Ron Paul: Freedom And Income Taxation Are Opposites

Authored by Jacob Hornberger via The Future of Freedom Foundation,

As the April 17 deadline for filing income tax returns and paying federal income taxes approaches, it is important that we all remind ourselves of an important point: Income taxation and the Internal Revenue Service are irreconcilable with the principles of a free society.

Another way to put it is this: If you’re living in a society in which the government wields the power to seize the fruits of your earnings, you are not living in a free society, no matter how convinced you are.

Americans lived without income taxation for more than a century. They also lived in a society in which there was no welfare state and no warfare state. No Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies, welfare, food stamps, public housing, drug laws, immigration controls, public schooling, Pentagon, military-industrial complex, CIA, NSA, FBI, EPA, DEA, SEC, Homeland Security, ICE, or most of the other myriad agencies of the welfare-warfare state.

It was that way of life that defined an American. That’s what Americans defined as freedom. That’s what made the United States the most unusual society in history (notwithstanding the horrible exception of slavery).

Succeeding generations of Americans give it all up in favor of socialism, interventionism, and imperialism.

  • They embraced and adopted the variation of socialism known as the welfare state.

  • They embraced and adopted the totalitarian structure known as a national-security state.

  • They embraced and adopted drug laws, which are the hallmark of tyrannical regimes.

  • They embraced and adopted the regulated, controlled, and managed economy.

  • They embraced foreign wars, foreign interventionism, partnerships with dictators, coups, assassinations, torture, and other practices long employed by dictatorial regimes.

  • And of course they embraced and adopted the means by which all of this statism is funded — income taxation and, also, to large extent, the Federal Reserve System, which fraudulently taxes people’s income and wealth through inflation.

Today, many Americans are coming to the realization of what has happened to our country with respect to foreign wars, empire, and foreign interventions. They’re growing sick and tired of perpetual war. They’re starting to figure out that empire, interventionism, and militarism were no part of the founding principles of our nation. They are seeing what empire and foreign interventionism are doing to our rights, freedoms, and economic well-being here at home. They are beginning to think. They are beginning to question.

The same holds true on the drug war. More and more Americans are “waking up” and seeing the horrible destructiveness and immorality of this government program.

Unfortunately, however, all too many Americans have not yet come to the same realization with respect to the welfare state, the managed economy, the Federal Reserve, and, of course, the income tax and the IRS.

The fact is: You have the natural, God-given right to keep everything you earn. You also have the natural, God-given right to decide what to do with your own money. Your money belongs to you, not the government. To achieve a genuinely free society, the income tax needs to be cast into the dustbin of history, along with the immoral and destructive welfare-warfare state apparatuses that it funds.


bob_dole Pinot-Noir Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:25 Permalink

Burgers didnt get off their lazyboys so the traitors keep getting in. Ron and Rand have been ignored as much as possible for almost 2 decades, will be interesting to see how much Americans allow the alt-right / msm ignore Rand the next go around. South Korea went outside and ousted their satanic president, burgers tried going outside but got psyop'd by Richard Spencer and to this day stay scared in doors.


In reply to by Pinot-Noir

Voluntary Exchange bob_dole Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:44 Permalink

Not only is income tax inconsistent with freedom, so is any form of taxation. When people consent to pay taxes they set in action a sequence that will ultimately result in the destruction of all freedoms.

Taxation being corrupt in its nature, corrupts everything that it touches.

When you consent to taxation you loose power to avoid the centralization and growth of corruption in your society. You perpetuate and concentrate pathological power, which by its nature attracts pathological people.

The only way you get leaders who stay honorable is if you maintain your power over your leaders. In a vote and tax system, you have lost control because you can't withhold tax payment or sue to get your money back for breach of contract when a "leader" quickly proves corrupt. And a corrupt system is also very good at making sure that the corrupt do not need to fear the next election. Fraudulent elections, or if they do loose, very cushy golden parachutes await them. 

That means we the people have to pay for the services we want through voluntary exchange. Also the contract has to have enforcement agreements that strongly compel compliance or full restitution if a breach occurs.

If the leaders are paid through taxes then the system is already corrupt shortly after such a system is instituted - as history clearly shows. People can only maintain control if they maintain the control over the payment and the penalties associated with breach of contract. You keep the contract enforcement service separate and distinct from the service the service provider does. You can't maintain that separateness under a vote and tax system.  

The society living by voluntary exchange must also refuse to use payments in currencies controlled and inflatable by governments. States and state controllers use that currency to further compound their pathological power, and keep their own slaves controlled through this same currency.

A free society would benefit from a redefining  "leaders" as the groups or people who  provide key services a society needs, such as: security, contract enforcement, and dispute resolution/adjudication. Not only should the providers of these services be bound by contracts, but they need to be separated into different and competing entities. A free market in these services will be the best way to ensure this separateness is maintained, and the avoidance of any controlling of a particular market to the point of near monopoly or allied oligopoly. A person must never surrender their "power of the purse".

In reply to by bob_dole

Prisoners_dilemna Save_America1st Mon, 04/16/2018 - 08:28 Permalink

How to score easy points with American zerohedge readers?, tell them what they want to hear; taxes are bad.

How to keep American zerohedge readers slaves, ignore the truth;


Hornberger knows the truth yet neglects to discuss it.  Why?!?!  Future of freedom my arse.


PS. Zerohedge has an international reader base. Hornberger is just here for the brownie points.


PPS. The income tax, by law, only falls on federally-connected income, not on private-sector earnings. It's a beautiful tax whereby those who earn money from Fed-Guv pay a portion back. (Section 86 & 93)…

Compare the 1862 Revenue Act above to the 1861 Revenue act (Section 8);…


The Founding Fathers got it right, as they were well informed by Adam Smith. All Federal Taxes are voluntary and can be avoided, except a Direct Apportioned tax, which is not currently levied (See 1861 above).   The income tax is not a direct apportioned tax, it is an excise. Private-sector Americans have paid the excise tax on their private-sector earnings since the 1940s because they were hoodwinked. Turns out evil men took over American government in many ways ~1940.

Anyone who wants to get rid of the income tax fails to understand the Constitutional restrictions on taxation, and is ignorant of the fact that the tax falls on earning money from Fed-guv. Any private-sector American paying the tax on their private-sector pay, needs to learn the law, history, and other info presented at See the first link above.


Anyone, such as Hornberger, who offers you a 3 paragraph Siren Call, rather than a discussion of Supreme Court rulings, the text of the statutes, the relationship of the statutes to the code, etc, is trying to brainwash you. Why does hornberger condemn the income tax and say "get rid of it", rather than teach you its true history and import??

In reply to by Save_America1st

NoBillsOfCredit Prisoners_dilemna Mon, 04/16/2018 - 11:33 Permalink

The ignorance of the people falls over into their membership on grand and petit juries wherein their ignorance as to what "income" is.  This results in unjust and in error indictments and convictions.  Since Income Taxes are indirect taxes, according to the Supreme Court, the tax on your compensation for services of the individual is not an "income tax" as such a tax would be a "direct tax". Ron Paul is playing the game and ignoring these facts (he knows what I am saying for sure) but is promoting an understand that is more palatable to the general public's misunderstanding of what "income" is in a tax statute with the goal of dumping this horrific "tax".


If anyone disagrees with the facts I have stated and down votes this comment, please explain why. I am always interested in learning more.

In reply to by Prisoners_dilemna

Sonny Brakes Voluntary Exchange Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:11 Permalink

This is a brilliantly worded synopsis of our current state of enslavement.

On a personal level, I try my best to avoid doing my very best because of taxation at every level. Sure I'm a loser, but I'm not an idiot, and I get by and unlike so many money grubbing soul-sucking vampires out there I don't intend on living forever and I'm not able to take anything with me when I'm gone; I've checked into it.

In reply to by Voluntary Exchange

Hanomy Pinot-Noir Mon, 04/16/2018 - 11:12 Permalink

This fits real with Hanomy Manifesto (which can be downloaded/reviewed at  I am the author and is trying to spread the word of it.  I have no affiliation with any group.   Hanomy is a new social, financial, and political system for the whole world.  A lot of problem today will be resolved.  It can be implemented just a few short year.  Numbers work.  I hope you find time to look into it.  Maybe the word will get out to the right eyes and ears ... or those with money to push it further.  FAQs section is coming shortly. 

Highlights of Hanomy:

• Fundamental human needs met throughout life’s existence
• Basic human rights observed everywhere
• Sovereign debts worldwide are settled and eliminated
• Upheld liberty and freedom
• Financial contributions drawn from a portion of idle/unutilized money
No taxes on income, profit or spending
• Interest charges and usury practices abolished
• Power of money creation where it belongs - the people
• An end to the fractional reserve system
• Upheld free market principles (true capitalism but with social responsibility)
• Decreased or dissolved inflation and hyperinflation
• Reduced income inequality
• An end to corporate welfare
• Advanced technology benefiting humanity
• Freedom of time for quality of life and caregiving
• Prohibited conditions for authoritarianism
Preserved sovereignty and respected borders
• An end to “modern day slavery” (this includes you)
• Improved care of the environment and world resources
• A world we’re proud to claim and pass along

In reply to by Pinot-Noir

PT Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:14 Permalink

You have a natural right to keep everything that you earn.
You have a natural right to hire someone to fight off every other bastard that wants to steal some of what you earn.

The job goes to the cheapest bidder.

The Black Market sets the real price or something or other ...

NoPension roddy6667 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:16 Permalink

There are immutable natural laws. 

The fact that our ancestors ascribed these laws to a " God " deserves understanding and the benefit of the doubt. 

Whatever caused a natural law to come into existence, and how or why a person believes it came to be, does not void the natural law. 

The Bible, for example....served ( and serves ) mankind fairly well in providing a strategy to organize and live your life.  I prefer it's form of " law ", over a system designed by and enforced by the long arm of the State. 

When one realizes that religion, in some form, is ubiquitous to humans gives pause.  Something needs to organize us. Pick your poison.

In reply to by roddy6667

roddy6667 philosobilly Mon, 04/16/2018 - 21:27 Permalink

Just because somebody said

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed,by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness"

does not make it true. It is just an opinion. Another group can make a completely opposing statement. It's all hype.


In reply to by philosobilly

cstu7011 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:17 Permalink

It's shameful to give this looney tunes goobermint a red cent when we can give it directly to an American family living in a box or tent.

PT cstu7011 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:18 Permalink

Isn't charity tax-deductible?

I wonder if govt would still call it "charity" if you convinced a beggar to give you a receipt?


(EDIT:  i.e. Charity is only Charity if done via a third party.  Charity is only Charity if some of the money is lost through administration fees.  Should homeless people register as religions or something?)

In reply to by cstu7011

Voluntary Exchange Debugas Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:16 Permalink

I am not going to "donate" to someone if I need to hire someone to protect me, or settle disputes, or enforce contracts. If I need those services then I also need to enforce for damages if they do not perform on their agreement. Therefore, any key service you need you should pay for and include in the contract the power to enforce the contract or obtain prior agreed restitution for breach of contract. So you need a contract that is enforceable by a separate and independent entity. Donations do not suffice because such a recipient has no requirement for performance. And we know from experience that "taxes" are not going to work over the long term (see above posts). If you are going to try trust, then only grant "trust" if a person earns your "trust" through performance. "Trust" without a contract is a vulnerable stance to take.

In reply to by Debugas

Voluntary Exchange ZENDOG Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Actually what never works is the definition of "the Commons". There is no such thing. Value is subjective. What one person thinks of as a  "good" held in common, others will view as an evil imposed against the will of a particular person or group. People who share a view of "common" good are free to own such "goods" by gathering a group of those who agree to pay for such an arrangement. I think it is a bad idea, but that is their own business. This does not entitle them to enforce their view of this "good" as being a "good" for anyone else who does not share their preferences, or force them to pay for it with "taxes".

Regarding the actions of the People who call themselves "The United States Government": there is not a single thing they do with their stolen tax booty that I consider to be "good". Every thing they do I consider evil and contrary to my personal interests or the informed interest of other non-criminal people who call themselves Americans.

I can agree that people should avoid paying all taxes. I can also agree that stupid people pay taxes. But that does not justify the actions of the criminals that enslave them, and always seek to make more and more slaves. Indeed, because of the consent of the ignorant and stupid, the human world is about to be destroyed. So if I want a future for the next generation, it is insufficient to just avoid taxes, I must also help to educate people out of their ignorance, stupidity, and slavery or the game is over!

In reply to by ZENDOG

D.T.Barnum Mon, 04/16/2018 - 06:00 Permalink

There never has nor ever will be such a thing as mass freedom.  It's like a perfect circle, existing only in theory.

The fact is: You have the natural, God-given right to keep everything you earn.

No you don't. You have a constitutional right that is based on the theory of a creator God, which is fine and good.  But, the people need to stay vigilant to make sure the constitution is upheld, which they haven't been.  Basically, God only exists if we collectively keep him in our hearts, which we haven't been doing.  America's post-Christianity religion is mammon and materialism.

Dr. Paul is an idealist who will tip-toe around the fact that there has to be a racial component to nationalism.  It's logic.  We all come from genetically homogeneous tribal roots, but we are supposed to NWO new-age style go against our hardwiring and ignore it, whilst holding hands and singing kumbuya.  I don't think It's going to work. 

America has no binding blood-ties or binding culture and too much diversity, which is a big cause of it becoming infiltrated by the khazar gypsy moneychanger cabal.  The khazar gypsy moneychanger cabal pushes diversity so they can more easily hide within the population.  Otherwise, they would stand out like a sore thumb.  These are more issues Dr. Paul, who has ties to the Rosicrucians (which I believe is new-age NWO type of organization), will not address.


Voluntary Exchange D.T.Barnum Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:17 Permalink

While I might object to the term "God given" since I prefer wording that does  not alienate agnostics or atheists, I can categorically refute your foolishness that seeks to negate a basically valid truth in order to justify a very harmful, nihilistic, foolish stance doomed to promote human misery and suffering. 

First "rights" do not derive from certain people claiming authority to enforce their will against others who don't agree (all constitutions). "Rights" are short-hand for understanding the nature of humans: that most of us prefer life to death, and prefer well-being to misery and suffering. Those actions in harmony with nature's laws that promote our life and well-being are thus "natural rights". Belief in God is not at all needed to agree to live by such rules.

I can agree with your observation that America has become corrupt and godless. I of course disagree with your view that "God" only exists if you live godly. This is irrelevant. While beliefs, such as a belief in God,  can motivate actions, they do not determine the consequences of actions. The laws of nature do that, and do it perfectly and consistently.

That is why our societies should be based on common observations on the laws of nature and the predictable consequences of such actions. The only argument that can exist against such an agreement of facts of nature is a personal preference for death, misery, and suffering, or, personal ignorance and/or misconception leading to false expectations with regard to the laws of nature.

A person can believe in "mammon" and "materialism" and still choose to behave in a way that promotes well-being of their fellow humans. Such defects of character might serve as motivations to violate someone's natural rights, but a person need not act merely from such desires.

Your appeal to race also falls into the category of other moral defects. Race need not be a motivation for violation of natural rights, although people tend to defend race before they defend natural rights. This is a defect of their own minds and those factors of their culture that promote such defects, (like the argument you are making!), not of the laws of nature that define optimal human cooperation. Optimal human well-being derive from optimal cooperation, and this can be very well defined as VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE.

Conversely involuntary exchange: such as taxes, theft, fraud, conscription, forced education, forced paper money, physical aggression, and so on, can be shown to be inferior to voluntary exchange based on the consequences to that part of nature called the "human kingdom".

