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
May 2, 2026 8:26 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
Sohrab Ahmari’s biggest mistake
The debate between Sohrab Ahmari and David French has sparked a useful conversation about the means and ends of liberty. In that discussion, both men make valid criticisms and both sometimes fall short, but a recent column by Ahmari reveals perhaps the most glaring error in his perspective. Ahmari believes both economic interventionists (“progressive liberals”) and those who oppose state intervention (“conservative liberals”) share the same goal of maximizing freedom apart from state coercion. AtFirst Things, he writes: Progressiveliberals are...
10 facts about homelessness in America
The homeless represent the most vulnerable portion of Americans living in poverty. The latest U.S. government report on homelessness shows that a culture ofsecularism and statism isdepriving Americans of church philanthropy, curbing the free market’s ability to provide,and leaving the most vulnerablereliant on the government – or the mercy of the streets. The Council of Economic Advisers detailed their conditions in itsreporton “The State of Homelessness in America,” released last week. It found that “rent controls” may have priced homeless...
The UK Supreme Court’s dangerous ruling
This morning, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled unanimously that Boris Johnson unlawfully suspended Parliament and annulled hisorder to prorogue. Today’s Supreme Court decision holds deep importance for Brexit, EU corruption, and the rule of law. The Supreme Court branded Prime Minister Johnson’s order to prorogue Parliament “unlawful” and declared it null and void. Members of Parliament were told to act as though it had never taken place. Speaker John Bercow announced Parliament will return to session tomorrow...
Fact check: Did ‘austerity’ kill 120,000 people?
Did stingy UK mit “economic murder” by slashing NHS funding? A clip of a self-described Communist accusing the government of killing 120,000 people has gone viral, but the facts do not bear out her contention. Ash Sarkar, who scored a glowing profile inTeen Vogueafter calling herself “literally a Communist,” made ment on the BBC programQuestion Time: Austerity was not just a bloodless balancing of the books it was paid for with people’s lives, 120,000 people. The reason why I’m so...
5 key points of Donald Trump’s UN religious freedom remarks
President Donald Trump addressed the Global Call to Protect Religious Freedom on Monday, ing the first U.S. president to host a United Nations meeting on religious liberty. The heads of state of more than 130 nations and UN Secretary-General António Guterres attended. Here are five key themes of his address: 1. Rights are unalienable, because e from God. “The United States is founded on the principle that our rights do e from government; e from God. This immortal truth is...
Bailouts, moral hazards, and the scapegoating of the taxpayer
If pandering is the politicians’pastime, then we owe a special debt of gratitude to those who resist this seemingly irresistible force. Today, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson confirmed that he refused to extenda £150 million government bailout to preventThomas Cook, the world’s oldest travel agency, from going bankrupt. Moreover, the prime minister explained his actions in both economic and moral terms. “It is perfectly true that a request was made to the government for a subvention of about £150 million​,”...
The Saddleback story: When a ‘call to missions’ results in entrepreneurship
When David Munson was 19 years old, he went on a missions trip and was sure he had discovered his ultimate vocation. “I just knew I wanted to do ministry for the rest of my life,” he says. Soon thereafter, he moved to Mexico to teach English as a way to kickstart his life in foreign missions. Yet through a range of unexpected encounters, he found himself designing leather products and selling them out of his truck. The weirdest part:...
Pandering: The politician’s pastime
What if someone told you “politicians sacrifice long-term economic performance for individual, political gain”? Many people would yawn (or sigh) and say this is obvious, or perhaps they would say it’s obvious with respect to the politicians in that otherpolitical party (the one that opposes their own). Nathan Jensen and Edmund Malesky, however, have not only made the claim quoted above, they’ve set out to prove it through hard data and careful argumentation in their book Incentives to Pander: How...
Remember the trees
In this week’s Acton Commentary I argue that pathos and politics isn’t enough to address the contemporary challenges of environmental stewardship in general and climate change in particular. I point to the necessity to recognize the gifts and responsibilities that God has given to humanity. This includes natural resources like trees and human endowments like ingenuity and creativity. And in case you think remembering the trees is too basic of an idea, I will say that I once attended an...
Wilfred McClay on friendship new and old
What is friendship? What does it mean to be or to have a friend? And why does Aristotle consider friendship a virtue and an important for political life? Wilfred McClay has a nice essay on friendship at the Hedgehog Review, where he reflects on the title of the song “My New, Old Friend.” McClay writes that he initially did not like the idea of a“new old friend,” first because true friendship is rare and takes time to develop, and second...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved