They knew this and still threw people in jail for not paying.

GIANT IRS BOMBSHELL! Leaked 1985 Letter from IRS Commissioner EXPOSES the 16th Amendment as a FRAUD – Income Tax Was NEVER Legal! $330 TRILLION STOLEN – WE MUST FIGHT BACK! Please read.

THE PATH TO JUSTICE: WHAT YOU MUST DO NOW!

President Trump has made it clear: The IRS must be dismantled. He’s the ONLY leader in modern history who has the courage to stand against this deep-state extortion racket. But he needs us to stand with him!

You guys realize its April 1st right?

This is fake and gay.

The trial was United States vs Jane R Ferguson.

Ferguson appealed her conviction and lost a 2nd time.

https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F2/793/793.F2d.828.85-1688.html

I pay taxes on my job and they come out every check. I do not own any side businesses nor do i pay out any 1099's. I have not filed taxes in over 7 years. They have never said anything and they won't.

I am questioning this document’s validity(?) The National Archives Catalog’s website has scanned letters of ratification from 48 states. That would be enough according to the two thirds rule.

I hate when people post this type of "Hopeum" here! What good does it do and all it does is injure credibility overall! This is fake! I do believe that taxation on income is Constitutionally illegal and for the reasons this letter says, however, I still believe the letter is fake.

I've been opted out of Federal income tax for about a month now. My take home pay is $400 more. Not filing anymore either. Feels good brah.

I want ALL my fucking money back.

Lump sum / untaxed

Ratified or not, it's still taxation without representation and therefore illegal under our Constitution... and likely why the IRS has never once been audited since it's inception. Same with the Federal Reserve

Some context: https://historyheist.com/glossary/amendment-16/

On June 17th, 1909, United States Senator Norris Brown of Nebraska proposed the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It was allegedly fraudulently ratified on February 25th, 1913. The federal government rests its authority to collect income tax on the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—the federal income tax amendment.

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

—The 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

After an extensive year-long nationwide research project, William J. Benson discovered that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the requisite three-fourths of the states and that nevertheless Secretary of State Philander Knox had fraudulently declared ratification.

It was a shocking revelation; it reached deep to the core of our American system of governance.

The Discovery

Article V of the U.S. Constitution defines the ratification process and requires three-fourths of the states to ratify any amendment proposed by Congress. There were forty-eight states in the American Union in 1913, meaning that affirmative action of thirty-six was necessary for ratification. In February 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that thirty-eight had ratified the Amendment.

In 1984 Bill Benson began a research project, never before performed, to investigate the process of ratification of the 16th Amendment. After traveling to the capitols of the New England states and reviewing the journals of the state legislative bodies, he saw that many states had not ratified. He continued his research at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.; it was here that Bill found his Golden Key.

This damning piece of evidence is a sixteen-page memorandum from the Solicitor of the Department of State, among whose duties is the provision of legal opinions for the Secretary of State. In this memorandum, the Solicitor lists the many errors he found in the ratification process.

These four states are among the thirty-eight from which Philander Knox claimed ratification:

California: The legislature never recorded any vote on any proposal to adopt the amendment proposed by Congress.

Kentucky: The Senate voted on the resolution, but rejected it by a vote of nine in favor and twenty-two opposed.

Minnesota: The State sent nothing to the Secretary of State in Washington.

Oklahoma: The Senate amended the language of the 16th Amendment to have a precisely opposite meaning.4

When his project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited the capitol of every state from 1913 and knew that not a single one had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution. Thirty-three states engaged in the unauthorized activity of altering the language of an amendment proposed by Congress, a power that the states do not possess.

Since thirty-six states were needed for ratification, the failure of thirteen to ratify was fatal to the Amendment. This occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization and punctuation, we would still have only two states which successfully ratified.

Bill Benson’s findings, published in “The Law That Never Was,” make a convincing case that the 16th amendment was not legally ratified and that Secretary of State Philander Knox was not merely in error, but committed fraud when he declared it ratified in February 1913. What follows is a summary of some of the major findings for many of the states, showing that their ratifications were not legal and should not have been counted.

The 16th amendment had been sent out in 1909 to the state governors for ratification by the state legislatures after having been passed by Congress. There were 48 states at that time, and three-fourths, or 36, of them were required to give their approval in order for it to be ratified. The process took almost the whole term of the Taft administration, from 1909 to 1913.

Knox had received responses from 42 states when he declared the 16th amendment ratified on February 25, 1913, just a few days before leaving office to make way for the administration of Woodrow Wilson. Knox acknowledged that four of those states (Utah, Conn, R.I. and N.H.) had rejected it, and he counted 38 states as having approved it. We will now examine some of the key evidence Bill Benson found regarding the approval of the amendment in many of those states.

In Kentucky, the legislature acted on the amendment without even having received it from the governor (the governor of each state was to transmit the proposed amendment to the state legislature). The version of the amendment that the Kentucky legislature made up and acted upon omitted the words “on income” from the text, so they weren’t even voting on an income tax! When they straightened that out (with the help of the governor), the Kentucky senate rejected the amendment. Yet Philander Knox counted Kentucky as approving it!

In Oklahoma, the legislature changed the wording of the amendment so that its meaning was virtually the opposite of what was intended by Congress, and this was the version they sent back to Knox. Yet Knox counted Oklahoma as approving it, despite a memo from his chief legal counsel, Reuben Clark, that states were not allowed to change it in any way.

Attorneys who have studied the subject have agreed that Kentucky and Oklahoma should not have been counted as approvals by Philander Knox, and, moreover, if any state could be shown to have violated its own state constitution or laws in its approval process, then that state’s approval would have to be thrown out. That gets us past the “presumptive conclusion” argument, which says that the actions of an executive official cannot be judged by a court, and admits that Knox could be wrong.

If we subtract Kentucky and Oklahoma from the 38 approvals above, the count of valid approvals falls to 36, the exact number needed for ratification. If any more states can be shown to have had invalid approvals, the 16th amendment must be regarded as null and void.

The state constitution of Tennessee prohibited the state legislature from acting on any proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution sent by Congress until after the next election of state legislators. The intent, of course, is to give the proposed amendment a chance to become an issue in the state legislative elections so that the people can have a voice in determining the outcome. It also provides a cooling off period to reduce the tendency to approve an idea just because it happens to be the moment’s trend. You’ve probably already guessed that the Tennessee legislature did not hold off on voting for the amendment until after the next election, and you’d be right – they didn’t; hence, they acted upon it illegally before they were authorized to do so. They also violated their own state constitution by failing to read the resolution on three different days as prescribed by Article II, Section 18. These state constitutional violations make their approval of the amendment null and void. Their approval is and was invalid, and it brings the number of approving states down to 35, one less than required for ratification.

Texas and Louisiana violated provisions in their state constitutions prohibiting the legislatures from empowering the federal government with any additional taxing authority. Now the number is down to 33.

Twelve other states, besides Tennessee, violated provisions in their constitutions requiring that a bill be read on three different days before voting on it. This is not a trivial requirement. It allows for a cooling off period; it enables members who may be absent one day to be present on another; it allows for a better familiarity with, and understanding of, the measure under consideration, since some members may not always read a bill or resolution before voting on it (believe it or not!). States violating this procedure were: Mississippi, Ohio, Arkansas, Minnesota, New Mexico, West Virginia, Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Colorado, and Illinois. Now the number is reduced to 21 states legally ratifying the amendment.

When Secretary Knox transmitted the proposed amendment to the states, official certified and sealed copies were sent. Likewise, when state results were returned to Knox, it was required that the documents, including the resolution that was actually approved, be properly certified, signed, and sealed by the appropriate official(s). This is no more than any ordinary citizen has to do in filing any legal document, so that it’s authenticity is assured; otherwise it is not acceptable and is meaningless. How much more important it is to authenticate a constitutional amendment! Yet a number of states did not do this, returning uncertified, unsigned, and/or unsealed copies, and did not rectify their negligence even after being reminded and warned by Knox. The most egregious offenders were Ohio, California, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Minnesota – which did not send any copy at all, so Knox could not have known what they even voted on! Since four of these states were already disqualified above, California is now subtracted from the list of valid approvals, reducing it to 20.

