Consequences of Following The Detax Program Unmasked

Ultimately, the test of Eldon Warman's detax program is the extent to which it is accepted by courts of law. So far, it has not been accepted at all.

To date, the definitive test for Warman's detax program has been Thomas Kennedy v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency and Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, Court File No. 00-CV-14232, August 31, 2000, Ontario Superior Court of Justice. In this case, the Court rejected Warman's ad hoc definition of "person, found against Mr. Kennedy, and ruled that a Requirement To Pay issued by CCRA to be "valid and enforceable against the applicant".

The following resources relate to Court File 00-CV-14232 and the possible consequences of following Warman's detax program in general:

At this web site:

• The transcript of Court File 00-CV-14232
• An exchange of newsgroup messages discussing the consequences of believing what the detaxers tell you.

At the CCRA web site:

• The CCRA press release on Court File 00-CV-14232
• "The CCRA warns Canadians against tax 'myths'"

Other cases in which detaxers have had their arguments rejected can be found at the Provincial Court Of British Columbia web site. Among these are:

• R. v. Peter R. Grant
• R v. Dick

Also at the Provincial Court Of British Columbia web site, one can read the results of Eldon Warman's use of detax principles in defending himself against a charge of assault:

• R. v. E.G. Warman (Provincial Court of British Columbia), in which Warman is convicted of assault
• R. v. Warman (Court of Appeal for British Columbia), in which Warman's appeal of his conviction is denied

These cases and others regarding Warman's brush with the criminal justice system may also be found at The web site of Stephen Jenuth.

I also commend to you the axiom used by police fraud investigators everywhere: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.