From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 20:52:13 +0800
To: gbroiles@netbox.com (Greg Broiles)
Subject: Re: implausible defenses & tax havens
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960816060630.006dc138@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: <199608160913.EAA18988@manifold.algebra.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Greg Broiles wrote:
> If you were on a jury, and you heard a defendant testify that they worked at
> a job site (either as an employee or a contractor) for years without ever
> being paid, and that they managed to maintain a lifestyle consistent with
> full-time work without ever receiving taxable income (whether as wages or
> dividends or interest or ..), and that the HR/personnel/AP people who
> testified that the defendant had been paid were mistaken or lying .. would
> you believe that testimony?

Suppose that a computer consultant Mr. X knows cryptography so well 
that his clients are willing to pay him $100/hr. Mr. X could conspire
with his client that he receives only $40/hr in taxable income, and the
rest he gets in form of digital cash.

If X lives sufficiently modestly, the IRS will be having hard times
getting him convicted. And really, what's the point in spending all this
money anyway? The more money one spends after a certain level, the more 
time one wastes.

	- Igor.