such as the shredding of the Constitution, socialism, out of control spending, fiscal child abuse and etc-being perpetrated by Obama-Lama-Ding-Dong and friends.

I have never seen anything like these massive protests in my life. Forever the romantic, I truly believed myself to be witnessing the media event of the century. WRONG!!! The media-with the exception of Fox News which broadcasted live from various protests-appeared to have only one objective in mind: damage control. Hence they provided minimal coverage. Let’s take a look.

Reporters at the LA Times want you to think that the gatherings were nothing more than hand full of Republicans delivering the same old “they are going to raise your taxes” message.

Reporting from Washington and Santa Ana — Republicans sought to ignite a popular revolt against President Obama on Wednesday by staging “tea party” protests across the nation to demand lower taxes and less government spending — but the tactic carried risk for the party.

“Nothing is as pressing a concern as the economy,” said Republican pollster Whit Ayres, adding that even among Republicans the political salience of taxes is not what it once was.

Uh…Those thousands of angry people hanging out in front of the Alamo in San Antonio, calling for a third party were just Republican spinsters? Riiiigght.

Across the pond at BBC, it is unimaginable that Obama can be anything but “worshiped” in America and they have obviously concluded that the “half dozen or so” people who have an issue with his socialistic agenda must be nuts and sexual deviants as well.

….And in truth, this is not the kind of political movement that really worries governments (least of all recently elected and still-popular governments like Barack Obama’s).

…They seemed undeterred by the fact that the phrase “tea-bagging” (which has a sexual connotation in some circles) is a bit of a gift to their critics on the left, who are inclined to snigger at them.

Was it not the Brits’ bums that America kicked after the original tea party?

I’m sure Arianna Huffington had to take a Valium before bedtime on Wednesday. But never fear my dearies, her flying monkeys were working hard into the night.

Before a crowd that organizers claimed was 15,000 to 20,000, but these experienced ex-advance man’s eyes saw as about 3,000, a parade of right-wing personalities used tax day to decry taxation, government, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and President Barack Obama with a rally outside California’s state Capitol in Sacramento…

Barack Obama, sworn in as president of the United States on January 20th, is Public Enemy Number One of the small but virulent American Tea Party movement….

The NYT: Tea party? What tea party? Blah..Blah…Blah…Guess what? Obama is the greatest and guess what he did today??!!!

With his conservative critics staging “taxpayer tea parties” to protest his fiscal policies, President Obama marked the April 15th tax-filing deadline on Wednesday by delivering a sales pitch for what he called “the most progressive tax cut in American history…..’’

OK. I’m getting bored now. For more examples, just “Google” news listings for “tea party.” You will see pretty much more of the same. It’s quite telling and almost funny how the various news agencies seem most interested in covering up the realities of the event. Is it because the story did not involve six women wearing pink boas or is someone afraid that not all is well in Obamaland? For the Obama PR teams, the latter just won’t do.

(Original here)

What Income Taxes Really Are

There IS an Income Tax . . .

HOWEVER

“Everything” you earn
IS NOT
“Taxable Income”

Did YOU earn your money by:

WORKING FOR…

DOING BUSINESS WITH…

INVESTING IN…

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ?

If not, then those earnings
ARE NOT “taxable income”

WWW.LOSTHORIZONS.COM

TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter B > PART I > § 63. Taxable income defined

(a) In general: Except as provided in subsection (b), for purposes of this subtitle, the term “taxable income” means gross income minus the deductions allowed by this chapter (other than the standard deduction).

That’s not very helpful, what exactly IS “income” since THAT is what you are taxing…

US Supreme Court, US v. Ballard, 535 f2d 400, 404 (1976) “The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code”

What does the Dictionary say “income” is?

in·come: The monetary payment received for goods or services, or from other sources, such as rents or investments.

OK, “income” is all that I earn from my work and investments…just what I thought…

US Supreme Court, Southern Pacific v. Lowe 247 U.S. 330 (1918): “We must reject the broad contention submitted in behalf of the government that all receipts, everything that comes in, are income…”

WHAT !?…….”income” is NOT “all” money that I receive !? What does the Constitution say about a DIRECT TAX upon my earnings?

