One can hardly touch on the subject of FREEDOM without at the same time mention taxation and all that it entails, and what it is supposedly is used for.

One of the first argument that comes up when you begin to talk to people who have not thought much about the alternatives to the existing system,  is "Unless we have a government that brings in taxes and distributes them to all the things that need to be funded, how can we maintain the road network, public parks, health care, schools, fire brigades, police, emergency services, shipping lanes, support the poor, etc.? "

First and foremost, I want to point out that I do not have all the answers. As for the detailed design of alternative ways to shape and run a society, there are many with more organisational skills than me and my confused mind. If you could see all the paper that normally cover my desk, you would agree with me. What I want to point out and try to show, is that we have many, many more and better options than what most people can imagine today - if we just open our eyes and minds a little.

A tribe that lives by nature - be it in a jungle somewhere, or as nomads on the tundra or the desert, have no government at all. They live with animals and nature in accordance with proven methods. They might have some form of leader or council which fulfils a function in their small society. But these people do not act like rulers or masters towards their fellow tribesmen.  If they did, they would hardly remain leader for very long.

When people gather in large numbers - such as in cities and organise themselves into nations, life becomes a little more complicated and more rules for interaction may be required. Some functions will require full time employees performing certain duties so that society works and people can live in peace and security. Few people would object to contributing some of the fruits of their production to such things, rather than learning some of these functions and spend part of their time to do these things. When we specialise, we can do better and be more efficient and get more done.

 I believe that this is how governments of various kinds came about from the beginning.

But there is a danger in this. Say that there are robbers and pirates in an area. The people will then select, train and pay some that seem suited to defend them against external enemies. You then have a group of citizens who might become accustomed to violence or take the lives of others in their daily work.  Lets now suppose that they are so successful that they put an end to the external enemies. Will they now lay down their weapons and learn other trades, or they will argue that they must be there to protect the people, and since they are not that busy with that, they may begin to interfere in internal affairs and force people to pay for their continued existence? Lets say that among them  are smart people who have learned how to manipulate people with fear and propaganda, how likely is it that such a group could acquire almost all the power and control of a society - especially if they also took control of the finances, politics, education, military, media and the judiciary.

Taxation would be a fact and would be enforced by force - for the "public good" of course.

This subject could easily become a book, so I will try to stick to some basic principles here.

I like to use nature as a template and guideline. Man is a part of and a product of Nature. We are the crown of creation as things stand now. We have the potential to destroy life, or become the organism that more than any other can bring Life's quest to conquer Matter forward by getting the deserts to bloom or take life out in space or to other dead celestial bodies.

If nature has given us something, it then seems we have the right to use it.

We have been given the ability to think freely, to talk freely, to interact freely with each other, to build and create freely, to travel freely and to enjoy the fruits of Mother Earth, that we need to survive. Therefore these must be rights that we as free people have. If we were not meant to be free, why give us the ability to be so?

Freedom also implies responsibility, and must go hand in hand with responsibility. When we have acted irresponsibly against nature and taking more than we need, or poisoned our environment in different ways, we have caused harm to other life forms that have as much right to be here as we do, or against ourselves or our children.

Back to the tax issue.


We have all learned the golden rule "Treat others as you want to be treated by them."
People do not like to be threatened to life and limb. People normally see their possessions as something they have the exclusive right to use and get upset when they are taken from them without their consent, as in theft. People also see fraud as something evil.

So if money is needed to take care of the general running of a society, and we have a small group that has been assigned the task to ensure that these features work, why not come to every free individual when he / she reaches the age of majority and put the cards on the table and offer that individual to voluntarily shoulder his or her part of what this all costs. Either by a percentage of one's earnings or by direct voluntary work in the service of society certain part of one's time? Or choose which functions he / she wants to pay for and take advantage of, and which ones are not interesting. Simple basic contracts.

This would be in line with our inherent rights and freedoms. It would also put a great limit on how much a government can spend.

But no, apparently this would send the wrong signal to the masses. Let us instead with education and media brainwashing, employment practices and threats of arrest, jail or losing homes, possessions and even children, force people to pay taxes. Let's have a huge propaganda machine so that people accept that this is right, normal and ethical. Let us not call this what it is - extortion and theft.

Let us instead give it a name that sounds right and makes it seem like something good. Such as different slogans used to make taxation into a "noble" thing. For example: "Making sure everyone does his bit"  or "Together we can make this country even greater".
Nobody likes a freeloader or parasite. And we give names to those who are not happy to pay a large part of what they produce to the state,  such as "tax evaders" or "tax dodgers", no matter if they avoid taxes legally or just refuses to pay.

