A Ride With My Best Friend: The Fiscal Arbitrators Pseudolaw Tax Evasion Scheme, Recruitment, and Litigation

D. Netolitzky
{"title":"A Ride With My Best Friend: The Fiscal Arbitrators Pseudolaw Tax Evasion Scheme, Recruitment, and Litigation","authors":"D. Netolitzky","doi":"10.54208/1000/0006/005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fiscal Arbitrators was a comparative short-lived Canadian pseudolaw tax avoidance scheme that operated between 2006-2012. Taxpayers made “Strawman Theory” claims to create large but fictitious business expenses. Taxpayers who employed Fiscal Arbitrators techniques had no legal basis for their claims. The Canada Revenue Agency assessed “gross negligence” penalties in addition to other automatic charges. At least 500 Fiscal Arbitrators customers appealed their taxation re-assessments at the Tax Court of Canada. There, these taxpayers usually claimed their actions, and blatantly false tax returns, had a reasonable basis. This unusual confluence of factors resulted in a substantial number of written court decisions that include first-hand, first-person, accounts of how and why Fiscal Arbitrators’ customers were recruited, and that describe this “Detax” scheme’s operation. Unexpectedly, Fiscal Arbitrators customers were primarily recruited via person-to person contacts and through family, social, and workplace networks. No Internet based recruitment was reported. Fiscal Arbitrators customers showed little to no interest in or understanding of the basis for their extraordinary claims. Their sole motivation was greed. These taxpayers were mainly non-ideological “mercenaries” who abandoned pseudolaw to conduct damage control steps as rational self interested actors. Most voluntarily terminated their appeals prior to a full appeal court hearing. The characteristics of this study’s Fiscal Arbitrators population do not correspond with how legal, media, and academic sources stereotypically portray and describe pseudolaw adherents. This investigation thus illustrates pseudolaw’s users are potentially more diverse than is commonly recognized.","PeriodicalId":111280,"journal":{"name":"The International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54208/1000/0006/005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fiscal Arbitrators was a comparative short-lived Canadian pseudolaw tax avoidance scheme that operated between 2006-2012. Taxpayers made “Strawman Theory” claims to create large but fictitious business expenses. Taxpayers who employed Fiscal Arbitrators techniques had no legal basis for their claims. The Canada Revenue Agency assessed “gross negligence” penalties in addition to other automatic charges. At least 500 Fiscal Arbitrators customers appealed their taxation re-assessments at the Tax Court of Canada. There, these taxpayers usually claimed their actions, and blatantly false tax returns, had a reasonable basis. This unusual confluence of factors resulted in a substantial number of written court decisions that include first-hand, first-person, accounts of how and why Fiscal Arbitrators’ customers were recruited, and that describe this “Detax” scheme’s operation. Unexpectedly, Fiscal Arbitrators customers were primarily recruited via person-to person contacts and through family, social, and workplace networks. No Internet based recruitment was reported. Fiscal Arbitrators customers showed little to no interest in or understanding of the basis for their extraordinary claims. Their sole motivation was greed. These taxpayers were mainly non-ideological “mercenaries” who abandoned pseudolaw to conduct damage control steps as rational self interested actors. Most voluntarily terminated their appeals prior to a full appeal court hearing. The characteristics of this study’s Fiscal Arbitrators population do not correspond with how legal, media, and academic sources stereotypically portray and describe pseudolaw adherents. This investigation thus illustrates pseudolaw’s users are potentially more diverse than is commonly recognized.
与我最好的朋友一起乘车:财政仲裁员的伪法律逃税计划,招聘和诉讼
财政仲裁员是一个相对短暂的加拿大伪法律避税计划,在2006年至2012年期间运作。纳税人提出了“稻草人理论”的主张,以创造巨额但虚构的商业费用。使用财政仲裁员技术的纳税人的索赔没有法律依据。除了其他自动收费外,加拿大税务局还评估了“重大过失”罚款。至少有500名财政仲裁员客户向加拿大税务法院就其税务重新评估提出上诉。在那里,这些纳税人通常声称他们的行为,以及公然虚假的纳税申报表,有合理的依据。这种不寻常的因素融合导致了大量书面法庭裁决,其中包括财政仲裁员如何以及为何招募客户的第一手第一人称叙述,并描述了这种“Detax”计划的运作。出乎意料的是,财政仲裁员的客户主要是通过人与人之间的联系以及通过家庭、社会和工作场所网络招募的。没有互联网招聘的报道。财政仲裁员的客户对他们的特殊索赔的基础几乎没有兴趣或理解。他们唯一的动机是贪婪。这些纳税人主要是非意识形态的“雇佣兵”,他们放弃了伪法,以理性的自利行为者的身份采取损害控制措施。大多数人在上诉法院全面审理之前就自愿终止了上诉。本研究中财政仲裁员群体的特征与法律、媒体和学术来源对伪法律拥护者的刻板印象并不相符。因此,这项调查说明了伪法律的用户可能比通常认识到的更多样化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书