These last five states, along with Kentucky and Oklahoma, have particularly strong implications with regard to the fraud charge against Knox, in that he cannot be excused for not knowing they shouldn’t have been counted. Why was he in such a hurry? Why did he not demand that they send proper documentation? They never did.

Further review would make the list dwindle down much more, but with the number down to 20, sixteen fewer than required, this is a suitable place to rest, without getting into the matter of several states whose constitutions limited the taxing authority of their legislatures, which could not give to the federal govern authority they did not have.

The results from the six states Knox had not heard from at the time he made his proclamation do not affect the conclusion that the amendment was not legally ratified. Of those six: two (Virginia and Pennsylvania) he never did hear from, because they ignored the proposed amendment; Florida rejected it; two others (Vermont and Massachusetts) had rejected it much earlier by recorded votes, but, strangely, submitted to the Secretary within a few days of his ratification proclamation that they had passed it (without recorded votes); West Virginia had purportedly approved it at the end of January 1913, but its notification had not yet been received (remember that West Virginia had violated its own constitution, as noted above).

Wonder what would happen if millions of people suddenly applied for their refund, including a copy of this memo with their order.

The book "The Law That Never Was" documents how the 16th amendment was never properly ratified and truly is not law.

Doesn't matter. They. Don't. Care.

Quick search for Becraft and Duncan returns this:

"Larry Becraft, the attorney in the case referenced in the memo who is mistakenly identified in it as "Lowell Bercraft," also told the Daily Herald the document was a forgery, stating that he tried to argue that the 16th Amendment was not valid but lost the case. He also pointed out that the "memo" gave the wrong first name for the U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case, Roger Duncan."

https://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/

In 1984 William J. Benson of South Holland, Illinois, began an investigation of the process of ratification of the 16th Amendment, to determine if the amendment had lawfully been made a part of the constitution. To undertake such a task, never before performed, required the review of all documents stored in various state archives, state law libraries, legislative libraries and offices of the secretaries of states, clerks of the houses and secretaries to the senates, that related to the method by which the States in the American Union in 1913 allegedly approved the amendment as a part of the constitution. Undaunted by the enormity of such a research project, Bill spent virtually the entire year traveling to the state capitols to find dusty old records regarding the actions of the states taken to adopt the amendment. This was an arduous task that Bill had been well trained for during his years as an investigator with the Illinois Department of Revenue.

The Premise

The federal government rests its authority to collect income tax on the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—the federal income tax amendment—which was allegedly ratified in 1913. In 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that a similar federal income tax act adopted in 1894 was unconstitutional. This deprived the federal government of a potential source of tax revenue. In 1909, the 16th Amendment was proposed by Congress to circumvent that decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. By 1913, the process of ratification of the amendment was claimed to have been completed. Because of the existence of this amendment, the federal government lays claim to the power to collect this tax from all of us.

The Discovery

Starting in January 1984, Bill went first to the capitols of the New England states and performed his investigative research, using the journals of the various state legislative bodies to find out how these states acted upon the proposal by Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution to permit a federal income tax law. After review of these records, he began to see that serious problems existed as to whether these states had legally ratified the same amendment which had been proposed by Congress. When examination of the records of about 20 states showed that many had not ratified the amendment and that information regarding the action taken by these States had been sent to the U.S. Secretary of State, he determined that records in Washington, D.C. most probably existed to prove the point.

In August 1984, Bill traveled to Washington, D.C. to research the historical records in the National Archives. After several days of pursuing fruitless leads, he finally found a book that had contained within it all federal records which had been prepared during the process of amending the Constitution by the 16th Amendment. This proved to be an exceptional discovery because those documents revealed that a man named Philander Chase Knox, the Secretary of State in 1913, was fully aware that the amendment had not been ratified nonetheless. See Bill Benson's Golden Key. After making this important discovery, Bill decideded it was essential that he also study the records of all other states which the federal government claimed had ratified the amendment.

In September 1984, Bill started investigating the remainder of the states and completed the project on December 1984. When this year long project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill knew that not a single state had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the Constitution in the manner required by law. Such a conclusion obviously meant that the federal government lacked the power to legally impose and collect the federal income tax. See defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment.

To demonstrate the merits of this argument, an examination of the evidence uncovered by Bill is essential. The federal government claims that the State of Kentucky was the second state to ratify the amendment, such action taking place on February 8, 1910. But, the records of the State of Kentucky reveal a far different picture. These records show that the Kentucky House proposed a resolution to adopt the amendment and then sent that resolution to the Senate in early February 1910. On February 8, 1910, the Kentucky Senate voted upon that resolution, but rejected it by a vote of 9 in favor and 22 opposed. The Kentucky Senate never did ratify that amendment, but federal officials, being in possession of documents showing this rejection, fraudulently claimed otherwise.

A second interesting situation involves the State of Oklahoma. Here, this proposed amendment was passed by the Oklahoma House and the language of the resolution perfectly matched the one passed by Congress. However, the Oklahoma Senate obviously disliked what Congress had proposed, so it amended the language of the 16th Amendment in such a fashion as to have a precisely opposite meaning. After all was settled and done in Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Legislature wanted an amendment which meant something entirely different than that which was proposed by Congress.

What happened in California reveals a comedy of errors. That legislative assembly never recorded any vote upon any proposal to adopt the amendment proposed by Congress. However, assuming that a nonexistent vote was taken, whatever California did adopt bore no resemblance to what Congress had proposed. And many states engaged in the unauthorized activity of amending the language of the amendment proposed by congress, a power that these states did not possess.

The State of Minnesota sent nothing to the Secretary of State in Washington, but this did not deter Philander Knox as he claimed that Minnesota ratified the amendment regardless of the absence of any documentation from the State of Minnesota.

The Fraud

Article V of the U.S. Constitution controls the amending process, which requires that three-fourths of the States ratify any amendment proposed by Congress. In 1913, there were 48 States in the American Union, so to adopt any amendment required the affirmative act of 36 states. In February 1913, Knox issued a proclamation claiming that 38 states had ratified the amendment, including Kentucky, California and Oklahoma. But, as previously shown, Kentucky had rejected the amendment, California had not voted on it and Oklahoma wanted something entirely different. If just these 3 states are excluded from the court of those which ratified, then the amendment was not legally adopted, the number of ratifying States being only 35. But, then again, a total of 11 states failed to vote on the amendment, 33 changed the language of the amendment and Minnesota sent in nothing. If the process of the adoption of the amendment is subjected to strict legal scrutiny the amendment was adopted by none.

Today, the federal government pretends that it has all encompassing power to tax the income of everyone and that the only way to change this system is to vote for congressmen who promise to modify or, even more unlikely, to repeal these laws. The American public needs to be apprised that another alternative exists and that it is entirely possible to challenge the very foundation of this taxing power upon the grounds that the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was never adopted. This challenge can be effectively made by exercising your rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

I always knew they never ratified this.

Stickied for deeper Research Anons. We need more validity, per State. Let’s get digging!

This is absolutely true, I know a guy who went up against the IRS with this exact argument and to this day he has never paid income tax, he finds jobs that 1099 him and then he throws them away he is an over the road truck driver.

Hey Grok, was the us 16th amendment officially ratified?

Yes, the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution was officially ratified. It was passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified by the required number of states—36 out of 48 at the time—on February 3, 1913. The amendment grants Congress the power to impose an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on the U.S. Census.

The ratification process followed the constitutional requirements under Article V, where three-fourths of the states must approve a proposed amendment. Historical records, including state legislatures' actions and the official certification by the Secretary of State, confirm that the 16th Amendment met this threshold. Claims questioning its ratification often stem from fringe legal theories or misinterpretations of procedural details, but these have been consistently debunked by courts and historians.

When it seems to good to be true, it likely isn't true.

I’ve seen this before. Can OP show the where this came from that is an official .gov site? Was it done by DOGE, I doubt it. When the letter says absolutely everything you wish was true. It’s suspect.

This keeps popping up. No one has been able to confirm this letter.

Wait until you hear about the fed

FAKE AND GAY ALERT!!!

All Karen’s must unite. This is their time! Then we will be behind them demanding our money back NOW!

So what forms do I file to get back 40 years of personal txes, business taxes and the taxes I have to pay on my payroll?