In Scandinavia, where I come from, the total percentage a full time working man or woman pays in all kinds of taxes is about 80% or the value he or she produces. Now I know that is not the case in South Africa - but ask yourself this "Are taxes going up or down in relation to you earnings, over the years?"  It seems to me that in most places, tax becomes a larger and larger burden for the average man in the street.
When I say Tax, I do not only mean income tax, but VAT, fuel tax, tax on alcohol and tobacco, transfer fees when buying a house, airport taxes, toll road fees, TV licence, etc.

In addition, each item you buy is taxed in many stages of  production, transportation and trading. If it was imported, customs charged a tax on that. Someone once calculated that there are over 100 different taxes on a loaf of bread. What would these products be sold at, if they were not taxed?

My guess is that the serfs of ancient times were  allowed to keep a larger portion of their production than what we do today. If we are forced to give up the fruits of our labour, are we not then slaves? At what percentage of confiscation goes the limit for slavery?

I am a carpenter. My clients come to me if they want something done, and if they like my price, we have an agreement. This is a voluntary trade and exchange. Why can not the government do the same? Why must it force itself on people? If they had to be so kind and ask for or negotiate for  money for their services, instead of demanding them, they would not be able to grow to the cancerous sized the State now turned out. People would simply not be willing to pay for it all.

How would you like if I knocked on the door and said, "I see that it was more than ten years ago, you had a new kitchen, so you have to have a new kitchen again according to the rules of the Carpenters Union. Here you have a few forms and different designs to choose from. Prices are quoted there. I'll be back in two weeks to see what you select, and to arrange for an installation date and to take a deposit. "?
At least you would get something for your money in such a case. But I bet that you would not like it and would fight back.

Why are people not fighting back when the State comes and force their business upon them? Fear? Social duty? I think it's fear mostly  - not least the fear of what others may think and say. Do you see how deeply the indoctrination goes?

How is it that taxes were much lower in the past? How could we have a functioning society with a much smaller public sector? How can some countries have almost no income taxes?
Do we even know that taxes go to what they are said to go to? Does a government, which actually could create a country's own money  (instead of, as is the case now, where money is created by the loans issued by banks), even need taxing the population? Are there perhaps other purposes of taxation than to finance public projects and running costs?

In a book I once read, the author claimed that about 100 years ago, it was the richest families in the United States who lobbied for the introduction of income tax. Why? To prevent other citizens to easily become rich and pose a competitive threat to their monopoly. They themselves always had ways to legally avoid taxes.

My personal opinion is that taxes are meant to keep people powerless, poor, unhappy subdued and worried. With our efficient production today we could live incredibly richer lives with more time to educate ourselves, travel, hang out and take care of each other -  or greater material well-being for those who wish to do so. This is not what those in power want and taxation as well as the enforcement of idiotic rules and regulations are primarily used to control and keep down the population.

A kind of variation to the male strategy of "Keep them barefoot and pregnant".


[Nothing here should be seen as "legal advice". This is just suggestions or my own ideas and are presented more as philosophical arguments or thoughts, rather than proven facts. If you decide to try anything I suggest, you do so entirely under your own responsibility and at your own risk.]

Some of this may create some risk or discomfort.

We all have different circumstances in life. The less you own, the less you have to lose.
But if you have children who are still young or you have other dependants, it may not be a good idea to go headlong into a fight with the State (which really is nothing but a large group of people with a certain conviction - but they are a large group and they have weapons and prisons to use if it suits them). It is always the trailblazers who will be hardest hit and where most of martyrs and heroes will be found.

So do not risk becoming a martyr, if you don't want to affect people who are dependent on you or you do not want to jeopardise your own safety. Use means that no one can object to.

Engage in private barter. There are complete systems in use for this in some places, with point systems for time spent in helping others with jobs they can not do. Where people of different skills trade favours with each other.

Buy second hand products to skip VAT. Buy from individuals instead of businesses.

Use cash or other things of value to provide exchange.

Avoid toll roads - or even better, write the toll operators and ask a few pertinent questions, that will reveal the fraud that they are perpetrating on the road users. They are a business. One does not HAVE TO do business with a business. Did that business pay for and build the roads in the first place?  I wonder for example how much it cost to build the toll road to Durban all those years ago, and how much has been collected in toll on that stretch since then.

What we as private living people conduct among ourselves is no concern of the government or businesses such as banks.

Or use Bitcoin or other similar means of exchange, as long as they remain free and independent.


If you have little to lose or feel so strongly about the subject that you are willing to put your safety at stake, you can hand in your resignation as a taxpayer and begin to challenge SARS by asking them to prove that you have an obligation to pay these taxes.

I can not give a detailed description of what is best way to do this. But a good understanding of what you are and what the government is (see other articles in this blog) is an absolute must.

Do not try to prove anything whatsoever. If someone claims that you have to pay these taxes, let them prove that claim. The burden of proof is always on the one who claims something. If this was not the case, wouldn't anyone be able to accuse others of all kinds of things, and if the accused could not prove that the claim was incorrect, would they not be guilty? I could say that the last time we met we played poker and you bet your house and lost, so it is now mine. If you could not prove that I'm lying, a Judge might let me take your house. Even with today's corrupt system, it has not gone that far (they will not allow us to take each other's things that easily - only that they themselves can do so).

So ask questions, and insist that they really respond fully to the question, and do not accept  fictions and ideas as evidence - just the facts or things that can be proven objectively.

Here are some questions that I see as relevant:

Is everyone a taxpayer?

What makes someone a taxpayer?

What is "Income"?

If someone or a business does not have any income, or has made a loss, is there an obligation to pay income tax?

What proof or witnesses with first hand experience in the matter, do you have that confirms that I am a Taxpayer?  Who in your organisation makes the claim that I am a Taxpayer or owe you any tax?

Are those who have not graduated Law School qualified to interpret the Income Tax Act?

If not, how can I be expected to fill out an Income Tax Return form with information and then testify in writing that I have done so correctly, when I am neither qualified to interpret the legislation it is based upon, nor have the right to do so? How can I do this, when I, legally speaking, can't even understand the law that is the basis of this action? Is SARS trying to make me commit perjury?

Am I a slave?
If I am not a slave, then do I not have the right to enjoy the fruits of my labour?
If I am not a slave, would then not the paying of tax have to be a voluntary activity?
When, where and how did I volunteer to pay income tax? When where and how was I informed that this was a voluntary arrangement?

- - -

If you think a bit more about this and studying some of the references below, you can probably think of more relevant questions.

Another thing you can do is re-write  "Open Letter to "Authorities" from the blog article: 
so it is suitable for the tax office, and then ask them to explain how they have authority over you, or have the right to require you to pay tax.

Always stay in the question. Do not try to give the impression that you are smart or know it all. Rather play dumb and insist that they help you understand. They are public servants. They are supposed to assist us. So if someone cannot understand how the obligation to pay income tax came about, they better explain it. If one digs at it long enough, one will eventually find the truth. When you know the truth, you can then do something effective about the matter. (chances are pretty good though, that you never will get the truth from the minions at SARS. Don't be afraid to go higher for your answers, if you can't seem to get them lower down).

Also pay attention the the WORDS they use!  Here is a paragraph from the top of the Income Tax Act 1962:

"The rate of tax referred to in section 2(1) of this Act to be levied in respect of the taxable income (excluding any retirement fund lump sum benefit) of any natural person, deceased estate, insolvent estate or special trust (other than a public benefit organisation or recreational club referred to in paragraph 5) in respect of any year of assessment ending on 29 February 2008 is set out in the table below:"  (My underlining)

It could pay well to find out exactly what those terms mean. I bet YOU as a living man or woman is none of these (but you may be considered to be acting in the capacity of one of these, and therefore have an obligation to pay the tax for the entity in question. So learn what you need to know and then kill the assumptions).

Another way, if you understand the difference between you as a man/woman and your legal/juristic person, is to invoice your person for the work you do for it (See the blog article "The difference between You and Yourself" for more on the difference between you and your legal person).
You are doing everything your person is presumed to do (Since your person is a dead fiction) and you are entitled to compensation for the work you do, unless you are a slave of course..
So bill your person for your work and make sure that your invoices  makes your person's income  non-existent or at least under the tax threshold. Feel free to invoice your person so that it is in debt to you.

One could argue that if you invoice in South African Rand, or any other currency, You thereby place yourself within the fictional system of commerce and politics, and become subject to all its rules. This can be circumvented by billing "in kind" instead. Bill for things like food, shelter, electricity, water and sewage, clothing, transport, telecommunications, entertainment, etc. and attach any receipts from your person as proof of payment. This way, all you do becomes "deductible". This should take care of the income tax.

Yet another way I know have been done by a few, is to pay your Person/Strawman/Legal Person (in my case Mr. KENT BENGTSSON) for using it as an "Agent in Commerce" or "Transmitting Utility", since it allows you as a wo/man to act in the fictional world of Commerce, Banking and Government. Pay it a monthly fee that ends up just under the taxable income for a year. Fill out the Tax Return Form and enter this as the only income for the Person.  If you want to be really thorough about it. Have a separate bank account for this, and try to use this account for things that are billed to the Person.

Why declare anything you may ask?  Well if you send in a form with Zero Income on it, it will set off more alarms in the tax office and may make them more likely to kick up a fuss.

Or, one can do what Dean Clifford and some others have done. After a lot of back and forth about the obligation to declare income by filing an Income Tax Return, he wrote his tax office and told them something like this:

"OK, lets for arguments sake say that I am obliged to do this. But one thing is for sure. I am not obliged to work for the Government for free, as that would be Involuntary Servitude (slavery).

So here are my terms for doing this for you:

I charge 500 dollar an hour when I have to perform work in the capacity of the Legal Person Mr. DEAN CLIFFORD. I estimate that it will take me 50 hours to gather all information, fill out and mail the form to you. That comes to $25,000.00. And since I do not trust the Tax Office to be honourable and just, I require that amount up front, before I will begin this work. I will start when your funds have cleared in my account.

Furthermore, since I am not qualified to navigate or make determinations about the Income Tax Act, you will have to grant me indemnity from all faults, deficiencies or mistakes that may be present in my filing. I need a written guarantee to that effect from the head of the Tax Office."

Do you see what he does here? This is contract law in practical use. They gave him an offer: "File and pay Income Tax."  he countered with the above, which gives him good money for his time, and releases him from responsibility and liability for any faults, no matter how sloppy or glaring. Of course they did not agree to pay him or fill it out under those conditions. So they left him alone after that.

When it comes to VAT for businesses, one can again use the "Am I a slave?" approach. Only a slave can be required to work for free. If you are not one, you have the right to charge for your services. If SARS wants you to collect VAT for them and send it to them, then, send them an offer where you name your price for this service, and that you will take you rate off the full VAT amount and send the balance plus your invoice with "paid" stamped on it to them. I suggest you take about 90% of the amount, as your compensation.

Another approach might be to lean on international conventions "THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA"  recognises.  Such as the "UN Declaration of Human Rights" or the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights".

Read these well and you will find a number of points which can be used to interpret compulsory taxation as a form of slavery or being forced to support activities that one cannot in good conscience support. It has been claimed that about 700 billion rand has been lost to corruption in the last 20 years in South Africa. I'm sure a look into that will give a lot of stuff one is unwilling to support, which can be used as reasons or examples.

There is no shortage of irregularities committed by public officials and the "elected" politicians. So pick and choose.

Personally, I see this last road as more complicated. Partly because it can be very hard to live in South Africa today, without using the legal person and its ID Number. If you do not want to pay taxes with the argument that you do not want to support a society that commits all these crimes,  I can imagine that if you are successful in pushing that line,  that "the State" turns around and says, "Okay, you need do not pay taxes, but you will not be able to use any services that can be seen as a tax-financed. Maybe they even want to deprive you of the legal person and ID number - including the ID, Drivers license and passport, or will threaten this. That might pose some problems if you want to leave this place by other means than walking across an unguarded boarder.

You can of course then ask to be refunded the taxes you paid in so far, but for which you did not receive a service in the form of pension, health care, etc.

As I said, more complicated.

- - -

The purpose here is not to provide a watertight way to avoid paying direct taxes, but have you, dear reader, to start thinking and questioning, and if you are willing to have some excitement in life, to test ways to withhold your support from a government which long ago ceased to serve the people and instead turned everything around, and got the people to serve the government - which is the exact opposite of what the public sector was meant to do.

If a child has become so spoiled and disobedient that it only creates problems and annoyance, does it helps the situation to just continue to give it what it wants and let it behave anti-socially? Or is it time to raise the voice, say NO! and withhold it's allowance until it starts to behave decently and support it's family instead of being a burden to it?

To answer the question at the beginning about how we would finance roads, health care, schools, etc. the taxes on motoring and fuel is more than roads and traffic-related health care costs. If the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Food and  Drug Administration did its job we would have food that was healthy to eat, and no toxic substances in food, water, drugs and hygiene products would be allowed. If the Food and Drug Administration stopped  acting as an extension of the pharmaceutical Industry and it's expensive drugs and "treatments" and  encouraged cheap, harmless and natural remedies which kept people healthy,  the result would be that we had less health care spending and more productive citizens. The school today is more an indoctrination camp than a way to educate people. Teach students to read, write and do math, and they can learn what they need themselves, as my parents did.

This country could do just fine with just the indirect taxes, we have, if the public sector was organised differently, the corruption was handled, and the government had not borrowed money for which interest now is payable.
That and making it easier and cheaper to run a business, make our infrastructures reliable and encourage free clean energy solutions - even it it meant less fuel or electricity taxes, since we would have devices generating the needed energy on site in our cars or homes.  With cheap energy business would take off and there would be more turnover for all to benefit from. We could even desalinate sea water if we had such energy sources.

