|
Many people think the Amish do not pay taxes. They do. But they have been
exempted from paying Social Security. This story is little known to the general
public today. It is full of drama, clashes with the government, issues of
religious freedom, politics, and much more. For writing this 5-part series, I
was privileged to have access to many original materials and personal letters.
(To read each section of the series individually, click on the following
bookmarks, or read on for the entire series.)
Part
One: The Dispute Begins
Part
Two: The Amish vs. the IRS
Part
Three: The Media Gets Involved
Part
Four: The Public Reaction
Part
Five: The Amish "Fight Back"
Part One: The Dispute Begins
In 1935, a bill known as "The Social Security Act" passed Congress.
Included in this act was "Old Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance," provided for those in industry and commerce, and extended to
include farm operators in 1955. What was once a benefit had now become a law.
The tax was to be reported at the rate of 3% of income up to an established
limit.
While the Amish have no objection "paying unto Caesar what is Caesar's,"
they do have problems with commercial insurance. In a sense, insurance was seen
as not trusting in God. Insurance plans were a worldly operation. Plus, the
Amish view of separation of church and state normally meant not accepting money
from government programs, especially something viewed as welfare. No one could
deny that this program was one of paying money to the government and then
receiving a benefit in return.
Perhaps most importantly, the care of the elderly is seen as the
responsibility of the family and community, not the government. Whether it be
additions built onto the main house where grandparents "retire,"
benefit sales to pay large medical bills, or the community effort of a
barn-raising, the Amish truly try to "take care of their own."
An IRS press release outlined what happened immediately after the law went
into effect...
In the fall of 1956, the IRS district director at Cleveland held meetings
with Amish farmers and their church officials in an effort to solicit
cooperation and voluntary compliance with the laws we have to administer. At
these meetings, it was explained that the self-employment levy is a tax and that
it would be the responsibility of IRS to enforce this tax.
As a result of these meetings and of letters sent to the individuals
involved, the majority of Amish farmers in that general area voluntarily
remitted the tax. With respect to those who refused, it became apparent that
some did not wish to contravene the dictates of their church, but they also did
not want "trouble" with IRS.
Thus, a portion of these farmers did not pay the tax, but did make the
execution of liens possible by maintaining bank accounts which covered the tax.
If things had stopped here, our story would be over. But the above
"arrangement" wasn't really satisfactory. Even the Amish recognized
that allowing the government to take the money from their bank accounts wasn't
much different from simply paying the money voluntarily. One Amishman was quoted
in a November 1962 Reader's Digest article as saying, "Allowing
our members to shift their interdependence on each other to dependence upon any
outside source would inevitably lead to the breakup of our order."
A group of Amish presented a petition to Congress, with 14,000 signatures.
The Amish questioned what possible harm they could do by not paying into Social
Security. "We do not want to be burdensome, but we do not want to lose our
birthright to everlasting glory, therefore we must do all we can to live our
faith!" Nothing happened.
The IRS press release noted that...
The current problem stems from the "hard core" group of Old Order
Amish farmers who closed out their bank accounts and made such levy action
impossible. As a result, the IRS was forced to collect 130 delinquent taxpayer
accounts from Amish farmers in the past two years.
Since the IRS was thwarted by the closing out of bank accounts, they next
tried to attach checks for the amount owed to cooperatives that bought milk from
the Amish. Most co-op officials refused to do this. The IRS saw only one
alternative --- to seize property. In the case of the Amish, that meant cows and
horses.
Part
Two: The Amish vs. the IRS
While Social Security was called a tax and administered by the IRS beginning
in the 1950's, it was also clearly described as a form of old age and
survivors insurance. In a 1961 IRS press release, the IRS recognized the Amish
stance that "Social Security payments, in their opinion, are insurance
premiums and not taxes. They, therefore, will not pay the 'premium' nor
accept any of the benefits."
As usually happens in these matters, it is one case that tends to catapult
the situation into the public eye. That case would be the collection of payments
from Valentine Byler, an Amish farmer living near New Wilmington, in western
Pennsylvania. According to various articles, books, and sources, this is
basically the series of events as they occurred...
By 1959, Valentine Byler owed four years of IRS taxes. The IRS added the
interest owed and came up with a total of $308.96.
Byler explained that his religion forbid paying insurance. When he was told
that this was a mere technicality and that it was indeed a tax, he apparently
replied, "Doesn't the title say Old Age, Survivors and Disability
Insurance?"
The IRS had tried to levy Valentine's bank account, but he had none. In
1960, after refusing a summons to appear in court, he was cited for contempt and
brought to the Pittsburgh U.S. District Court. According to a Reader's
Digest article, the judge "angrily demanded of the IRS agents, 'Don't
you have anything better to do than to take a peaceful man off his farm and drag
him into court?' " The case was dismissed.
But the IRS was undaunted and, according to its own press release, this is
what happened next on April 18, 1961...
Since Mr. Byler had no bank account against which to levy for the tax due,
it was decided as a last desperate measure to resort to seizure and sale of
personal property.
It was then determined that Mr. Byler had a total of six horses, so it was
decided to seize three in order to satisfy the tax indebtedness. The three
horses were sold May 1, 1961 at public auction for $460. Of this amount, $308.96
represented the tax due and $113.15 represented the expenses of the auction
sale, including feed for the horses, leaving a surplus of $37.89 which was
returned to the taxpayer.
The Byler case, like all others in the same category, presents an unpleasant
and difficult task for the Internal Revenue Service... We have no other choice
under the law.
Valentine was literally in his field with his team of horses doing some work
prior to spring plowing when his horses were seized. With these same horses he
would prepare his fields, do his planting, reap the harvest, and earn his
living. The harnesses were also taken and included in the sale. According to a
book describing the auction, The Amish in Court, no Amish came to bid on
the horses and, due to a lack of bidders, they went for a good price, with the
harnesses "thrown in" by the auctioneer. (Valentine borrowed his
neighbor's horses to finish his plowing.)
Immediately after the seizure and sale, the Pittsburgh IRS Chief of
Collections responded he was unaware of the plowing situation. "Plowing
never occurred to me. I live in an apartment." He was furthermore quoted as
saying, "We don't ask people their race or religion when we administer
the tax laws. People have no right to use their religion as an excuse not to pay
taxes."
Part
Three: The Media Gets Involved
While Social Security was called a tax and administered by the IRS beginning
in the 1950's, it was also clearly described as a form of old age and
survivors insurance. In a 1961 IRS press release, the IRS recognized the Amish
stance that "Social Security payments, in their opinion, are insurance
premiums and not taxes. They, therefore, will not pay the 'premium' nor
accept any of the benefits."
The dispute came to the public's attention after the IRS seized the horses
of a Pennsylvania Amishman, Valentine Byler, to pay for the back Social Security
taxes he owed and had refused to pay. With these same horses he would prepare
his fields, do his planting, reap the harvest, and earn his living.
Since increased taxes and Social Security were becoming more of a concern
among the general American public and the new Kennedy administration, it didn't
take long for this story to hit the newspapers, and not just in the United
States. A Public Information Officer for the IRS admitted that some Communist
countries picked up the story to supposedly show the hypocritical attitude of
the government and lack of true freedom in the United States.
The newspapers in America basically responded in favor of the Amishman. The Yonkers
Herald Statesman noted...
Many of us resent central government insistence that it must impose on us
all the costs of cradle-to-grave care as defined by bureaucrats. Yet we pay and
pay and pay the taxes demanded because we have not yet been able to devise a
sound way of escape.
The New York Herald Tribune, under the headline "Welfarism Gone
Mad," stated in part...
The majesty and might of the Federal government have now been marshaled
against Valentine Y. Byler. His horses --- which, since Amish rules forbid the
use of tractors, represent his means of livelihood --- have been seized and sold
at auction.
What kind of "welfare" is it that takes a farmer's horses away at
spring plowing time in order to dragoon a whole community into a 'benefit'
scheme it neither needs nor wants, and which offends its deeply held religious
scruples?
And from the Ledger-Star in Norfolk, Virginia came this response from
William H. Fitzpatrick...
...When the last Amish buggy has disappeared from the dusty by-road, or
has been sold like Valentine Byler's three plow horses, it will mark more than
the passing of a sect who were overwhelmed by time and change. It will mark also
a milestone in the passing of freedom --- the freedom of people to live their
lives undisturbed by their government so long as they lived disturbing no
others. It was a freedom the country once thought important.
Another article, included in a letter sent to Valentine himself, showed how
the case could touch a raw nerve with some, especially those unhappy with the
new Kennedy Administration. It was the classic "little guy" against
the privileged politicians of "big government." Theodore L. Humes in a
publication called Human Events lashed out at just about everybody...
It is unlikely that the name Valentine Byler comes up between Bach fugues
at the White House, or during the poolside dunkings of Bobby [Kennedy] and his
pals; the Ford Foundation is unlikely to commission Marc Blitzstein to glorify
him in opera as it has done for Sacco and Vanzetti; and neither Carl Sandburg
nor Robert Frost will honor him in verse.
Part Four: The Public Reaction
While Social Security was called a tax and administered by the IRS beginning
in the 1950's, it was also clearly described as a form of old age and
survivors insurance. In a 1961 IRS press release, the IRS recognized the Amish
stance that "Social Security payments, in their opinion, are insurance
premiums and not taxes. They, therefore, will not pay the 'premium' nor
accept any of the benefits."
The dispute came to the public's attention after the IRS seized the horses
of a Pennsylvania Amishman, Valentine Byler, to pay for the back Social Security
taxes he owed and had refused to pay. With these same horses he would prepare
his fields, do his planting, reap the harvest, and earn his living.
Between 1961 and 1963, Valentine received over 40 letters at his home, as
people read about his plight. Some even sent money. These letters came from a
wide range of Americans, and reflected social and political feelings of the
time. Since none of these letters have ever been quoted or seen publicly to my
knowledge, I want to include selections from a few of them in this issue...
From Dallas, Texas: May I congratulate you on having the intestinal
fortitude to stand up for your beliefs. While I am aware that your action
stemmed from a love of your religion rather than from defiance, I hope that your
example may serve to point out to some of us just how far our benevolent
Government will go to reach its goal of making dependents of us all. There seems
to be no place for a person who asks merely to be left alone, and to provide for
himself and his family
From New Wilmington, Pennsylvania: Please accept this as a small token
($5) toward the "resistance of the tyranny of the majority." I only
wish that I could do more but, being a college student, my funds are limited.
From a minister in National City, California: We have always prided
ourselves on having absolute separation of Church and State, absolute freedom in
Religion, and genuine respect for every man's conscience here in these United
States. I am sincerely sorry this has happened. I hope that the Lord leads you
out of this situation well.
From Dickinson, Texas: Your courageous stand for your religious principles
is to be commended. Your action in support of freedom is action in defense of
the freedom of all of us.
From a doctor in Dallas, Texas: Your views and beliefs should be
respected. Our great nation was built on principles and premises you adhere to.
We as a country and a nation have come a long way from the old time virtues of
simplicity, hard work, frugality, and self reliance.
From Elk City, Oklahoma: We have been guilty of letting little things
seemingly creep in and have destroyed the quality of togetherness which you folk
still possess. The idea that eventually we will all be taken care of by the
government simply takes the initiative away from folks. To my knowledge you are
the only people to have the admirable regard you have for no divorce, lack of
juvenile delinquency, and caring for the aged. I think we could all learn a
great deal from you folk.
From Amsterdam, New York: The only point of issue is that if there are no
cases of old age need in your community, then you should not have to pay social
security tax. But if there are, you should and must. It is simple as all that.
From Washington, DC: Many of us do not like the apparent over-reaching
power of "Caesar's Might." Which will last longer --- trust in God
or trust in money? The Amish are wise enough to answer this one. I dare say the
Amish way, to trust in God and men's good will, will last longer than any
monetary system.
Part
Five: The Amish
"Fight Back"
While Social Security was called a tax and administered by the IRS beginning
in the 1950's, it was also clearly described as a form of old age and
survivors insurance. In a 1961 IRS press release, the IRS recognized the Amish
stance that "Social Security payments, in their opinion, are insurance
premiums and not taxes. They, therefore, will not pay the 'premium' nor
accept any of the benefits."
The dispute came to the public's attention after the IRS seized the horses
of a Pennsylvania Amishman, Valentine Byler, to pay for the back Social Security
taxes he owed and had refused to pay. With these same horses he would prepare
his fields, do his planting, reap the harvest, and earn his living.
The Amish held meetings with various officials after the incident. At a
September, 1961 meeting with the IRS commissioner in Washington, Amish bishops
cited several Bible passages, including I Timothy 5:8, which says, "But if
any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath
denied the faith and is worse than an infidel."
This printed petition submitted read in part...
We, as representatives of the Old Order Amish Mennonite Church, do herein
express our deep appreciation, and with grateful hearts do we recount the favors
and consideration accorded our forefathers in the past...
We believe in a supreme being and also the constitution of the USA, and we
feel the Social Security Act and Old Age Survivors Insurance [OASI] is abridging
and infringing to our religious freedom. We believe in giving alms in the church
according to Christ's teaching.
It has been our Christian concern from birth of our church group to supply
those of our group who have a need, financial or otherwise... Our faith has
always been sufficient to meet the needs as they come about, and we feel the
present OASI is an infringement on our responsibilities; as a church we feel
grieved that this OASI has come upon us...
We Bishops, representatives of the Old Order Churches of the USA are
appealing to you to prayerfully consider and reconsider this favor. In God we
trust.
In the end, it was decided the Amish would seek an exemption based on the
First Amendment. The IRS would stop further seizures until the case was settled.
The Senators present said they would try to get a bill passed in Congress. In
essence, a "moratorium" was in effect.
The Amish seriously considered a court case, and even hired a lawyer, in a
move uncharacteristic with their religious beliefs. As the court date
approached, they wrestled with their convictions and decided to drop the case,
opting instead to pursue a legislative exemption.
Further meetings and public reaction mainly in support of the Amish continued
through the year 1964. And so it came to pass that in 1965, the Medicare bill
was passed by Congress. As Wayne Fisher writes in The Amish in Court, "Tucked
into the 138 page bill was a clause exempting the Old Order Amish, and any other
religious sect who conscientiously objected to insurance, from paying Social
Security payments, providing that sect had been in existence since December 31,
1950. After Senate approval in July, the signing of the bill by President Lyndon
B. Johnson on August 13, 1965, made it official and canceled tax accounts of
some 15,000 Amish people amounting to nearly $250,000."
What then became of Valentine Byler, who had suddenly been thrust into the
limelight? According to Wayne Fisher, "On May 3, 1965, Mr. Byler fell
from a grain drill while working in his field and broke his neck. While he lay
very sick in a hospital bed in the front room of his farmhouse, the news of the
passage of the bill for which he had become a symbol, brought only a flicker of
a smile from his face framed within his red beard."
Amish Country News
Amish Series by Brad Igou (1999)
Return to Amish History Page
|