Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Just Render Unto Caesar Already: The IRS and Frivolous Tax Arguments
Just Render Unto Caesar Already: The IRS and Frivolous Tax Arguments
Nov 3, 2025 3:32 PM

In an attempt to trap Jesus, some Pharisees and Herodians asked him, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Should we pay them, or should we not?” In response, Jesus said,

“Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” And they brought one. And he said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said to him, “Caesar’s.” Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

The Pharisees and Herodians “marveled” at Jesus answer, but had they asked an agent of the Roman IRS they likely would have been given a similar answer.

Governments have always had to contend with citizens who make what are considered “frivolous tax arguments” to plying with tax laws. Such arguments rarely work (it’s usually not effective to try to present a creative interpretation of tax law to the people who interpret tax laws) but people keep trying.

The IRS has an entire list of responses to the mon frivolous tax arguments. Here are four of my favorites:

1. Contention: The filing of a tax return is voluntary.

Some taxpayers assert that they are not required to file federal tax returns because the filing of a tax return is voluntary. Proponents of this contention point to the fact that the IRS tells taxpayers in the Form 1040 instruction book that the tax system is voluntary. Additionally, these taxpayers frequently quote Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 176 (1960), for the proposition that “[o]ur system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint.”

The Law: The word “voluntary,” as used in Flora and in IRS publications, refers to our system of allowing taxpayers initially to determine the correct amount of tax plete the appropriate returns, rather than have the government determine tax for them from the outset. The requirement to file an e tax return is not voluntary and is clearly set forth in sections 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a)

2. Contention: Federal Reserve Notes are not e.

Proponents of this contention assert that Federal Reserve Notes currently used in the United States are not valid currency and cannot be taxed because Federal Reserve Notes are not gold or silver and may not be exchanged for gold or silver. This argument misinterprets Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution. The courts have rejected this argument on numerous occasions.

The Law: Congress is empowered “[t]o coin Money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the Standard of weights and measures.” U.S. Const. Art. I, § 8, cl. 5. Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution prohibits the states from declaring as legal tender anything other than gold or silver, but does not limit Congress’ power to declare the form of legal tender. See 31 U.S.C. § 5103; 12 U.S.C. § 411. In an opinion affirming a conviction for willfully failing to file a return and rejecting the argument that Federal Reserve Notes are not subject to taxation, the court stated that “Congress has declared federal reserve notes legal tender . . . and federal reserve notes are taxable d

3. Contention: Taxpayers can refuse to pay e taxes on religious or moral grounds by invoking the First Amendment.

Some individuals or groups claim that taxpayers may refuse to pay federal e taxes based on their religious or moral beliefs, or an objection to the use of taxes to fund certain government programs. These persons mistakenly invoke the First Amendment in support of this frivolous position.

The Law: The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The First Amendment, however, does not provide a right to refuse to pay e taxes on religious or moral grounds or because taxes are used to fund government programs opposed by the taxpayer. The First Amendment does not mercial speech or speech that aids or incites taxpayers to unlawfully refuse to pay federal e taxes, including speech that promotes abusive tax avoidance schemes.

4. Contention: The “United States” consists only of the District of Columbia, federal territories, and federal enclaves.

Some individuals and groups argue that the United States consists only of the District of Columbia, federal territories (e.g., Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.), and federal enclaves (e.g., American Indian reservations, military bases, etc.) and does not include the “sovereign” states. According to this argument, if a taxpayer does not live within the “United States,” as so defined, he is not subject to the federal tax laws.

The Law: The Internal Revenue Code imposes a federal e tax upon all United States citizens and residents, not just those who reside in the District of Columbia, federal territories, and federal enclaves. The Supreme Court has “recognized that the sixteenth amendment authorizes a direct nonapportioned tax upon United States citizens throughout the nation, not just in federal enclaves.” United States v. Collins, 920 F.2d 619, 629 (10th Cir. 1990) (citing Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R., 240 U.S. 1, 12-19 (1916)). This frivolous contention has been uniformly rejected by the courts, and the IRS warned taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument. Rev. Rul. 2006-18, 2006-1 C.B. 743.

“Like moths to a flame, some people find themselves irresistibly drawn to the tax protester movement’s illusory claim that there is no legal requirement to pay federal e tax. And, like moths, these people sometimes get burned,” said a federal court in the case of United States v. Sloan. Burned, indeed: If you file a frivolous tax return you can be fined up to $100,000 and imprisoned up to five years.

