Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Many Americans are starting to question whether the IRS can actually prove jurisdiction, authority, and a lawful assessment before demanding payment. This growing interest centers around concepts like burden of proof, tax jurisdiction, and legal authority, with people searching

Joe Powers

3,832 subscribers

141,285 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика Финансы

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Gov. Wes Moore says the president has "the legal authority to authorize the Insurrection Act" but "the question isn't his authority." "It's that the authority oftentimes should come with moral clarity. And it could should come with a with an operational necessity. And both of those two things are missing.”

Gov. Wes Moore says the president has "the legal authority to authorize the Insurrection Act" but "the question isn't his authority." "It's that the authority oftentimes should come with moral clarity. And it could should come with a with an operational necessity. And both of those two things are missing.”

Kaitlan Collins

209,588 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Should the taxpayer still bear the burden of proof in instances where a tax dispute with the Revenue Authority is based in pre-populated & third party data? In my submission before the National Assembly's Finance & Planning Committee on behalf of the Tax Research Centre at Strathmore University, I argue that Finance Bill 2026's proposals seeking to anchor Incomes & Expenses Validation in law will be incomplete if they do not include a proposal for the the Revenue Authority being saddled with the burden of proof in such instances. Here's why: · Finance Bill 2026 proposes to amend Sec75 of the Tax Procedures Act to provide that the Revenue Authority may use technology to pre-populate tax returns on behalf of a person required to submit or lodge a tax return · Finance Bill 2026 further proposes that a person required to submit or lodge a tax return may rely on pre-populated return generated by the Revenue Authority to file their return · Finance Bill 2026 proposes to amend Sec112 to provide that the Cabinet Secretary of the National Treasury may make Regulations for the procedure for the submission or lodging of returns based on pre-populated tax returns generated by the Revenue Authority Here's where the problem is: · In all this, Sec56(1) which provides that "In any proceedings, the burden shall be on the taxpayer to prove that a tax decision is incorrect" remains unchanged · Sec56(1) is predicated on the fact that Kenya has been running on a self-assessment based regime & the data upon which tax disputes emerges was held by the taxpayer · With Incomes & Expenses Validation & the onset of a Dual Assessment regime in Kenya, taxpayers are now exposed not just to errors of judgement & data on their part, but also errors of technology & transmission which are out of their control · Can we really still have the burden of proof lying exclusively with the taxpayer in an environment where tax compliance has shifted from a function of record keeping to one where system integration reliability is now a key factor?

Should the taxpayer still bear the burden of proof in instances where a tax dispute with the Revenue Authority is based in pre-populated & third party data? In my submission before the National Assembly's Finance & Planning Committee on behalf of the Tax Research Centre at Strathmore University, I argue that Finance Bill 2026's proposals seeking to anchor Incomes & Expenses Validation in law will be incomplete if they do not include a proposal for the the Revenue Authority being saddled with the burden of proof in such instances. Here's why: · Finance Bill 2026 proposes to amend Sec75 of the Tax Procedures Act to provide that the Revenue Authority may use technology to pre-populate tax returns on behalf of a person required to submit or lodge a tax return · Finance Bill 2026 further proposes that a person required to submit or lodge a tax return may rely on pre-populated return generated by the Revenue Authority to file their return · Finance Bill 2026 proposes to amend Sec112 to provide that the Cabinet Secretary of the National Treasury may make Regulations for the procedure for the submission or lodging of returns based on pre-populated tax returns generated by the Revenue Authority Here's where the problem is: · In all this, Sec56(1) which provides that "In any proceedings, the burden shall be on the taxpayer to prove that a tax decision is incorrect" remains unchanged · Sec56(1) is predicated on the fact that Kenya has been running on a self-assessment based regime & the data upon which tax disputes emerges was held by the taxpayer · With Incomes & Expenses Validation & the onset of a Dual Assessment regime in Kenya, taxpayers are now exposed not just to errors of judgement & data on their part, but also errors of technology & transmission which are out of their control · Can we really still have the burden of proof lying exclusively with the taxpayer in an environment where tax compliance has shifted from a function of record keeping to one where system integration reliability is now a key factor?