If taxes were lower, few of us would mind contributing to the common expenses, and we could afford to do so.

You can not force people to do things, while claiming that they are free. Taxation can only be morally justifiable if it is not made under duress, but rather under voluntary agreements with free willing participants who fully understands all the factors involved. Such as full disclosure of how everything is  and stands. The current system can not do this because it is built on deceit and lies from the ground up (See other articles in this blog).

If people understood how the current system worked and was built and who it served, it would fall tomorrow. It depends on our ignorance for its existence. We feed this monster by giving it energy in the form of our production and our belief that it is real and legitimate.

Below are some things I suggest you study if you want to tackle the subject of taxation and state control as such.
Not all  has to do direct with taxation, but covers related topics you should have some idea about. If the links do not work, search for the title on YouTube or Google.


[keep in mind that everything may not be true in the below materials, or may not be the same in South Africa. Try to verify all information, before you act on it.]

First is the little video "Meet your Strawman"

Then I recommend "The story of your enslavement"

Here is Larken Rose with a very astute observation and explanation. "I'm allowed to rob you"

Here is a man who stumbled on a secret set of accounts that he claims hold so much money that there would at the time allow Americans to not pay any more tas for over 20 years. Listen carefully and think of how this could be used for the good of the people and the nation if not withheld.

Here is a longer film that explains in detail, pretty much how everything got to where it is today and how all these apparent obligations can be loaded on us without violating our basic human rights. I suggest you listen through it once, let it brew a bit, and the come back and study it properly (looking up words you don't understand, think through important principles or revolutionary concepts, etc.)
"Freedom a complete picture". If you listen carefully you will hear him give a solution to income tax for contractors.

Here are two interviews with Marc Stevens who has lots of experience and success in dealing the the American IRS. Again, not all is about tax, but I suggest you listen to it all as it is all relevant when it comes to dealing with presumed or assumed obligations. There is also a fair bit about strategies to apply in Court (a place you might visit if you chose not to pay any more tax).

"Ben Lowrey and Marc Stevens"

"Red Ice Radio - Marc Stevens - hour one"

This is one of my favourites. Dean Clifford did a series of radio interviews some years back about how to do different things. Due to a copyright dispute etc. these are not available on the internet.
I have saved them on my One Drive in the "D.C. how to" folder. Download and listen to at least episode 1, 8 & 9. If you click on the files the full name and number comes up in the right margin. 

Here is a talk by Michael of Bernicia. Listen to it all, or just to the part where he talks about how he got an agreement with the Brittish Tax office (HMRC) that he was not a tax payer. That begins 1:24 into the video "Beating the banksters"

Here is a little clip regarding a tax that was proposed in the UK. Now there is a vast difference between the number of transactions done in the UK and in South Africa, but still...

"There is NO INCOME TAX LAW"  This is a good American film. It does maybe not give much in the way of solutions, but sure as hell points out some outpoints with regard to taxation, and government control.  Chances are good that much of this has been done in other countries.

Here is a man speaking for a group that are practising different ways to become more free from the current prevailing system. I believe following a plan like this would be among the more successful ways to deal with tax and undue government control. Listen to the video and any others you can find by him. Have a look at the two websites. They charge for their comprehensive courses. If you have a problem with that, think of how much you pay in tax per year. If that could stop, would that course fee be a good investment?

Here is the site of their society:

This is where one can get their training:

Then I like to warmly recommend the teachings of a group called "Creditors in Commerce", who operate in a similar manner to the previous one. They are not active today as far as I know, but their materials are available as free audio downloads at

They cover a lot of ground, but mainly financial stuff and things relating to the "justice system", with a viewpoint of attaining harmony and making everyone whole. Their talks and workshops cover hundreds of hours. I suggest you start with the earlier stuff like some of the free videos from "The Living Temple" talks by Brandon Adams. If it resonates, carry on with a little bit at the time. For me this has been the main source of valuable data and inspiration.  My one and only totally successful Court Hearing was conducted using their advice.

Here is a good place to start with them: 

Here is a video giving yet another way to deal with all kind of monetary claims, including taxes. I cannot comment on if it can be done here in South Africa or not. Beware with these things. Make sure you understand everything and feel comfortable going ahead with stuff like this. If not done right you may be done for fraud.
Chances are you will be done for fraud even if you do it right, but are not able to stand your ground in Court, when challenged.

I will add more material here as I come across relevant stuff, so check back now and then.

You will also most likely come across more things if you study the above,

Good luck.


No comments:

Post a Comment