Wesley Snipes gets three years prison for not filing taxes

[Tech]

A US federal judge on Thursday sentenced Hollywood actor Wesley Snipes to three years in prison Thursday for failing to file his tax returns from 1999 to 2004, the Department of Justice announced.

"The law is very clear: people must pay their taxes," added IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman. "There is no secret formula that eliminates a person's tax obligations, nor are there any special exceptions."

Didn't the US fight a war 230 years ago due to being unfairly taxed by an overpowering government?

 

[Kanav]

wow...just fucking wow

Three years for THIS shit?!

 

[BigBen]

WOW, seriously 3 years! Did he get any kind of probation?

 

[Duality]

fuck the US and its government. i have no faith in this declining, backwards "superpower" of a country. hopefully he gets off early for good behavior

 

[Pain]

They are just setting an example, he won't serve those 3 years.

 

[Flex]

There is no law.

 

[sexnews]

Should make a good movie

 

[power]

They are just setting an example, he won't serve those 3 years.

Yes he will, he has to serve 3 years min.

 

[high_five]

Fuck the government. You got CEO's of companies who are raping this country, owing billions of dollars and laying off tens of thousands of employees yet they are making billions of dollars from it. Then you have a guy who doesn't pay his taxes and he gets 3 years in prison. Is is just me or is there something wrong with that?

 

[Braaq]

He should just have to pay his taxes with a hefty fine, not three years. Total BS and I would be pissed if I was to made an "example" of

 

[Big04pimpin]

Yes he will, he has to serve 3 years min.

Umm, if he got sentenced to 3 years, then that his max he will have to serve. However, with appeals, time in court and being famous and having the money he has he will probably only spend a month or two if any at all in jail.

I thought he got off? He wasn't convicted here in Orlando. I heard the jury sided with him.

 

[Tech]

He should just have to pay his taxes with a hefty fine, not three years. Total BS and I would be pissed if I was to made an "example" of

I agree with that, only if there must be a punishment. why send a nonviolent or non-threatening person to prison? he's not a danger to anyone.

but in reality, he shouldn't have to give the government $17,000,000 of the money he rightfully earned. no one should.

the way the government acts is no different than the way a pimp treats his hoes....take a portion of their money and give nothing in return.

 

[pegasus]

He should just have to pay his taxes with a hefty fine, not three years. Total BS and I would be pissed if I was to made an "example" of

he should'nt have to give a penny to the IRS, if the source of his money was only his wages. had this been tried in the supreme court then he would'nt have been found guilty, cause they accept the fact that the 16th amendment was never passed.
watch freedom to fascism on google. it tells you all you need to know.

 

[Bulkboy]

the way the government acts is no different than the way a pimp treats his hoes....take a portion of their money and give nothing in return.

uhm, no, what about the defense of the nation? ever gone to a public school? a shitload of different programs and services are being taken care of by the government. i think u take a lot of things for granted, its ok to debate taxation levels, but cmon u cant be serious about that statement.

taxes are there for a reason,its because they are a necessary income for the government to take care of all the things a modern society consists of and needs. i agree that taxes shouldnt be overly high, but they should be there, and mainly it should be an economic stimulus and redistributing tool. in other words, if someone makes 20 million dollars, then he could and should contribute more than a guy who makes 50 k a year.

 

[pegasus]

uhm, no, what about the defense of the nation? ever gone to a public school? a shitload of different programs and services are being taken care of by the government. i think u take a lot of things for granted, its ok to debate taxation levels, but cmon u cant be serious about that statement.

taxes are there for a reason,its because they are a necessary income for the government to take care of all the things a modern society consists of and needs. i agree that taxes shouldnt be overly high, but they should be there, and mainly it should be an economic stimulus and redistributing tool. in other words, if someone makes 20 million dollars, then he could and should contribute more than a guy who makes 50 k a year.

here you have to pay property tax which goes towards the school in your area. you have to pay for your water, refuse collection, electricity.

you pay 40% tax on gas, and so many other taxes such as vehicle registration tax etc. you even have to pay a tax on a second hand car, even though it had already been taxed when the first owner bought it.

you also pay tax everytime you buy anything (except food) and you pay state taxes and so many other forms of taxation.

all the money that the IRS collects goes off to pay the intrest which the fedral reserve charges the goverment for the money it lends the government. these where the finding of a commitee which ronald ragen commisioned.

 

[Tech]

uhm, no, what about the defense of the nation? ever gone to a public school? a shitload of different programs and services are being taken care of by the government. i think u take a lot of things for granted, its ok to debate taxation levels, but cmon u cant be serious about that statement.

taxes are there for a reason,its because they are a necessary income for the government to take care of all the things a modern society consists of and needs. i agree that taxes shouldnt be overly high, but they should be there, and mainly it should be an economic stimulus and redistributing tool. in other words, if someone makes 20 million dollars, then he could and should contribute more than a guy who makes 50 k a year.

I'm only talking about the income tax.

Of course certain taxes are necessary to provide for a national defense. Other than that, I don't see why any money should go to the federal government. Public school funding should be controlled by the states.

you said the government needs money to take care of all things a modern society needs.....please tell me what those things are, and why would a government need to control them. (Other than roads and defense)

the government produces nothing, so why should they be in control of so much?

 

[Rocky]

Still at least Steven Seagal and Jean Claude Van Damme have less competitiion for the straight-to-DVD market now.

 

[Hypocrisy86]

Exactly Tech, Gov't reminds me of a spoiled brat, spending large amounts of money on one single item every time they barely have enough left to pay for 1gallon of gas

 

[Tech]

Mission Impossible: turn BulkBoy into a Ron Paul supporter.

 

[Bulkboy]

I'm only talking about the income tax.

Of course certain taxes are necessary to provide for a national defense. Other than that, I don't see why any money should go to the federal government. Public school funding should be controlled by the states.

but if u get rid of the income tax, u loose like 50% of the revenues, how is there gonna be anything left for schools among other things? just ending every foreign obligation is not gonna cut it, u would still have to cut drastically on social programs and education and so forth at home.

you said the government needs money to take care of all things a modern society needs.....please tell me what those things are, and why would a government need to control them. (Other than roads and defense)

well, first of all a judicial system, social care to stop people from being put out on the street, care for the elderly/pensions, these are all vital things for a society imo, things u can not let the market handle, and therefore should be controlled by the public sector.

t

he government produces nothing, so why should they be in control of so much?

obviously a society is dependant on a strong private sector to create jobs and wealth, i dont think we disagree there, but the role of the government has increased as time has gone by, and to some extent it has undeniably been to the better for the society, look at unemployment and poverty rates before ww2.

the thing is that the market runs everything based off profit, but in some cases u cant do that. like its obvious that giving the elderly pensions is something that needs to be handled by a non profit org (i.e the government)