The Ice Blog

by Ice

Tax Increases Begin Next Year

If you believe the tax increases won’t effect your finances next year – think again. If there were ever a time to seek Financial Solutions to the runaway system of taxation – now is the time. Are there steps that you can take to reduce the burden of next years increased tax rates?  Contact The Ice Blog to find out.

Major Individual Income Tax Benefits Expiring 12/31/2011:

• Personal tax credits applied against income tax no longer apply

• Higher alternative minimum tax exemptions revert back to extraordinarily-low thresholds

• $250 school teacher expense deduction ends

• Mortgage insurance premium deduction expires

• State and local sales tax deductions expire

• Tuition and related fees deduction end

• IRA to charity tax-free transfers stop

• 2% Social Security tax reduction ends

Major Individual Income Tax Benefits Expiring 12/31/2012:

• Marriage penalty equalization ends

• Dividends taxed at capital gains rates removed, taxed at regular rates now

• Capital gains low tax rates expires

• Removal of itemized deduction phase out for higher income Americans

• Removal of personal exemption phase out for higher income Americans

• Child care deduction limit of $3,000 reverts to $2,400

• Child credit reduces from $1,000 per child to $500 per child

• Low 10% tax bracket for low income Americans is eliminated

• Lower income tax rates and smaller brackets expires

• Refundable adoption credit and reduced deduction

• American Opportunity college education credit expires

• Major reduction in earned income credits and refunds

• Income tax exemption for debt forgiven on home foreclosures and repossessions

• Deduction for student loan interest ends

• Education IRA limit drops from $2,000 to $500

Vote Ron Paul and put an end to the IRS strangle hold on your freedom and finances.


November 10, 2011 - Posted by | Economy, IRS, Money, Tax, Taxation, Taxpayer | , , , , , ,


  1. Good Heavens, I do not understand why all of you alleged Patriot groups have not done the research that is all on the record. I pay no income taxes since I am not “doing business” as the Congress has required as noted in the Congressional Record from 1909 until 1913 when the 16th amendment was enacted.
    I researched all of the taxing Statutes, especially volume 38, page 166 whereby the the normal tax was recorded and since I could not find where I was ‘one required’, I then read each and every recording of the debate about the income tax in the Congressional Record, and it ALWAYS recorded that the income tax was to be the extension of the corporation tax act of 1909 to individuals and copartnerships that were “doing business”, in the act of “doing business” or involved in the carrying on of “doing business”. Being a very astute discerner, I scoured each and every law review article that discussed the income tax and at no time was the private sovereign ever considered to be ‘one required’. Therefore I composed a three point determination to determine if any private sovereign could be considered to be ‘one required’, to wit: In order to be determined to be ‘one required, you would have to be “doing business” in accordance with the taxing statute(s) and be under the jurisdiction of the federal government, you would have to be “doing business” for a ‘gain or profit’ in accordance with the taxing statute(s) and be under the jurisdictiion of the federal government, and third, you would have to be “doing business” for a ‘gain or profit’ that can be effectively-connected to a taxable event in accordance with the taxing statute(s) and be under the jurisdiction of the federal government. I quite filing tax returns in 1979 and only had two meetings with the infernal revenue disservice, one in 1994, and recently in 2010, and both, after providing both evidence and an affidavit showing that I was not ‘one required’, I was told to go and have a nice day.
    The most important phrase noted above is, “and be under the jurisdiction of the federal government”: Read the Constitution at Article 1, Section 8 to realize that since the Constitution IS the supreme law of the land, no agency, irs or otherwise, can submit any demands that conflict with the Constitution.
    The majority of so called Americans are more aptly described as amerikans since they have been so “dumbed-down” to believe that it is easier to pay the theft rather than put up with the hassle, and that is why the unpublic disservants feel that they can steal the labor earnings of the Americans without any serious challenges.
    Read Charlotte Iserbyt’s book, The Deliberate Dumbing-Down of America’ to realize how the once Americans have become docile, subserviant amerikans!

    Comment by D DAXX | November 10, 2011 | Reply

    • I don’t pay any taxes either. I’ve learned how to deal with the issue. And I don’t rely on any of the “paytriot” schemes that DO NOT WORK. The truth is that I take your claims of “evidence” and an affidavit made the IRS go away with a grain of salt. I’ve heard these claims before. And anyone that you convince to pay for this knowledge so they may follow your lead will end up in trouble. When it fails you will claim they must have done something wrong… but too late for them cuz you’ve already got their money. I went another, less troublesome and proven route. I chose a system that has been used by wealthy people for decades upon decades… and actually works. No more wasted time studying tax codes or worrying about whether or not the IRS is going to come knocking on my door.

      Comment by Ice | November 10, 2011 | Reply

      • I have read your articles for many years, and am surprised that you negate my above comments. I have never charged for any of the information that I have learned from the Congressional Record, the intent of the lawmaker.
        The ONLY was to stop the irs is to read the law, then read the Congressional Record and then discern exactly what the Congress intended to tax and with what authority and once you thoroughly understand what you have read then, and only then, you quit filing tax returns that do not apply to you as a sovereign, lawful person!
        Your reference to the manner that the wealthy avoid taxes is that they create trusts and then continue to operate in the public market-place and thereby avoid any and probably all taxation – period! I on the other hand prefer to operate within the law and just not involve myself with the public, jurisdictional, federal government!

        Comment by d daxx | November 12, 2011 | Reply

        • I’m not involved with the Federal Government. I am “invisible”. If you would like to share that information with my viewers I will accept your article and post it to The Ice Blog if you like. Write it up, do spell check, put it in the order you’d like so that it’s and easily understood process and I’ll make it available to all. Whether or not any of my readers will attempt the process is something I couldn’t even guess at. Personally, I won’t attempt it. I’ve seen these things get shot down all the time. Yep… well within the LAW but shot down nonetheless. It’s up to you. Here’s an opportunity for you to help others beat the taxman and regain their freedom from tyranny. I’ll be waiting to hear from you. My contact information is on the Home Page.

          Comment by Ice | November 12, 2011 | Reply

          • Ever since I began to realize that something was wrong with how the government had been doing “business”, and I had been challenged by the irs to post as income something that was not income, I started to do legal research at the University of Michigan Law Library in Ann Arbor, and the more that I researched the more that I realized that I was not ‘one required’ and that is when I quit filing returns.
            My major complaint with all of the past, and even many of the present, tax-protest gurus, is that none of them looked at the law to read and understand what it stated, and then looked at the Congressional Record, the intent of the lawmaker, to fully comprehend and discern that the income tax could only pertain to an entity, individual or copartnership, that was “doing business” in a statutory manner, and under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Why didn’t they? I have read practically all of the publications of Erwin Schiff and all of the other alleged patriots and none of them published an explanation of the taxing laws, none of them published and explanation of what the Congressional Record stated, and none of them researched whether the Congress, not the irs, had any authority or jurisdiction to assess an income tax on any other entity than an individual or copartnership that was “doing business” for a ‘gain or profit’ that can be effectively-connected to a taxable event. “Doing business” is used in a statutory interpretation and not a generic interpretation, ‘gain or profit’ has been stated in many cases from all levels of the alleged court system, Eisner v Macomber, 252 US 189, 1920, for example, and the phrase effectively-connected to a taxable event has been utilized by the irs in their interpretative, not substantive, regulations many times.
            All of the aforementioned facts and phrases have been utilized many times to describe and define who and what can be taxed, therefore, why no one has ever put those facts and statements together and mailed them to the irs and their federal representatives is beyond me.
            I explained my lawful status to the irs on both of the previously mentioned meeting occasions and I never heard from them after I clearly established my private status position. The only reason that I was called the second time was, as I astutely determined, that a new office was opened in my geographic area and apparently my file that the irs had maintained was in a pile of files given to a new agent and she decided to contact me to see why the irs did not have any current data about me and why I had not filed returns. No big deal, since I have not had any further communications with those thieves!

            Comment by d daxx | November 12, 2011 | Reply

  2. Real Americans should realize that unless and until we pull the so-called ‘purse strings’ and deprive the greedy, thieving congress – they do not deserve capitalization – from the theft of our labor earnings, and all of the other financial thievery, the mendacious and scurillious behavior of those thieves will continue until we become a more pronounced third world country!

    Comment by D DAXX | November 10, 2011 | Reply

    • I’d like to get rid of the IRS altogether. And currently there is only one candidate that is willing to phase that department out… and he’s getting my vote.
      RON PAUL.

      Comment by Ice | November 10, 2011 | Reply

  3. […] Tax Increases Begin Next Year ( […]

    Pingback by Why Your Tax Bill Might Surge Next Year - Prepper Podcast Radio Network News | Prepper Podcast Radio Network News | November 11, 2011 | Reply

  4. The truth is, is that the Government needs to make a long term solution that will benefit all american’s but at the same time lift this country back to the top of the mountain where it belongs.

