Panama Papers story highlights the huge difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion


By Patrick Vermeister
18 April 2016

Millions of shoppers make buying decisions every day. They hunt for good deals, clip coupons and use discount codes. It pays to make the best use of one’s resources, however limited they may be. The ascension of online retailers like Amazon brings an added benefit — a lack of sales tax. All other things being equal, shoppers can, in most cases, avoid sales tax when buying items online.

That is a totally legitimate decision: an item that costs $49.99 in the brick-and-mortar store before sales tax and costs the exact same price online — especially when offered free shipping — with no sales tax. Easy decision. What would those shoppers’ reactions be when people start calling them shady characters?

They were making a decision to avoid the tax, right? Totally legitimate.

That same criticism is now targeting people who wish to simply protect their wealth from rapacious government bureaus which continually, year after year, act irresponsibly and rack up debts in the name of the taxpayer.

In the recent case of the Panama Papers leak, the media has portrayed the private individual as the wrongdoer.

“The media repeatedly paints with a broad brush, referring to all corporations formed internationally as ‘shell companies,’ ” said Adele Weiss, principal at Weiss+Associates, a European-based consultancy firm specializing in the Federal Income Tax. “This is a huge presumption which begs the question: Who is encouraging the media to act in such an irresponsible way?”

Well, the answer may come from Bradley Birkenfeld, an American whistleblower who, while working for Swiss bank UBS, provided private data to the U.S. government regarding Americans who held accounts at the bank. The IRS paid him $104 million for this data.

He suspects in the case of the Panama Papers, the leaking of some 11.5 million private documents from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, was orchestrated, planned or facilitated by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. “The CIA I’m sure is behind this, in my opinion,” he told CNBC.

Birkenfeld said the reason for this leak was to be used as a weapon in the ongoing currency war, in particular with Russia. “The very fact that we see all these names surface that are the direct quote-unquote enemies of the United States: Russia, China, Pakistan, Argentina and we don’t see one U.S. name. Why is that? … There’s something seriously sinister here behind this.”

Weiss agrees with Birkenfeld’s suspicions, but adds: “This revelation comes very near the tax deadline for reporting. The media has always been complicit in publishing well-timed articles to make it seem as if the U.S. government is capturing every tax evader. In these stories, the topic is never broached that people are perfectly within their rights — both legally, ethically and strategically — to avoid taxes. There is a HUGE difference between a tax avoider and a tax evader. Likewise, there is a cavernous difference between those lawful non-taxpayers and those who are legal U.S. Taxpayers of the Federal Income Tax.”

One who avoids tax does so legally and ethically; one who evades tax is a person who hides money for a tax he is obligated to pay. All politicians who currently work for the National Government are definitely U.S. Taxpayers.

Author Nicholas Shaxson, writing an op-ed piece that was published in The Washington Post, opined: “Tax havens shield the money of rich people. … When tax havens assist kleptocratic elites in hiding their cash with impunity, they don’t guard against corruption and despotism — they help perpetuate them.”

Although he pointed out that the Panama Papers leak provided names recognized by many — and not ordinary citizens — he still made the huge mistake of painting a picture that international corporations are vehicles solely for unsavory activity. “Tax havens provide an escape route from laws that is available only to a rich minority that can afford to use it, thus removing from the equation the constituency with the greatest power to push for reform,” he wrote.

This is patently false. International corporations can be formed for as little as a couple thousand dollars. I have had one for 12 years now, and it’s very clear that I am about as wealthy as I am powerful and famous.

As none of these other ‘journalists’ note in their written articles, it’s vital for every investor to protect and grow whatever wealth they have attained. Capital controls have come to the United States; those powers will undoubtedly increase while your ability to stay out of their sordid web will decrease. Do you trust your debt-addicted government to respect your private property?

“We have to make a distinction here,” warned famed investor Doug Casey of what the U.S. has become over time. “One is ‘America,’ which is a marvelous idea, unique idea, fantastic idea. I’m extremely pro-American. But America has ceased to exist. It has been replaced by the United States (the corporate entity) which is just another of 225 nation-states that covers the Earth like a skin disease at this point. People shouldn’t conflate these two things: the ideal with the political reality. So what you’ve got to do is get a lot of your assets out of the control of the government that thinks it owns you … like a milk cow.”

It’s crystal clear that the benefits of forming an international corporation are numerous and positively affect investors at any stage, from billionaires to entry-level entrepreneurs.

“What everyone in the media seems to miss is that there exists millions of Americans who legitimately do not owe any Federal Income Tax and know there is something very bad coming down the financial pike,” added Weiss, whose firm has helped over 3,000 clients.

“We have helped our clients not only realize that the Federal Income Tax is voluntary, but helped educate them and aided in communicating their correct status with the National Government.”

Weiss has known for over 20 years that the Federal Income Tax was voluntary, thanks in part to this admission by then IRS boss Dwight Avis in 1953: “Your income tax is 100 percent voluntary tax, and your liquor tax is 100 percent enforced tax.”

Through years of research, Weiss found out how the National Government got people to volunteer through a sub-silentio (under silence) election, and years later, found out that in order to make their tax scheme operational without violating the Constitution, the U.S. Congress had to create an Exit Door to allow Americans (referred to in IRC statutes and regulations as Nonresident Alien Individuals) an option to legally leave the U.S. Tax Club. In between these two pieces of legislation exists a great deal of subterfuge.

His Revocation of Election document serves as the American’s official notice that he has elected to operate outside the U.S. Tax System. There is a YouTube video on this process.

“This is a very powerful document that frees the (qualified) American National of any future obligation to file and pay a Federal Income Tax,” Weiss declared. “This amounts to the same choice made by shoppers when they choose Amazon to avoid paying tax. Both are completely legitimate decisions, despite how the media wishes to portray only one side to this topic.”

Those wishing more information on the Revocation of Election process and the formation of international corporations can email

Our Mission

“It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error, it is the function of
the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error.”
— American Communications Association
v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442 (1950)