Do you believe a Jury would convict someone for failing to adhere to the 2014 mandate

[The2ndAmendment]

would someone get convicted of tax evasion for trying to artificially deflate their income in order to make up the ObamaCare tax/penalty?

that would be a very interesting case of Jury Nullification.

There's a case going on right now about it:

Jury begins deliberating in tax fraud trial of Chelsea businessman ? Mid-Maine ? Bangor Daily News ? BDN Maine

In fact, they are common (although infrequent).

 

[Hoffstra]

yes, folks should be convicted for regular old tax evasion.

now, tax evasion to simply avoid the ObamaCare penalty tax?

im not sure.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm looking for some hanging of people who don't buy Obamacare

 

[theDoctorisIn]

would someone get convicted of tax evasion for trying to artificially deflate their income in order to make up the ObamaCare tax/penalty?

that would be a very interesting case of Jury Nullification.

There's a case going on right now about it:

Jury begins deliberating in tax fraud trial of Chelsea businessman ? Mid-Maine ? Bangor Daily News ? BDN Maine

In fact, they are common (although infrequent).

What does that have to do with Obamacare?

Tax fraud cases are fairly common - and that's because it's a crime to defraud the IRS.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

This is how the "mandate" fee is going to work out: It'll be added to your tax liability. If you get a refund, it'll come out of that, if you end up owing taxes, you'll owe a little more.

If you don't pay it, it'll be sent to collections.


No "trial by jury" involved.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

would someone get convicted of tax evasion for trying to artificially deflate their income in order to make up the ObamaCare tax/penalty?

that would be a very interesting case of Jury Nullification.

There's a case going on right now about it:

Jury begins deliberating in tax fraud trial of Chelsea businessman ? Mid-Maine ? Bangor Daily News ? BDN Maine

In fact, they are common (although infrequent).

What does that have to do with Obamacare?

Tax fraud cases are fairly common - and that's because it's a crime to defraud the IRS.

I don't know, ask Hoffstra; or are you planning to punish all members of USMB for not adhering to the topics of their respective threads?

 

[rightwinger]

If I am on the jury......FEMA death camps for you

 

[Hoffstra]

if you deflate your income in order to make up for the ObamaCare tax/penalty, you will be tried for tax evasion.

you will get your day in court and if you argue well, be found not guilty.

 

[Hoffstra]

What does that have to do with Obamacare?

Tax fraud cases are fairly common - and that's because it's a crime to defraud the IRS.

if you know your ObamaCare tax penalty will be $1250 and you artificially deflate your taxable income by that same amount, you will be accused of tax evasion if you get caught.

that will lead to a trial, and if your argument is good you will be found not-guilty.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There's a case going on right now about it:

Jury begins deliberating in tax fraud trial of Chelsea businessman ? Mid-Maine ? Bangor Daily News ? BDN Maine

In fact, they are common (although infrequent).

What does that have to do with Obamacare?

Tax fraud cases are fairly common - and that's because it's a crime to defraud the IRS.

I don't know, ask Hoffstra; or are you planning to punish all members of USMB for not adhering to the topics of their respective threads?

I was asking what your case had to do with Hoffstra's post.

 

[Zoom-boing]

The IRS will garnish the wages of such an individual.

Link?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What does that have to do with Obamacare?

Tax fraud cases are fairly common - and that's because it's a crime to defraud the IRS.

if you know your ObamaCare tax penalty will be $1250 and you artificially deflate your taxable income by that same amount, you will be accused of tax evasion if you get caught.

that will lead to a trial, and if your argument is good you will be found not-guilty.

Ah, I think I see what you're trying to say.

If you "artificially deflate" your taxable income for any reason, you'll be "accused" of tax evasion - and you'd offer something anti-Obamacare as your defense in court.

I guess that would be a way to have a "trial by jury" over Obamacare - although I think it's pretty unlikely that a jury would have much sympathy for your story.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The IRS will garnish the wages of such an individual.

Link?

They're actually not allowed to, by the Obamacare law itself.

 

[Hoffstra]

Ah, I think I see what you're trying to say.

If you "artificially deflate" your taxable income for any reason, you'll be "accused" of tax evasion - and you'd offer something anti-Obamacare as your defense in court.

I guess that would be a way to have a "trial by jury" over Obamacare - although I think it's pretty unlikely that a jury would have much sympathy for your story.

arguing that the only reason the tax/penalty was found Constitutional was because Justice Roberts didn't want to break Supreme Court precedent by overturning large Federal programs, but did infact believe that penalizing someone for NOT buying something was illegal, will convince enough jurors that the penalty/tax is infact unConstitutional.

in the court of public opinion, the ObamaCare tax/penalty won't stand.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Ah, I think I see what you're trying to say.

If you "artificially deflate" your taxable income for any reason, you'll be "accused" of tax evasion - and you'd offer something anti-Obamacare as your defense in court.

I guess that would be a way to have a "trial by jury" over Obamacare - although I think it's pretty unlikely that a jury would have much sympathy for your story.

arguing that the only reason the tax/penalty was found Constitutional was because Justice Roberts didn't want to break Supreme Court precedent by overturning large Federal programs, but did infact believe that penalizing someone for NOT buying something was illegal, will convince enough jurors that the penalty/tax is infact unConstitutional.

in the court of public opinion, the ObamaCare tax/penalty won't stand.

A lawyer would have quite a challenge in front of them to win a case that based around pleading guilty to fraud.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Jury nullification doesn't work because the people who would do something like that are never picked for juries.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Hoffstra]

Jury nullification doesn't work because the people who would do something like that are never picked for juries.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

says who?

with the right argument by the Defense, many Americans would comply with Jury Nullification.

 

[healthmyths]

The IRS will garnish the wages of such an individual.

Several factors will prevent the above from being a possibility:
A) The garnishee must have a job. At the rate of job destruction there will be few jobs!
B) At the rate of growing dissatisfaction with ACA will fullfill the the Cloward-Piven Strategy which seeks to hasten the fall of
capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/theclowardpivenstrategypoe.html

In other words with no jobs, no money there will not be enough time on any court calendars nor judges, nor juries to prosecute the volume of
ACA law breakers!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Jury nullification doesn't work because the people who would do something like that are never picked for juries.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

says who?

with the right argument by the Defense, many Americans would comply with Jury Nullification.

How come it rarely ever works, then?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Do you believe a Jury would convict someone for failing to adhere to the 2014 mandate

What’s of concern is there’s likely many more conservatives just as ignorant.