    Comment by mhbeanstalk23 | November 11, 2011 | Reply

    • And that’s exactly what needs to happen. The best long term solution is to begin by whittling down the over sized bureaucracy… stop the Fed gov. from spending money on those things that are best handled LOCALLY. The Dept. of Education is a good example. And then we have the Agriculture dept. busting “pic nics” … geez. It won’t stop until we get the right man in the drivers seat. I’ll tell ya right now that a vote for Flip Floppin Romney or Forgetful Perry will just give us more of the same.

      Vote Ron Paul… let’s Restore America!!

      Comment by Ice | November 11, 2011 | Reply

      • I Agree with you on most of your reply but unfortunately i really don’t know much about Ron Paul so as of now I’m not sure who i would support in the republican nomination. I do know it wont be Perry, Cain, or Bachmann. Gingrich seems like he could possibly do a good job and in my personal opinion Romney seems to be a strong candidate. But we have some time to decide who to support and i intend to do the research and pay close attention to the debates. Any info on Ron paul would be very much appriciated though so that I can be fair in my decision making.

        Comment by mhbeanstalk23 | November 12, 2011 | Reply

        • There is much to say about Ron Paul. He is a Veteran. As a Congressman from Texas he has always voted within his Constitutional boundaries. He voted NO on the bailouts and the current “wars” … he voted against giving the President any authority not given to that office by the Constitution. He has been CONSISTENT … he says what he means and it is backed up by his voting record.

          His “Plan to Restore America” will cut $1 Trillion from the budget his first year in office… and it will increase funding to SS, Medicare, Military and Veterans Benefits at the same time. He has always believed that the States can handle many things more effectively than the Federal Government … such as Education. He has targeted 5 Federal Agencies to be phased out – beginning immediately. (IRS is one of them). He wants to do away with the unconstitutional (and privately owned) Federal Reserve and turn our economy over to the People… where it belongs and put the U.S. Treasury back to work printing money backed by Gold.

          There is much to say about Ron Paul. I’ve heard some really idiotic statements come from supporters of other candidates. (One guy tried to tell me that Ron Paul wanted to do away with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I challenged him by offering $1000.00 to him if he could prove that. It’s all lies. Because Ron Paul has adhered to the Constitution every day he has been in office). Ron Paul’s door is closed to corporate lobbyists. They know they are not going to be able to bribe him to support any of their causes. They don’t even bother knocking on his door.

          What you really want to do is look at the other candidates a little closer. Your comment leads me to believe that you are leaning towards Romney. Is that so? Here’s the thing: the Mass Media is making you think Romney is a strong candidate. The truth is… he isn’t. He has a lot of problems. He has flip flopped so much that no one can be sure where he stands on any issue. And his “RomneyCare” scares the hell out of a lot of people. If “ObamaCare” was modeled after RomneyCare… do you honestly think he will do anything to repeal ObamaCare? He isn’t talking about repealing it, he’s talking about granting “waivers” to the States. That isn’t enough. He keeps talking about how successful RomneyCare is… but that isn’t the truth. His state has lost a lot of employment and is spending a whole lot more money with that legislation in place. And people are relocating to other states to get away from that mess.

          I’ve got a few videos from this campaign cycle posted. Here is another that will give you a little more insight to the other candidates … especially Mitt Romney. You can see it at:


          The truth is that NOW is the time to change the tune and stop the same ol song and dance routine. The truth is that a vote for any other candidate is a vote for the same garbage we’ve been putting up with for years. It’s time to give Freedom a chance. With Ron Paul there will be more of that… in your personal life, in the Markets and in the World.

          If you come across anything about Ron Paul that you want to discuss in greater detail or have any questions … I’ll be glad to assist in any way I can.

          Comment by Ice | November 12, 2011 | Reply

          • Romney, good heavens. I am, and have been for a long time, a strict constitutionalist and an untra conservative, however, I do respect the liberal view of everyone – except when (un)public (dis)servants think liberal when voting while in a public position!

            Comment by d daxx | November 12, 2011 | Reply

            • I’ll say this in the nicest way I can: Romney is a piece of Trash. I have always had this opinion of him. If you watch that video you’ll see some of the things that had brought me to that conclusion. Romney is a pandering fool. We’re in BIG TROUBLE if he gets into office.

              Comment by Ice | November 12, 2011 | Reply

  5. Dr. Ron paul is the ONLY candidate that intends to return the government to the people and force it to operate under the limitations and restrictions of the Constitution. The masses-r-asses have been led to believe that they have Constitutional Rights. Hogwash. All of my Rights are inalienable and are endowed to me by my Creator and if you don’t believe in a Creator then believe that your Rights are inalienable by birth; as long as you learn and accept that government cannot grant any Rights since it is restricted by the people; who are the grantor of governmental powers; that is, if they can get back the control of THEIR governmnent!

    Comment by d daxx | November 12, 2011 | Reply

    • Well said!

      Comment by Ice | November 12, 2011 | Reply

  6. I did a little research on Ron Paul and he is a very talented leader and politician. However he stands for Gay marriage and unfortunately that is something that i can not stand by. He claims to be a christian, as do I, But he does not stand for what the bible says about sexual orientation. I’m not saying that if you are gay that your a bad person. Jesus loves all the same and so do i but i can not and will never agree with the gay community formally and publicly being allowed to marry. That was not the only thing i did not agree with when it came to Paul, there were smaller things that made me question his ability to lead this nation, but as a christian i find it difficult to support another christian who knowingly argues against the word of God. I’m not trying to be religious here, as you can tell by my blog, but to me that is an important topic.

    Comment by mhbeanstalk23 | November 17, 2011 | Reply

    • Unfortunately you are misinformed. Ron Paul does not stand FOR gay marriage. I don’t know where you got your information from but it is wrong. Ron Paul stands for the States Right to make their own laws regarding this, however, his personal view is that marriage is between a man and a woman. Let’s get the facts straight here: Ron Paul’s stance is that the Federal Government should not be involved in the marriage question at all. That is a matter for the States (which are Sovereign entities) or the Church.

      Now that we have that straight… what are some of your other disagreements?

      Comment by Ice | November 18, 2011 | Reply

  7. I have a question: Are you an “issue voter”?? Are you someone that, because of a specific issue will or will not vote for a candidate? What if the one candidate that you won’t vote for, because of a specific issue, is the only candidate that will remain within the bounds the Constitution has set for that office? What if that vote is wasted on someone that will bring more of the same ol song and dance? What if that vote could be cast for the one candidate that could turn this Union around and set it back on the path the founding fathers had set it on but because of one minor misunderstanding of that candidates position it is wasted on, again, the same ol song and dance??

    If anyone truly understands the form of government that we live under they would surely vote for Ron Paul as he is the only candidate that, as a public servant, has consistently voted according to that form – even when he has been the ONLY one to do so. He is the only candidate that has remained true to the Constitution and the vision of the founders of this Union. He is the only candidate that has been consistent in his actions and speech. He is the only candidate that has demonstrated any integrity at all. Ron Paul is the real deal. I’m proud to cast my vote for a real and true Statesman – Ron Paul. I will not waste it on some slick politician that doesn’t have the best interest of the People as his priority.

    Comment by Ice | November 18, 2011 | Reply

  8. From this article: “6. Pro-Life Issue: Here is the one fact all Americans need to know. Dr. Paul is the only Republican candidate who has said, “So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid.” Abortion is one of the most divisive issues and may always be a divisive issue as long as Americans have freedom of religion and the right to be, think and feel differently. Dr. Ron Paul may be personally pro-life; however, his voting record indicates that, even if a bill attempting to make abortion illegal federally in the U.S. were passed by the House and Senate, Dr. Paul would veto the bill as unconstitutional. Which other Republican candidate has a track record to indicate that? Would Dr. Paul look to put pro-life judges on the Supreme Court bench? Probably as much as past Republican presidents. The current Democratic President has recently placed two women on the Supreme Court, and new Justices are appointed only when a Justice dies or retires. Six Republican Presidential candidates have already signed the Susan B. Anthony List 2012. Dr. Ron Paul is the safest Republican candidate because he would veto anti-abortion bills at the federal level and support states that chose to protect women’s reproductive rights. His other strong Constitution-based reforms outweigh the small risk that Roe v. Wade would be overturned during his term, returning the power to the states, who can then protect women’s reproductive rights, as Vermont has. Would he truly respect the states’ rights on this, considering his strong personal stand? Many progressive states have anti-abortion laws on their books that are not enforceable due to Roe v. Wade. So far, Dr. Paul has written bills to make it possible for states to make abortion illegal in the Sanctity of Life bill. He wrote the We the People Act, which, if passed, would render Roe v. Wade invalid and return powers to the states. He signed the Susan B. Anthony list, which describes federally defunding all abortions and Planned Parenthood. If Dr. Paul can fix the economic mess, is the slight chance that Roe v. Wade would be rendered invalid something Americans are willing risk for the betterment of the country in many other important areas? We will not ever go back to a time before birth control, morning-after pills, RU 486, the Internet and other advancements. Certain states, even with Roe v. Wade, are extremely restrictive.”

    If you go to the link and read the article it is chock full of links that prove the point… Ron Paul IS Pro Life.

    Comment by Ice | November 18, 2011 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: