Dear Dave and Jason, I did get an Overdue payment Reminder (2/5/2008), asking I respond by 12/5/2008, which I was quite happy to do. I wrote to the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation personally, asking for amechanism to pay the other 10% of my tax into a fund where the money can be spent on projects that nonviolently build a sustainable future. The ATO reply puts the case that it is the parliament that allocated expenditure of funds, the ATO is there to collect th monies prescribed under law by the parliament, and noting "there is no constitutional basis for a taxpayer to refuse to pay tax obligations because of a belief that the money will be put to a purpose with which the taxpayer disagrees." In this case there was some credit in my Integrated Client Tax Account and the remaining tax has been transferred to cover the 'debt' for this financial year. That means we move on a few steps by next year. I have not heard back from wayne Swan, nor has my cheque payable to AusAID yet been cashed, at least not on the bank statements I have so far seen. I am intending to reply to the ATO , DRAFT attached. Any comments welcome I am also intending to contact some other Quakers and also approach the Mennonites to see if anyone there is of similar mind. much peace david David Johnson
Dear Raelene Vivian, Thank you for your letter dated 16 May 2008, and see you have solved this year’s problem by transferring money from one of my tax accounts to another. I understand and accept your department’s role is to collect taxes at the rates prescribed by government legislation, and accept that it is parliament’s role to allocate those funds on behalf of all us taxpayers. I also recognise and am sorry if what I am doing causes you extra work, or arouses feelings of annoyance or antipathy, or offends your sense of duty that I should do what is right. However when law is unjust it needs to be challenged. So I will continue to interact with you because of all the people in Australia you are best placed to advise the government on how this injustice can be removed. I will also interact with the government. As you know I am very happy to pay all my tax due, on the basis it is not used for military expenditure. The law is wrong in that it insists I provide money specifically to kill others, and worse to hire and train another person to do this killing on my behalf. If I were to pay someone in my community to kill another because that other person had caused me trouble or had beliefs I found unacceptable, then I would rightly be charged with a criminal offence. Yet using my taxes to train military personnel to kill is exactly that, and even more, I note that in the present wars there is no evidence that any of these people we are killing has done anything to harm us. I am required under law to pay money so that our military weapons and people can kill others in Iraq and Afghanistan, in the same wrong way we did in Vietnam 40 years ago. To finance killing is wrong; we abhor it in our communities at home, and should also abhor it nationally. Your point that "there is no constitutional basis for a taxpayer to refuse to pay tax obligations because of a belief that the money will be put to a purpose with which the taxpayer disagrees" may be true. However this case is not just a simple “I disagree with so much money being spent on private schools, or aboriginal health, or agricultural subsidies”. This case rests on a fundamental objection to killing, an objection way beyond the normal range of preferences expressed by various taxpayers. I am asking that you help find a solution so there be a mechanism for me to pay the other 10% of my tax into a fund where the money can be spent on projects that nonviolently build a sustainable future. Thank you Much peace David Johnson