Reparations For Slavery Tax Credit
Reparations For Slavery – The Law And Relevant Case Law
Proponents of this contention assert that African Americans can claim a so-called “Black Tax Credit” on their federal income tax returns as reparations for slavery and other oppressive treatment suffered by African Americans. A similar frivolous argument has been made that Native Americans are entitled to a credit on their federal income tax returns as a form of reparations for past oppressive treatment.The Law: There is no provision in the Internal Revenue Code which allows taxpayers to claim a “Black Tax Credit” or a credit for Native American reparations. It is a well settled principle of law that deductions and credits are a matter of legislative grace. See, e.g., Wilson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-139, 81 T.C.M. (CCH) 1745 (2001). Unless specifically provided for in the Internal Revenue Code, no deduction or credit may be allowed.The IRS indicated in News Release IR-2002-08, 2002 I.R.B. LEXIS 30, that it will crack down on promoters of “slavery reparation tax credit” and “Native American reparations” scams. See 2002 TNT 17-15 (Jan. 24, 2002). Also, according to the News Release, the IRS will implement a new policy under which these reparation claims will be treated as a frivolous tax return which could result in a potential $500 penalty. Id. The IRS issued Revenue Ruling 2004-33, 2004-1 C.B. 628, warning taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument. Also, with respect to a somewhat similar argument, the IRS issued Revenue Ruling 2006-20, 2006-1 C.B. 746, warning taxpayers from claiming an exemption for Native Americans from federal income tax liability based upon an unspecified “Native American Treaty.”Persons who claim refunds based on the slavery reparation tax credit or assist others in doing so are subject to prosecution for violation of federal tax laws. In July 2003, Robert L. Foster and Crystal D. Foster, father and daughter, were convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States withrespect to such claims and of filing false, fictitious and fraudulent claims.On October 23, 2003, Robert Foster was sentenced to 13 years in prison and Crystal Foster was sentenced to 3 years and 1 month in prison. See 2003 TNT 206-31 (Oct. 23, 2003). In September 2005, the Third Circuit affirmed Robert Foster’s conviction, but remanded the case for resentencing. See 2005 TNT 187-18 (Sept. 23, 2005).Furthermore, the United States has a cause of action for injunctive relief against a party suspected of violating the tax laws. Sections 7407 and 7408 provide for injunctive relief against income tax preparers and promoters of abusive tax shelters, respectively, in these types of cases.For example, on March 31, 2003, a federal district court permanently barred tax return preparer, Andrew W. Wiley, from preparing federal income tax returns claiming refunds based on a non-existent tax credit for slavery reparations finding that Wiley engaged in “deceptive conduct which has interfered substantially with the proper administration” of the tax laws. United States v. Wiley, No. 3:02-cv-209WS (S.D. Miss. 2002); see 2003 TNT 62-18 (March 31, 2003).In August 2007, a federal court in Georgia permanently barred Derrick Sanders from promoting a tax fraud scheme involving false claims. Sanders, in promoting the scheme, repeatedly made false statements that the Yamassee group is a Native American tribe whose members are exempt from federal income tax. Sanders also prepared forms for customers to use improperly to instruct their employers to stop withholding taxes from wages.
Relevant Case Law:
United States v. Bridges, 86 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5280 (4th Cir. 2000) – the court upheld Bridges’ conviction of aiding and assisting the preparation of false tax returns, on which he claimed a non-existent “Black Tax Credit.”United States v. Foster, 2002-2 U.S.T.C. (CCH) ¶ 50,785 (E.D. Va. 2002) – the court held that no provision of the Internal Revenue Code allows for a tax credit for slavery reparations and entered an injunction against Foster (an income tax return preparer) prohibiting him from preparing returns or refund claims based on fabricated tax credits.United States v. Haugabook, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25314 (M.D. Ga. 2002) – the court entered a permanent injunction against Haugabook prohibiting him from preparing returns or other documents to be filed with the IRS claiming a tax credit or refund for reparations for slavery or other fabricated tax credits or refunds.United States v. Mims, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25291 (S.D. Ga. 2002) – the court entered a permanent injunction against the defendants prohibiting them from preparing returns or other documents with the IRS claiming a credit or refund for reparations for slavery or any other fabricated tax creditor refund.United States v. Foster, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3092, 2002-1 U.S.T.C. (CCH) ¶ 50,263 (E.D. Va. 2002), aff’d, 51 Fed. Appx. 915 (4th Cir. 2002) – the court held that the United States clearly established its right to recover an erroneously paid refund in the amount of $500,000, plus interest, where the claim for refund was based on the slavery reparation tax credit.Taylor v. United States, 57 Fed. Cl. 264, 266 (2003) – the court upheld Service’s denial of Taylor’s refund claim, which was based on “being reduced to a second class citizen, but billed first class citizenship taxes for over 60 years,” holding that the Internal Revenue Code does not contain aprovision allowing slavery reparation claims.George v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-121 – the court rejected George’s frivolous argument that he is an “Indian not paying taxes” finding that Native Americans are subject to the same federal income tax laws as are other United States citizens, unless there is an exemption created bytreaty or statute.Gunton v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-122 – the court rejected Gunton’s frivolous arguments finding that Native Americans are subject to the same federal income tax laws as are other United States citizens, unless there is an exemption created by treaty or statute.Wilkins v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 109 (2003) – the court found that the Internal Revenue Code does not provide a tax deduction, credit, or other allowance for slavery reparations.