We all know that the American justice system considers a defendant innocent until proven guilty.?

Except when the IRS is involved. In financial matters involving the Internal Revenue Service, one is treated as guilty unless they can prove themselves innocent. Why is this allowed? Or am I misinterpreting how the IRS operates?

4 Answers

  • 10 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Good point. Probably because your suppose to pay them without them asking you. So they view it as if they caught you and maybe you want to confess. It's more of a collection notice and not an arrest. You're being billed even if it's more an audit, but it's not exactly a summons. It's a civil matter first. You would be liable instead of guilty.

  • 10 years ago

    In the criminal justice system the defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty. The IRS is not a part of the criminal justice system but is ruled by administrative law which has a whole different set of standards and procedures.

  • Blowme
    Lv 5
    10 years ago

    Hahahaha. The system treats the accused in court as guilty until proven innocent. Unless you have enough money.

    Yes, the IRS sucks. It's unconstitutional and shouldn't exist. The federal income tax was not properly ratified by the states.

  • 10 years ago

    You are actually incorrect. Defendants ARE NOT innocent until proven guilty. If that wa the case, the NON-violent offenders would not be arrested and held in a jail.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.