Conklin is a big fan of the argument that you can't be compelled to file a tax return because that would violate your 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination.
Books, Web Sites, Videos, and Other Publications
William T. Conklin claims to be successful in fighting the IRS, and has described himself as a “known tax protester like Jesus Christ, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington.” Conklin v. United States, KTC 1994-259, 1994 WL 374410, Case No. 89-N-1514 (D. Col. 5/2/1994), aff'd . Unfortunately, his claims of success are contradicted by the public record, because he has lost every case on record. See, e.g., Conklin v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 41 (1988); Church of World Peace, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1992-318; Church of World Peace, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1994-87; Church of World Peace, Inc. v IRS, 715 F.2d 492; United States v. Church of World Peace, 775 F.2d 265; Conklin v. United States, 812 F.2d 1318; Conklin v. C.I.R., 897 F.2d 1032 (10th Cir. 1990); Tavery v. United States, 897 F.2d 1027; Tavery v. United States, Civ. No. 87-Z-180 (USDC Col.); Tavery v. United States, No. 91-S-222 (D. Col.), aff'd 32 F.3d 1423, KTC 1994-389, No. 91-1376 (10th Cir. 1994).
Oddly enough, Conklin lists many of those cases on his web site as “wins,” but he never explains how he can “win” a case in which the court rules against him.
Conklin has offered $50,000 to anyone who can show him how to file an income tax return without waiving his 5th Amendment rights. One person gave him the correct answer (which is to omit any incriminating information from the return) and then sued him for the $50,000, but the court ruled in Conklin’s favor, saying that because Conklin was the one who had to be satisfied, he was the “sole arbitor of the sufficiency of any answer tendered,” it was solely up to him whether or not to award the prize, and he could reject answers he didn’t like even if the answers were legally correct. Walder v. Conklin, Case No. 01-CV-1038-B (U.S.D.C. Wyo. 12/13/2001). (Believe it or not, Conklin brags about this decision on his web site, listing it as a “win” and not realizing that the decision shows him to be a fraud because his “reward offer” is meaningless.)