So if you’re ever tempted e up with a creative reason for avoiding paying federal taxes, you’re better off just following Jesus advice and “render unto Caesar” before Caesar renders unto you.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
When Nixon tried to control prices
Note: This is post #21 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. President Nixon had a problem—inflation was out of control. So in 1971 he attempted to implement a drastic solution: he declared price increases illegal. Because prices couldn’t increase, they began hitting a ceiling. With a price ceiling, buyers are unable to signal their increased demand by bidding prices up, and suppliers have no incentive to increase quantity supplied because they can’t raise the price. This video by...
Understanding the President’s Cabinet: Labor Secretary
UPDATE:Andy Puzder withdrew his name from considerationyesterday, so we’re updating and reposting this article with the information for the new nominee, Alexander Acosta. Note: This is the fifth in a weekly series of explanatory posts on the officials and agencies included in the President’s Cabinet. See the series introductionhere. Cabinet position:Secretary of Labor Department: United States Department of Labor Current Nominee:Andrew Puzder Succession:The Secretary of Labor is the eleventh in the presidential line of succession. Department Mission:“To foster, promote, and...
5 facts about Frederick Douglass
February 14 is the chosen birthday of Frederick Douglass (1818-1895), one of America’s greatest champions of individual liberty. Here are five facts you should know about this writer, orator, statesman, and abolitionist: 1. Douglas was born into slavery in Maryland circa 1818. (Like many slaves, he never knew his actual date of birth and so chose February 14 as his birthday.) He was given the name Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey but decided to change it when he became a free...
How an outdoor adventure gear company is bridging the sacred vs. secular divide
To really serve God, a Christian should go into ministry, right? That’s what Greg McEvilly thought. But then he founded Kammok, an outdoor adventure pany. ...
Judge Neil Gorsuch: Defender of religious liberty
Upon the announcement of President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, originalists quickly came to a warm consensus, hailing Judge Neil Gorsuch as a strong defender of the Constitution and a fitting replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia. In addition to the wide-ranging, bipartisan testimonials testifying to his character, intellectual heft, and various credentials, Gorsuch has demonstrated mitment to the Constitution and the freedoms it seeks to protect, whether in weighing issues of executive power, regulatory overreach, or, quite literally,...
Lord Acton’s judgment on pope and king
“Acton’s ideal of the historian as judge, as the upholder of the moral standard, is the most noble ideal ever proposed for the historian,” says Josef L. Altholz in this week’s Acton Commentary, “and it is an ideal that has been rejected, perhaps with grudging respect, by all historians, including myself.” We workaday historians can have no higher ideal than Acton’s second choice, impartiality or objectivity. In this sense, as also in his relative lack of publications, Acton was somewhat...
Thousands protest against returning cathedral to Russian Orthodox Church
St. Isaac’s Cathedral in St. Petersburg is one of the tens of thousands of churches seized, shuttered, or destroyedfollowing theBolshevik Revolution of 1917. Instead of leveling it – the fate of so many other houses of worship – muniststurned the architectural wonder into a Museum of Atheism, then a museum in its own right. It has e a UNESCO World Heritage Site visited by 3.5 million people last year. In January,Governor Georgy Poltavchenko announced that he would transfer ownership of...
The EU: Where cronyism and virtue signaling meet
Despite persistent caricature, corporate titans do not always view government regulators as enemies; they often see them as unwitting collaborators. Big business and the regulatory state go hand-in-hand, according to Michael Gove, a Conservative Party Member of the UK’s Parliament. Large corporations sometimes support – and occasionally help write – regulations that they can keep, but that petitors cannot. By setting the regulatory bar just out of reach, they use the lever of government to artificially petition in their favor....
New Issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality (19.2)
The most recent issue of theJournal of Markets & Morality, vol. 19, no. 2, has been published online and print copies are in the mail. This issue features the publication of Acton’s 2015 Novak Award winner Catherine Pakaluk’s lecture, “Dependence on God and Man: Toward a Catholic Constitution of Liberty,” in addition to our regular slate of peer-reviewed articles. As a special feature, this issue contains two symposia of conference papers: The Evangelical Theological Society Theology of Work Symposium and...
The myth of ‘economic man’: How love holds society together
Despite the predictable flurry of sugary clichés and hedonistic consumerism, Valentine’s Day is as good an opportunity as any to reflect on the nature of human love and consider how we might further it across society. For those of us interested in the study of economics, or, if you prefer,the study of human action, what drives such action — love or otherwise —is the starting point for everything. For the Christian economist, such questions get a bit plicated. Although love...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved