HOME PAGE
TOP
Honesty, Our Discipline and the Temporal Government
Taking Oaths, Honesty, and the IRS Honesty when Friends Ran Pennsylvaina




Taking Oaths, Honesty, and the IRS

Raised as a Friend, I have always been scrupulous not to take an oath or to swear to anything.  Several years ago, it was pointed out to me and to Ohio Yearly Meeting that the phrase, “Under penalties of perjury,” which I had never questioned before, literally means, “As if lying when under oath.”  When the yearly meeting considered this, our discipline was changed.  Ever since then, when completing a form which includes such a statement, I have crossed it out and enclosed a recipient-specific copy of the letter here:

 

Internal Revenue Service

 

Dear friends,

 

I have modified the statement about the truthfullness of this return to remove the phrase, “Under penalties of perjury…”.  According to Webster’s Dictionary, “perjury” means: “false swearing; voluntary violation of an oath...”  I strive to be honest in all that I do and say, and I am ready to stand judgment if it is found that I have knowingly made a false statement.  However, I am forbidden to swear to the honesty of the return and therefore cannot sign a statement that, by its reference to perjury, implies that I am swearing.  

 

My position is in  keeping with my beliefs and obligations as a member of the Religious Society of Friends.  Our Book of Discipline states:

“Our testimony against the use of oaths is founded upon the following positive command of Jesus: "But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: nor by the earth; for it is His footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil" (Matt. 5:34-37).                                  

We regard the taking of oaths as contrary to the teachings of Christ, and as setting up a double standard of truthfulness, whereas sincerity and truth should be practiced in every phase of life.

Friends' opposition to judicial oaths is not merely a negation; it is a positive affirmation of an ideal of sincerity for the regulation of life. For an honest person to "swear" or to declare "under penalties of perjury" (which means as if one had sworn) adds nothing to the credibility of his/her statement, but puts him/her under judgment for disobedience to Christ's command not to swear. For a dishonest person to "swear" or to declare "under penalties of perjury" offers no assurance of honesty in the present instance, since he/she has in the past risked judgment by disobeying Christ's command to be honest in all things.       

When asked to swear to, or to affirm, the honesty of a statement, a Friend might simply answer to the effect: ‘I love Christ's law and fear his judgment at all times, including this. He has commanded me not to swear but to always be truthful.’”

 

Most legal documents make provision for Friends, and others, for conscience’ sake, to affirm, rather than to swear to, the honesty of their statements.  This provision is made in keeping with the First Amendment, which declares, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  

 

I apologize if this causes you any inconvenience.

 

Your Friend in Christ,

 

 

 

Conrad Lindes

 

 

For many years now I have done this with my tax returns, and nothing has happened.  This year, I got a letter from IRS stating that my position was “frivolous,” that without the full statement sign my return was incomplete and would not be processed, and that my continuing to advance the frivolous claim could result in a $5,000 fine.

 

I send this reply:

 

Dear D_____P_____,

 

I am responding to your letter, a copy of which is enclosed, dated 6/4/2007.  Since I made no objection to paying my taxes, I assume that the only part of this letter that applies to my return is the second paragraph on page 3 regarding the “designated signature declaration.”  I will try to better explain something which the IRS may define as “frivolous” but which is central to my life as a Friend of Christ (“Quaker”).   That is to be completely honest in all things at all times.  You may not believe in Heaven and Hell, but Friends do.  And we believe that our Lord, Jesus Christ, expects us to follow all His commandments, not just the ones which are convenient or fashionable.   One of His commands forbids us to take oaths, or to sign as statement which implies that we have taken an oath, which is what your “under penalties of perjury” line does.

 

I have always filed my tax forms as honestly as I could.  I have always declared all my income, even cash which many people “forget” to report.  I have never declared any business expenses or other deductions which were  not fully justified.  Once, I even returned an IRS refund check because I believed that I was over paid by one cent.

 

However, if I ever filed a report which was incorrect, even accidentally so, I am sure that IRS could require me to correct the error and pay any back taxes and fines whether or not I had signed the “under penalty of perjury” statement.  So requiring me to sign that statement is not necessary for the IRS to function in collecting all taxes due.   

 

The State of Ohio has processed my return without my signing such a statement.  I have testified in court without giving such a statement.  The IRS has processed my returns in prior years with the “under penalty of perjury” phrase crossed out.  Please reconsider whether your requirement is just and necessary. 

 

 

Your Friend in Christ,

 

 

 

Conrad Lindes

 

I also wrote to the American Center for Law and Justice, and organization which champions Americans’ religious rights in the courts.  I was told that numerous cases, some taken all the way to the Supreme Court, have upheld the right of the IRS to require the signing of this statement, opining that the need for the orderly administration of tax return is a good so important that it over rides personal freedoms. 

 

So I am left to consider: Should I file another return, with the perjury phrase untouched? If I do, would it be disobedient to our Discipline or am I over-reading what the Discipline requires? Or, should I hold to my position and risk not only not receiving my refund, but prosecution, a fine of $5,000, and extreme strain on my marriage, as my wife is not a Friend and does not share this concern?
I do not want it to be my position, but the rule of the Lord, but is it?   I would like any one who reads this to pray for me to hear clearly what the Lord would have me to do, and for me to have the courage and the humility to do it.

 

I took this matter to my own meeting, and wrote to other Friends. The advise and prayers received raised my up from my despair and and answer came to me from the Lord - the last two sentances of the final letter which I sent to the IRS:


Dear D____ P____,

I have responded to your warning letter, but gotten nothing in return. I have tried to call you and was intercepted by one of your staff, who claimed to have the ability to answer my questions, but did not have either of my letters available to discuss. I wonder if anyone has read either letter. I wonder if any one will read this.

Enclosed is a copy of my 2006 Federal Income Tax return, as previously filed. My wife and I have completed it as accurately as possible. To my knowledge, every cent of income has been reported and every cent of deduction is exact and valid. I am conscientiously honest - that is, because the Word of the Lord speaking in my heart (and in yours) requires it. Yet when I obey the same Word with regard to refusing to take an oath, as "under penalties of perjury" implies, you threaten me with a fine.

Surely the IRS recognizes how much easier its work is because so many people are conscientiously honest. Does your "under penalties of perjury" statement prevent dishonest people from lying on their returns? Don't you wish every one would heed that Word, whispering in their souls, "Do not claim to be honest by swearing an oath. BE honest, ALL THE TIME!"

I am not in a position to deny my family the refund due it, plus your threatened fine, so I have signed this version as it is.

Fear of retribution makes me sign this form.

Fear of God makes me tell the truth.


Your Friend in Christ,

 

I would like to know your thoughts

 

Conrad Lindes





Honesty in the Courts in Pennsylvania

Conrad, I continue to work through your dilemma regarding oath-taking. I was reading through the 1682 Frame of Government for William Penn's colony, and came across this as one of the laws agreed to in England, before they shipped off to the colony.

The "solemn promise" was apparently acceptable, as being distinct from an oath. Legal penalties were obviously the same as official perjury.

In Christ, Kevin

XXVI. That all witnesses, coming, or called, to testify their knowledge in or to any matter or thing, in any court, or before any lawful authority, within the said province, shall there give or deliver in their evidence, or testimonly, by solemnly promising to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. to the matter, or thing in question. And in case any person so called to evidence, shall be convicted of wilful falsehood, such person shall suffer and undergo such damage or penalty, as the person, or persons, against whom he or she bore false witness, did, or should, undergo; and shall also make satisfaction to the party wronged, and be publicly exposed as a false witness, never to be credited in any court, or before any Magistrate, in the said province.