Julians Amboko

305,332 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Congress actually possesses the authority to break up activist judges under the Constitution. Through jurisdiction stripping, Congress can decide which cases the court can hear and send them straight to SCOTUS. Congress can also defund the activist courts by breaking up the 9th Circuit. Give this a listen. 🤔 🔥🔥👇🏻

Congress actually possesses the authority to break up activist judges under the Constitution. Through jurisdiction stripping, Congress can decide which cases the court can hear and send them straight to SCOTUS. Congress can also defund the activist courts by breaking up the 9th Circuit. Give this a listen. 🤔 🔥🔥👇🏻

Victoria 🇺🇸⏳🗽🚔

208,577 просмотров • 1 год назад

Lawyer blows up on judge for not following the law and trying to rule outside of her jurisdiction. This guy quickly put this judge in her place as she tried to rule on something that she does not have authority over. This is how to respectfully assert authority in a court room like an absolute pro. 💪

Lawyer blows up on judge for not following the law and trying to rule outside of her jurisdiction. This guy quickly put this judge in her place as she tried to rule on something that she does not have authority over. This is how to respectfully assert authority in a court room like an absolute pro. 💪

Giggling Ganon

344,359 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Well here’s proof of what many have suspected — former IRS agent confirms that Americans are NOT required to pay income taxes. I would like for the Commissioner of the IRS to address this — can someone contact Frank Bisignano!! The current commissioner.

Well here’s proof of what many have suspected — former IRS agent confirms that Americans are NOT required to pay income taxes. I would like for the Commissioner of the IRS to address this — can someone contact Frank Bisignano!! The current commissioner.

Erica 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

79,346 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

With the new changes to NFA Tax Stamps, many are asking how AR Pistols can be legally converted to a short-barreled rifle. In this video, we provide a general overview of the process. Always research and abide by your local laws and restrictions before continuing with the Form-1 process. DISCLAIMER: This video is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Consult qualified legal counsel or the ATF directly if you have questions specific to your situation. Firearms laws, regulations, and enforcement policies, including those administered by the ATF, are complex, vary by federal, state, and local jurisdiction, and are subject to change without notice. The information presented may not reflect the most current legal or regulatory developments. Viewers are solely responsible for determining whether the manufacture, possession, or use of any firearm or regulated item is lawful in their jurisdiction and for ensuring full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations before taking any action. Palmetto State Armory is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of the ATF or any other government agency. All actions taken based on this information are done at the viewer’s own risk. All firearms presented in this video are in compliance with federal, state, and local laws. Always shoot responsibly.

With the new changes to NFA Tax Stamps, many are asking how AR Pistols can be legally converted to a short-barreled rifle. In this video, we provide a general overview of the process. Always research and abide by your local laws and restrictions before continuing with the Form-1 process. DISCLAIMER: This video is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Consult qualified legal counsel or the ATF directly if you have questions specific to your situation. Firearms laws, regulations, and enforcement policies, including those administered by the ATF, are complex, vary by federal, state, and local jurisdiction, and are subject to change without notice. The information presented may not reflect the most current legal or regulatory developments. Viewers are solely responsible for determining whether the manufacture, possession, or use of any firearm or regulated item is lawful in their jurisdiction and for ensuring full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations before taking any action. Palmetto State Armory is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of the ATF or any other government agency. All actions taken based on this information are done at the viewer’s own risk. All firearms presented in this video are in compliance with federal, state, and local laws. Always shoot responsibly.

Palmetto State Armory

48,472 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

This is where media narratives fall apart: jurisdiction comes first, always. Federal district courts do not have subject-matter jurisdiction over immigration removals—Congress stripped it. Those cases run through immigration courts and then the Courts of Appeals, period. Judges don’t get to “feel” their way into power just because habeas is invoked. If a court lacks jurisdiction, it lacks authority—full stop. Anything after that is theater. Ignoring jurisdiction isn’t compassion; it’s judicial overreach.

This is where media narratives fall apart: jurisdiction comes first, always. Federal district courts do not have subject-matter jurisdiction over immigration removals—Congress stripped it. Those cases run through immigration courts and then the Courts of Appeals, period. Judges don’t get to “feel” their way into power just because habeas is invoked. If a court lacks jurisdiction, it lacks authority—full stop. Anything after that is theater. Ignoring jurisdiction isn’t compassion; it’s judicial overreach.

Andrew Branca Show

11,918 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

🚨 FORMER DEBT COLLECTOR EXPOSES THE ONE QUESTION THAT STOPS COLLECTION CALLS IMMEDIATELY A woman who says she worked as a debt collector for 15 years claims there was one question callers could ask that stopped collectors cold. According to her, the moment someone asked: “Can you provide written proof you have the legal right to collect this debt?” Everything changed. She says many debts are bought and sold for pennies between companies, and the collectors calling people often don’t actually have the paperwork proving they legally own the debt. Under the FDCPA, consumers have the right to request verification before paying anything. She says when people asked for written proof, collectors often couldn’t provide it… and the call would basically end right there. Now the clip is going viral as people debate whether most debt collectors are actually able to prove the debts they’re chasing. How many people have paid a collector without ever asking that question first?

🚨 FORMER DEBT COLLECTOR EXPOSES THE ONE QUESTION THAT STOPS COLLECTION CALLS IMMEDIATELY A woman who says she worked as a debt collector for 15 years claims there was one question callers could ask that stopped collectors cold. According to her, the moment someone asked: “Can you provide written proof you have the legal right to collect this debt?” Everything changed. She says many debts are bought and sold for pennies between companies, and the collectors calling people often don’t actually have the paperwork proving they legally own the debt. Under the FDCPA, consumers have the right to request verification before paying anything. She says when people asked for written proof, collectors often couldn’t provide it… and the call would basically end right there. Now the clip is going viral as people debate whether most debt collectors are actually able to prove the debts they’re chasing. How many people have paid a collector without ever asking that question first?

HustleBitch

987,355 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Trump’s reckless and illegal tariffs—imposed without congressional authority—are a nationwide sales tax on the American people. Congressional Republicans have allowed him to do this. But enough is enough. That’s why we voted to reclaim Congress’ authority so we can debate, vote on, and stop these tariffs. Costs are rising, but House Democrats are fighting to make life more affordable.

Trump’s reckless and illegal tariffs—imposed without congressional authority—are a nationwide sales tax on the American people. Congressional Republicans have allowed him to do this. But enough is enough. That’s why we voted to reclaim Congress’ authority so we can debate, vote on, and stop these tariffs. Costs are rising, but House Democrats are fighting to make life more affordable.

Congresswoman Sarah McBride

77,281 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

On some days, we register wins on the public finance front. The National Assembly's Finance & Planning Committee proposes that the House passes an amendment to the Tax Procedures Act providing that in instances where the Revenue Authority has relied on dual assessment for filing taxpayer returns, it holds the burden of proof. This formed part of our submission as the Tax Research Centre at Strathmore University during the stakeholders' submission exercise (see quoted tweet). A few issues still remain though: · The Committee argues that while it is necessary to leverage technology in strengthening tax administration, there's need for adequate safeguards protecting the taxpayer. We are aligned · However, the Committee's express proposal is that the Authority be obligated to share data with the taxpayer via a new Sec29A to the Tax Procedures Act · There's no mention by the Chairman Hon FCPA Kuria Kimani, CBS - MP Molo of Sec56(1) of the Tax Procedures Act which expressly deals with the question of burden of proof We live to fight another day I guess. Waiting to see what will actually be captured in the Finance Act 2026.

On some days, we register wins on the public finance front. The National Assembly's Finance & Planning Committee proposes that the House passes an amendment to the Tax Procedures Act providing that in instances where the Revenue Authority has relied on dual assessment for filing taxpayer returns, it holds the burden of proof. This formed part of our submission as the Tax Research Centre at Strathmore University during the stakeholders' submission exercise (see quoted tweet). A few issues still remain though: · The Committee argues that while it is necessary to leverage technology in strengthening tax administration, there's need for adequate safeguards protecting the taxpayer. We are aligned · However, the Committee's express proposal is that the Authority be obligated to share data with the taxpayer via a new Sec29A to the Tax Procedures Act · There's no mention by the Chairman Hon FCPA Kuria Kimani, CBS - MP Molo of Sec56(1) of the Tax Procedures Act which expressly deals with the question of burden of proof We live to fight another day I guess. Waiting to see what will actually be captured in the Finance Act 2026.

Julians Amboko

21,749 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🚨 BREAKING: IRS SCANDAL EXPOSED 🚨 You’re not going to believe this. Sen. Joni Ernst has revealed that IRS EMPLOYEES OWE ~$50,000,000 IN UNPAID TAXES. Yes. The people who enforce the tax laws… aren’t paying them. Let that sink in. Nearly 6,000 IRS employees, almost 10% of the agency, have significant unpaid tax balances. Average amount owed? About $8,000 per employee. These are not recent bills. Many are from prior years. Some didn’t even file. This isn’t a clerical issue. It’s a credibility crisis. These employees know exactly how the system works, what gets flagged, what doesn’t, and where enforcement is weak. That’s not just hypocrisy. That’s tax fraud risk inside the tax authority itself. So here’s the real question: Should Scott Bessent put IRS employees with unpaid taxes on probation, just like any other federal worker? Because, if the IRS won’t enforce the rules on itself, why should the public trust enforcement at all? Curious what you think. Please comment and hare.

🚨 BREAKING: IRS SCANDAL EXPOSED 🚨 You’re not going to believe this. Sen. Joni Ernst has revealed that IRS EMPLOYEES OWE ~$50,000,000 IN UNPAID TAXES. Yes. The people who enforce the tax laws… aren’t paying them. Let that sink in. Nearly 6,000 IRS employees, almost 10% of the agency, have significant unpaid tax balances. Average amount owed? About $8,000 per employee. These are not recent bills. Many are from prior years. Some didn’t even file. This isn’t a clerical issue. It’s a credibility crisis. These employees know exactly how the system works, what gets flagged, what doesn’t, and where enforcement is weak. That’s not just hypocrisy. That’s tax fraud risk inside the tax authority itself. So here’s the real question: Should Scott Bessent put IRS employees with unpaid taxes on probation, just like any other federal worker? Because, if the IRS won’t enforce the rules on itself, why should the public trust enforcement at all? Curious what you think. Please comment and hare.

Clinton Donnelly

2,299,134 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Trump has halted the hiring of the 88,000 IRS agents. This means more tax cheats will likely get away with tax evasion. And MAGA celebrates. And no, IRS agents are not qualified to be border agents. Why do people fall for this stuff?

Trump has halted the hiring of the 88,000 IRS agents. This means more tax cheats will likely get away with tax evasion. And MAGA celebrates. And no, IRS agents are not qualified to be border agents. Why do people fall for this stuff?

Ed Krassenstein

1,363,390 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents admit on video that they illegally pulled over a car driving down a street in Minneapolis. In the video, multiple ICE agents are seen surrounding a civilian vehicle with several cars. Both back doors of the vehicle are open as agents stand around it. An ICE agent is heard saying: “We just want to make sure you are good, you were driving like a complete maniac, and the way that you’re acting, we have to verify if you are good, and then we will be out of here.” That statement matters… because ICE does not have general authority to conduct traffic stops. Immigration enforcement agents cannot pull someone over for alleged driving behavior. That power belongs to state and local law enforcement, not federal immigration officers. There is no claim of a specific crime. No explanation of probable cause. No warrant shown. Just ICE agents stopping a car, detaining the occupants, and admitting on camera that they initiated the stop based on how someone was “driving.” That is an unlawful stop. Under the Constitution, law enforcement cannot seize or detain someone without legal authority or probable cause. Blocking a vehicle, surrounding it with agents, opening doors, and questioning occupants is a seizure… and doing so without lawful authority is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. If ICE can pull over random cars, invent a reason, and detain people with no warrant and no authority, then the question isn’t whether this was illegal… It’s how many more unconstitutional stops they’ll get away with before someone gets hurt again.

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents admit on video that they illegally pulled over a car driving down a street in Minneapolis. In the video, multiple ICE agents are seen surrounding a civilian vehicle with several cars. Both back doors of the vehicle are open as agents stand around it. An ICE agent is heard saying: “We just want to make sure you are good, you were driving like a complete maniac, and the way that you’re acting, we have to verify if you are good, and then we will be out of here.” That statement matters… because ICE does not have general authority to conduct traffic stops. Immigration enforcement agents cannot pull someone over for alleged driving behavior. That power belongs to state and local law enforcement, not federal immigration officers. There is no claim of a specific crime. No explanation of probable cause. No warrant shown. Just ICE agents stopping a car, detaining the occupants, and admitting on camera that they initiated the stop based on how someone was “driving.” That is an unlawful stop. Under the Constitution, law enforcement cannot seize or detain someone without legal authority or probable cause. Blocking a vehicle, surrounding it with agents, opening doors, and questioning occupants is a seizure… and doing so without lawful authority is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. If ICE can pull over random cars, invent a reason, and detain people with no warrant and no authority, then the question isn’t whether this was illegal… It’s how many more unconstitutional stops they’ll get away with before someone gets hurt again.