What stands out like a "sore thumb" is voluntary exchange vs involuntary exchange. Good "Jews" practice voluntary exchange, bad "Jews" practice involuntary exchange. You can take these two statements and substitute any racial, national, religions, or cultural group you wish to designate. One choice results in good for humans, the other choice results in bad for humans. Or to quote some ancient wisdom "You shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not murder.

Those who defend natural rights, do not sit around and sing "kumbayya", they act to defend what is theirs, and cooperate in such actions with any and all those who also respect natural rights.

The only way one person, party, culture, race, religion, or nation could prey upon another is by practicing involuntary exchange. Using any "solution" other than voluntary exchange fails to solve the underlying problem: involuntary exchange.

Thus taxation, or any human "law" are not the solution, they are various examples of known failures that always demonstrate the problem: "involuntary exchange". Natural law is unaffected by the declarations of men, thus humans are incapable of  making any kind of real "law". All the laws that matter already exist! They can be discovered, they can be agreed to, they can be ignored, but the consequences of them can not be evaded. Or to put it simply: choose life, that you may live.


In reply to by D.T.Barnum

21st.century D.T.Barnum Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:21 Permalink

 America's post-Christianity religion is mammon and materialism

so, let's replace taxing incomes- and start taxing mammon and materialism . !

it would be anonymous, broad-based and proportional

buy a pack of gum? then you'll be paying your "fair share" ( a repulsive phrase to start with)

rent a private jet from warren buffett's NetJets operation ? that would be taxed

turn the vulture Buffett into our tax collector-- since he thinks "rich" people should pay more tax-- then it's time to change what is taxed.   

In reply to by D.T.Barnum

Mr. Ed 21st.century Tue, 04/17/2018 - 00:55 Permalink

The FairTax, above all, does not violate our 4th ammendment right be secure in our "...persons, houses, papers and effects." (ie, our privacy!) because there is no need to file any kind of "return" with any governmental body or submit to "audits".


You can't say that about the Flat Tax - and this is where Ron Paul and I part company.  He is basically a force for good, but needs to re-think his position on this issue.

In reply to by 21st.century

Pinot-Noir Mon, 04/16/2018 - 06:05 Permalink

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....” ― Noam Chomsky, The Common Good.


Therin lies the issue, speech is controlled and we know for a fact that social media is complicit so diversity of intelligent debate is therefore limited.


Ron Paul strayed outside of accepted guidelines and was therefore sidelined. Watching him being sidelined was the massive 'Red Pill' moment for me. ALL the media outlets blanked him, cut his conversations and interviews off mid sentance. It was as blatent as it was shocking.


There are good guys out there but they just can't get the platform.


The Ticks are well and truly embedded.





BraceforImpact Mon, 04/16/2018 - 06:18 Permalink

I consented to NONE of this. FK em.


I was never free, never will be, and if I have kids, neither will they. This place is a toilet LOL


People are actually so dumb they think this is all normal.

Last of the Mi… Mon, 04/16/2018 - 06:57 Permalink

The only way you will really drain the swamp is through tax reduction. Ultimately trillions of taxpayer dollars up for grab is the problem. Who decides where they go is the ultimate form of corruption in our government.

The only way to kill this blood sucking cancer that is our government now, is to starve it out.

gkolmer Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:01 Permalink

Dear Mr Ron Paul,


You are perhaps the only individual that has a grasp of reality when it comes to "behavioral taxation" (i.e. the more you raise taxes the less revenues you collect-see Hauser's Law). It is perhaps the reason you are not in Washington anymore but also, it should be noted that you have only half of the solution; you should not tax income or investment, you should only tax consumption. Consuming something today means we are potentially depriving future generations; thus only this segment of economic affairs should be taxed as there is an explicit trade-off that "behaves" over generations.

21st.century Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:04 Permalink

Dr. Paul, once again, diagnosis the ill-ness-- but offers no remedies. 

He does correctly zero in on taxation- payroll, income taxes are the Jesus Nut that holds the whole ramshackle, in-efficient, last century bureaucracy together. SS Act of 1935 .. and the attendant payroll taxation method, has been the vehicle for the following med-i and med-e "cares" to be added. There's no doubt that omamacare was/ still is on the same goal-- to just add another amendment to collect obama care taxes to FICA (payroll)

a "flat" Tax is just a flat INCOME tax

stop taxing income-- tax spending -- then you would have an IRS about 1/10th the size today. there would still need to be need for a small irs ... maybe just as a dept. in Treasury dept? can't have everything at once, so, why not go for more perfect union ?

time to leave the cynical payroll tax in last century

taxing the meager wages of poor people, keeps them poor. govt. produced poverty.



F em all but 6 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:09 Permalink

Ron Paul is right, but like all others does not understand the system. Before the States sought federal permission to join other States in the Federal Social Security Act (compact clause), INCOME was narrowly defined by the USSC as "PROFIT AND GAIN". At that time, what an individual received as "COMPENSATION FOR LABOR" was defined by the courts as an "EVEN EXCHANGE. In other words, your labor was your PROPERTY and what you exchanged it for through contracts was also "PROPERTY" of equal value. NO profit and gain means no basis for an EXCISE TAX period. And ignore pre SS taxation of the uber rich whom had that form of income from investments therefore subject to an excise.

Back to the Social Security Act of 1936. Yes it violates the constitution. It stands because it was never challenged with the correct legal arguments. The federal ACT created a PRIVILEGE. The term EXCISE TAX and PRIVILEGE TAX are synonymous. The privilege? Being eligible (entitled) to what the courts would define as extraordinary protections paid for with money from the public treasury. And yes the courts have told us that we have NO property or contract rights in "PUBLIC MONEY". So those that VOLUNTARILY apply for the number (coerced) have, through WAIVERS, agreed to be taxed for the PRIVILEGE. The TAX is NOT a direct tax on the property (WAGE), but merely uses the wage as a unit of measurement to calculate the indirect excise. And now the judicially definition of INCOME becomes irrelevant. Within the context of the PRIVILEGE, and under the legislative PLENARY taxing powers, CONGRESS NOT THE COURTS DEFINE INCOME. Wage income, barter income, gift income, ect and to infinity. Income is now whatever Congress says it is. Moreover, because taxation is purely a legislative function, the function of the courts is limited to deciding if the object subject to an excise is in fact the proper object of an excise. Once decided, the amount of the excise cannot be controlled by the courts.

What does this mean? The State and federal government (THROUGH WAIVERS OF CONTRACT AND PROPERTY RIGHTS) can take 100% of what you make except a handful of future promises that can be modified or taken away at the will of the legislative body that created the PRIVILEGE.

That the entire federal government is INSOLVENT is now self evident. That this form of taxation is the only thing that is holding off the inevitable collapse should also be self evident. And what of the courts? Would they intervene and dissolve the system if the correct legal arguments were presented? Dont hold your breath. The courts have been compromised by ignorance, arrogance, and good old fashioned corruption. The only remedy at this point is another horrible bloody civil war.

philosobilly F em all but 6 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 12:19 Permalink

ha it stands cause no good legal argument, try it stands cause people found out they could make themselves an unnamed upper class through govt largesse. or better yet and easier to understand, people are by and large lazy and stupid and free stuff is awesome- this is literally why democrats dont have an argument beyond well take their stuff and give it to you.

In reply to by F em all but 6

Rich Monk Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:11 Permalink

The remedy: Arrest all Central Bankers and the Wall St. (((Crooks))). Confiscate their assets, then proceed to public hangings. Next, move on to the politicians, repeat. Finally, shut down the Federal government and allow States to run themselves.

moonmac Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:42 Permalink

Social Security is just another Big Gubbermint Money Skimming Operation for people born with good genes to steal from workers with bad genes who die before or soon after they start collecting.‎