US Constitution, Article 1 Section 9: “No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken”

In response to the above Constitutional reference, your accountant or the IRS will probably refer to the 16th Amendment, commonly known as the “Income tax”. To which the Supreme Court would reply…

US Supreme Court, Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. 240 U.S. 103 (1916): The provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…

Additionally… Howard M. Zaritsky, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division of the Library of Congress Report No. 80-19A,“Some Constitutional Questions Regarding The Federal Income Tax Laws”:

Page CRS-5 (1979): “The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Chief Justice White [the Brushaber ruling], first noted that the Sixteenth Amendment did not authorize any new type of tax, nor did it repeal or revoke the tax clauses of Article I of the Constitution, quoted above. Direct taxes were, notwithstanding the advent of the Sixteenth Amendment, still subject to the rule of apportionment and indirect taxes were still subject to the rule of uniformity.”F. Morse Hubbard, Treasury Department Legislative draftsman. March, 27 1943 Page 2580.

The income tax is, therefore, is not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and privileges which is measured by reference to the income they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax: it is the basis for determining the amount of the tax.

The “PRIVILEGE” you must participate in to earn “taxable income” is working for, doing business with, or investing in businesses majority-owned by the Federal Government or “Federal Instrumentalities”. If you make your money having nothing to do with the Federal Government, then your earnings are not “taxable income”.

WWW.LOSTHORIZONS.COM

(original)

The only thing the IRS has not Taxed

The only thing IRS has not yet taxed is the penis. This is due to the fact that 40% of the time it is hanging around unemployed, 30% of the time it is hard up, 20% of the time it is pissed off and 10% of the time it’s in the hole.It has two dependents, but they’re nuts.

Effective January 1, 2000, penises will be taxed according to size. The brackets are as follows:
10”-12” Luxury Tax
8”-10” Pole Tax
5”-8” Privilege Tax
4”-5” Nuisance Tax

Males exceeding 12” must file under capital gains. Anyone under 4” is eligible for a refund.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK FOR AN EXTENSION!

Issues still under consideration are as follows:
Are there penalties for early withdrawal?
Do multiple partners count as a corporation?
Are condoms deductible as work clothes?

(original)

Democrat Taxes

If you don’t understand the Democrats’ version of tax cuts (and you are not alone), this will explain it for you.

50,000 people go to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due. The team was about to mail refunds when the Congressional Democrats stopped them and decreed that they send out refund amounts based on the Democrat National Committee’s interpretation of fairness. After all, if the refunds were made based on the price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the wealthiest ticket holders. That would be unconscionable! The DNC plan says people in the $10 seats will get back $15, because they have less money to spend. Call it an “Earned” Income Ticket Credit. Persons “earn” it by demonstrating little ambition, few skills and poor work habits, thus keeping them at entry-level wages. People in the $15 seats will get back $15, because that’s only fair. People in the $25 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don’t need a refund. If they can afford a $25 ticket, then they must not be paying enough taxes. People in the $50 luxury seats will have to pay another $50, because they have way too much to spend. The people driving by the stadium who couldn’t afford to watch the game will get $10 each, even though they didn’t pay anything in, because they need the most help. Now do you understand? If not contact Representative Richard Gephart or Senator Tom Daschle for assistance.

(original)

Arizona, Quit Thinking About Raising Taxes You Morons!

Man, these politicians just don’t get it, do they? During a slowing economy it is not good to raise taxes – much less a recessive economy. This is what is being rumored here in Arizona.

Faced with a sliding economy and deepening state deficit, Gov. Jan Brewer’s office is quietly making plans for a spring special election at which voters would be asked to raise taxes and loosen spending mandates on certain state programs, The Arizona Republic has learned. (link)

Hello!?

I always like to boil things down to a lower level. The amount of money that governments deal with is not something we can really fully understand. But, In this situation the government spends money on programs X, Y, and Z. In our scaled-down version, let’s say you are paying for your car , food , and entertainment. You learn that you are going to have less income coming in, let’s say your spouse had their hours cut back. So, what do you do right away?

Well, I know when I was growing up the answer was to completely cut out the unneeded stuff such as movies, music, and new clothes. The stuff that couldn’t be cut back, such as food, was redone – coupons were snipped every day (and used), if clothes were messed up we either wore them anyways or they were patched and if needed a trip to Goodwill, car pooling to sport practices to save gas. This was the immediate response to the dillema, not the afterthought.

But even so, with government, let’s say that they raise taxes. Let’s just say that they raise the sales tax from 5.6% to 7.0%. This may not seem like a lot, but when you go to buy groceries or WHATEVER, then you are going to feel it.  I believe that the term for this is called nickel-and-diming you to death. Of course, likewise, this increase in taxes will NEVER be a temporary tax either. Even if things get better, you can be assured that whatever tax raise they did will remain.

Note to Arizona politicians: Quit talking about raising taxes! Go through your duty list and find out what things are garbage and trash them. If you still need money, then look through your box again and find out where you can cut spending by 5%-10%. I’m sure you can find the money between those two ideas somehow.