Found at the end of IRS Form 1040: "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, they are true, correct, and accurately list all amounts and sources of income I received during the tax year."

Can we ever with legitimate moral justification apply mental reservation in signing?

Can material, knowing, and willful fabrication and submission of the above form ever be morally justifiable according to correct moral principles of Catholic Theology?  If so please mention the principle(s) and consider illustrating with one or more examples of same.

When does personal taxation under the threat of the heavy hand of government become so great as to amount to the government's stealing from the people?

Have you ever heard a Catholic cleric address any of the above questions from the pulpit?

"Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's."  Matt. 22:21

.
Have you ever tried to find out where they define what they mean by "income?"
Why would they need a definition when by signing the form you are attesting to whatever definition they might choose to supply later?
Are the profits of a corporation the same thing as compensation for a human being's personal labor?
When you sell an item of personal property and you receive more than what you paid for it, is the difference "income?"
What about when it sells for less than you paid for it, is that loss deducted from your "income?"
What if a customer refuses to pay his bill -- can you subtract the loss from your "income" that year?
Or if you don't subtract it this year can you subtract it next year? Or the year after? Why not?
How about when someone steals you blind and leaves you penniless, is that something that computes as negative "income?"
.

Thanks Neil.  Good questions, indeed!

I will try to simplify things for the purpose of this thread by presenting a hypothetical by way of -- well, let's call him Joe Doe.  Joe Doe is a bachelor who made $100,000 last year and is about to file his 1040 with no schedules, just claiming the standard allowable deduction.

80 of the 100 thousand he made teaching school.  The other 20 thousand he made by handyman cash only jobs.  He's a Catholic and doesn't believe he is morally required to report the full 20 thousand (he thinks he will just report 10 of the 20 thousand) in cash only jobs and he's believes he's morally justified in signing off on the 1040 Form.  Without knowing any more details than that, what's your (or anyone else's) take on the matter.

I think your scenario would be somewhat rare on a practical level because it would be difficult to find numerous people willing to pay cash for your services. If, on the other hand, you worked for a small number of people, each employing you to the tune of 6-7 thousand dollars, they would be putting their businesses at risk for not reporting their payments to you. I know that this does not answer your question, but I think society is already too cashless and most people would never find themselves in the position of having to decide whether or not to "hide" large sums from the government.

With all due respect, I was certainly hoping to generate better replies than this, which I think you might be the first to admit is a sort of non-response..  Unfortunately, it completely bypasses the very legitimate questions I pose.  (Bottom Line: Can you or can you not ever knowingly, willfully, AND morally justifiably sign that last line on the form with a good properly formed Catholic conscience even though you know you have falsified the income and if so how so -- using one or more examples to illustrate.)

I was not trying to figure out some ideal scenario which might work best for the most people in trying to figure out some solid Catholic answers, just something to get the ball rolling.  My scenario may not be the best (if someone has a better one I hope they will offer it), but there is no reason why it could not be applied as a point of reference for some solid discussion.  Even if my scenario in your worlds "would be somewhat rare on a practical level because it would be difficult to find numerous people willing to pay cash for your services" the scenario itself is still a very legitimate one to work off of for trying to intelligently discuss the questions I presented, is it not?

So please -- I hope my OP can further some good solid discussion without any hang-ups over "technical" problems in the application.  If people don't want to contribute due to concerns over Big Brother looking down on them -- well, that's another matter! :)

80 of the 100 thousand he made teaching school.  The other 20 thousand he made by handyman cash only jobs.  He's a Catholic and doesn't believe he is morally required to report the full 20 thousand (he thinks he will just report 10 of the 20 thousand) in cash only jobs and he's believes he's morally justified in signing off on the 1040 Form.  Without knowing any more details than that, what's your (or anyone else's) take on the matter.

First, I think the "penalties of perjury" vary according to the amount of money involved. If the worst that can happen is they decide you owe more taxes, then all you are doing by signing, is agreeing to pay them more taxes according to whatever amount they determine. If you choose not to pay that penalty, then they may take more drastic measures by increasing the penalty, by garnishing wages, confiscating your properties or locking you up.

As for being paid cash, it seems that when he spends that cash which he did not claim, he will end up rendering "to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" because cash or not, everything is taxed, so Caesar will certainly end up getting his share one way or the other.

But is it morally wrong to not claim or pay tax on that cash? Personally, I vote no.

Personally, I think that matter is trivial, his real concern should probably be more aimed at answering to God for what he teaches in school.       

 

.
Again, if you can find where there has been an official definition of "income" as it is presumed and used on the forms, please post a copy.

Income (for better or for worse) as set out by the IRS is seen on this form: https://apps.irs.gov/app/vita/content/globalmedia/4491_income.pdf

The tax code, of course, is the most complicated code in the U.S.

Questions involving whether certain income in certain cases falls within the statue have no doubt been endlessly litigated so one might well have to delve into administrative law decisions as well as case law in any particular case which does not clearly fall into one of the more common sets of income guidelines as set out by the IRS in their forms.

What follows is one page of the above linked form:

How do I determine taxable and nontaxable income?
The Income Quick Reference Guide in the Volunteer Resource Guide, Income tab, includes examples of
taxable and nontaxable income.
Gross income is all income received in the form of money, goods, property, and services that is not exempt
from tax. It includes income from sources outside the U.S. or from the sale of a primary residence, even
if part or all of that income can be excluded. Gross income may include part of Social Security benefits
received and certain scholarship and fellowship grants.
•
Income that is taxable must be reported on a taxpayer’s return and is subject to tax.
•
Income that is nontaxable may have to be shown on a taxpayer’s return but is exempt from tax.

What are types of taxable income?
The Income section of Form 1040 is used to report earned and unearned taxable income.
The sum of all
earned and unearned income is reported on Form 1040, line 22, as total income.
•
Earned income – any income received for work, such as wages or business/self-employment income
•
Unearned income – any income not produced from work, such as unemployment income or income
produced by investments, such as interest on savings, dividends on stocks, or rental income

Whatt are types of nontaxable or exempt income?
Some nontaxable income such as gifts and inheritances are excludable and not shown on the return.
Exempt income includes such things as
interest income produced from certain types of investments. There
are some instances when exempt income is shown on the return but not included in the income tax compu
-
tation, for example, tax-exempt interest income.
Under the Victims of Terrorism Tax Relief Act of 2001, the following amounts are not included in income:
•
Certain disability payments received in tax years ending after September 10, 2001, for injuries sustained
in a terrorist attack
•
Payments from the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001
•
Qualified disaster relief payments made after September 10, 2001, to cover personal, family
, living, or
funeral expenses incurred because of a terrorist attack
•
Death benefits paid by an employer to the survivor of an employee if the benefits are paid because the
employee died as a result of a terrorist attack
The Act also provides that the federal income tax liability of those who died as a result of the following
attacks is forgiven for certain tax years:
•
The September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and United Airlines Flight 93
in Somerset County, Pennsylvania
•
Terrorist attacks involving anthrax occurring after September 10, 2001, and before January 1, 2002
•
The April 19, 1995, attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building
For additional details, see Publication 3920, Tax Relief for Victims of Terrorist Attacks.

First, I think the "penalties of perjury" vary according to the amount of money involved. If the worst that can happen is they decide you owe more taxes, then all you are doing by signing, is agreeing to pay them more taxes according to whatever amount they determine. If you choose not to pay that penalty, then they may take more drastic measures by increasing the penalty, by garnishing wages, confiscating your properties or locking you up.

As for being paid cash, it seems that when he spends that cash which he did not claim, he will end up rendering "to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" because cash or not, everything is taxed, so Caesar will certainly end up getting his share one way or the other.

But is it morally wrong to not claim or pay tax on that cash? Personally, I vote no.

Personally, I think that matter is trivial, his real concern should probably be more aimed at answering to God for what he teaches in school.        

 

Some good points in your first paragraph, although my OP is not concerned with practical consequences one may or may not face from the government, but rather the moral consequences (if any) of willfully, and knowingly signing a false statement.  That is why I think the question of whether or not you may have a legitimate case for mental reservation in some cases is key.

As for your second paragraph, it is quite true that we live in a world where we are being taxed directly and or indirectly on our spent income in a zillion different ways and I think that is a very legitimate consideration in trying to determine whether we can legitimate say enough taxes (theft?) is enough and that that the federal government simply does not have a legitimate right to know about every single dime of income that we make when it comes to reporting it on the federal income tax form.  If they don't have that right in a particular case then I for one would think you may well be justified to use mental reservation (with a clear conscience) in signing a falsified form.

Your last sentence may or may not be true in any one particular case, but it is a distraction from the legitimate questions in my OP which I would hope this thread can stay focused on.

Technically and biblicaly speaking, the IRS has no right to collect your income through taxes, because the IRS is a government agency, but The Federal Reserve note (paper dollars) is generated by a private entity (foreign Jєωιѕн central banks & shareholders). It's not even generated by the U.S. Treasury.  

Jesus Christ said, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" (Mark 12:17), because the currency was made by Roman hands, using Roman resources and capital, for the Roman government ruled by Caesar, so anyone in possession of same currency had the moral obligation to pay a portion of it back to Caesar for whatever services he provided to the Hebrews.

The same principle applies to crypto-currency, gold, silver, and various forms of barter. They aren't generated by the U.S. government, so you're under no moral obligation to have these sources of income & wealth taxed by the government.

Great points!  They would seem to add even greater weight to an argument for mental reservation when signing off on the 1040.

I dare say that discussions on CI are monitored by sinister parties outside the Catholic, i.e. by folks who are not Catholic, who have no interest at all in Catholic issues or Catholicism, much less the highly sectarian and nuanced comments of certain Catholic trads about their faith.  But these same people might be very interested in learning what some of you think about the IRS, and what constitutes taxable income on the part of individuals, and what kinds of income are justifiably taxable by our overreaching government, etc.  I would just suggest that certain of you be careful about what you post on the subject, one way or the other.  These shadowy figures may very much be interested in things you may reveal about your understanding of tax law and justified taxing practice.  They could very easily, IMO, use material posted unwisely or carelessly to move on certain individuals, not to mention CI itself.  My concerns may entirely unfounded, but, on the other hand, they may not.