Jesus Freakin Congress

126,024 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Okay, I can officially say I’ve seen it all Democrats are now openly defending the Federal Reserve and demanding they stay independent Maxine Waters “We should not be talking about anything but the independence of The Fed, our central bank — This committee, with its clear authority over the Fed, must take a bigger role in defending the Fed's independence” Democrats are now literally demanding we don’t End The Fed, and instead keep paying them interest to borrow money that they type into existence on a computer screen I’m actually speechless. Democrats are the worst enemy of the American People

Okay, I can officially say I’ve seen it all Democrats are now openly defending the Federal Reserve and demanding they stay independent Maxine Waters “We should not be talking about anything but the independence of The Fed, our central bank — This committee, with its clear authority over the Fed, must take a bigger role in defending the Fed's independence” Democrats are now literally demanding we don’t End The Fed, and instead keep paying them interest to borrow money that they type into existence on a computer screen I’m actually speechless. Democrats are the worst enemy of the American People

Wall Street Apes

269,596 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

NOTICE TO ALL SERVING MEMBERS OF AN GARDA SÍOCHÁNA AND THE IRISH DEFENCE FORCES Take notice that your oath of service binds you not to any political office, minister, or temporary government, but to the State and to Bunreacht na hÉireann, which is the supreme law of Ireland. Under the Constitution, sovereignty resides in the People. All powers of government are derived from the People and are held in trust. As a member of An Garda Síochána, you are bound to act with fairness, integrity, and respect for human rights, upholding the Constitution and the law. As a member of the Irish Defence Forces, you are bound to obey only lawful commands. Any order that conflicts with constitutional protections, fundamental rights, or the lawful authority of the People falls outside the scope of that oath. You are hereby reminded that allegiance to the Constitution takes precedence over all political direction. Failure to uphold this duty is a failure of oath. The people of Ireland are not the enemy. They are the source of all lawful authority. Stand accordingly.

NOTICE TO ALL SERVING MEMBERS OF AN GARDA SÍOCHÁNA AND THE IRISH DEFENCE FORCES Take notice that your oath of service binds you not to any political office, minister, or temporary government, but to the State and to Bunreacht na hÉireann, which is the supreme law of Ireland. Under the Constitution, sovereignty resides in the People. All powers of government are derived from the People and are held in trust. As a member of An Garda Síochána, you are bound to act with fairness, integrity, and respect for human rights, upholding the Constitution and the law. As a member of the Irish Defence Forces, you are bound to obey only lawful commands. Any order that conflicts with constitutional protections, fundamental rights, or the lawful authority of the People falls outside the scope of that oath. You are hereby reminded that allegiance to the Constitution takes precedence over all political direction. Failure to uphold this duty is a failure of oath. The people of Ireland are not the enemy. They are the source of all lawful authority. Stand accordingly.

Louise McKenna

26,997 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

NOTICE TO ALL SERVING MEMBERS OF AN GARDA SÍOCHÁNA AND THE IRISH DEFENCE FORCES Take notice that your oath of service binds you not to any political office, minister, or temporary government, but to the State and to Bunreacht na hÉireann, which is the supreme law of Ireland. Under the Constitution, sovereignty resides in the People. All powers of government are derived from the People and are held in trust. As a member of An Garda Síochána, you are bound to act with fairness, integrity, and respect for human rights, upholding the Constitution and the law. As a member of the Irish Defence Forces, you are bound to obey only lawful commands. Any order that conflicts with constitutional protections, fundamental rights, or the lawful authority of the People falls outside the scope of that oath. You are hereby reminded that allegiance to the Constitution takes precedence over all political direction. Failure to uphold this duty is a failure of oath. The people of Ireland are not the enemy. They are the source of all lawful authority. Stand accordingly.

NOTICE TO ALL SERVING MEMBERS OF AN GARDA SÍOCHÁNA AND THE IRISH DEFENCE FORCES Take notice that your oath of service binds you not to any political office, minister, or temporary government, but to the State and to Bunreacht na hÉireann, which is the supreme law of Ireland. Under the Constitution, sovereignty resides in the People. All powers of government are derived from the People and are held in trust. As a member of An Garda Síochána, you are bound to act with fairness, integrity, and respect for human rights, upholding the Constitution and the law. As a member of the Irish Defence Forces, you are bound to obey only lawful commands. Any order that conflicts with constitutional protections, fundamental rights, or the lawful authority of the People falls outside the scope of that oath. You are hereby reminded that allegiance to the Constitution takes precedence over all political direction. Failure to uphold this duty is a failure of oath. The people of Ireland are not the enemy. They are the source of all lawful authority. Stand accordingly.

Louise McKenna

66,233 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад