“I know ev’rybody’s income and what ev’rybody earns; And I carefully compare it with the income-tax returns.”

—W.S. Gilbert, Princess Ida

April is the cruelest month, for reasons other than what T.S. Eliot had in mind. This is the month in which you must account for yourself to Caesar. The authorities, having relieved you of a goodly portion of your earnings before you even caressed the bank-notes between your fingers, now demand you show cause why you should not remit still more.

And in further demonstration of the principle that the citizen in this beloved democracy is the master and the government the mere servant, you are requested to affix your signature beneath these calming words: “Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return and accompanying schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, they are true, correct, and complete.”

Those who deem such threats—I mean words—harsh have clearly not visited the friendly IRS website. There you will find much useful information, including the “truth about frivolous tax arguments.” These are the sundry—and legally baseless—claims that no American citizen is obliged to pay income tax.

The first “frivolous argument” is that the income tax is voluntary: “Proponents point to the fact that the IRS itself tells taxpayers in the Form 1040 instruction book that the tax system is voluntary.” Considering the source of the argument, it might seem something more than frivolous. But, alas, the government subscribes to the Humpty-Dumptian philosophy of language found in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass: “‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.’ ”

As the IRS explains, “The word ‘voluntary,’ as used in Flora [v. United States] and in IRS publications, refers to our system of allowing taxpayers to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate returns, rather than have the government determine tax for them. . . . [T]he court clearly states, ‘although Treasury regulations establish voluntary compliance as the general method of income tax collection, Congress gave the Secretary of the Treasury the power to enforce the income tax laws through involuntary collection.’”

The IRS is right. The law spells out the penalties for not filing and not paying. So in other words, if one should choose not to volunteer to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate returns, one will be visited by an armed taxman.

As one observer has noted, the income tax is voluntary in the same way stopping at stop signs is voluntary. A voluntary tax is a contradiction in terms.

P.S.: We taxpayers don’t have to file until April 17 this year. Here’s the IRS’s explanation: “Taxpayers will have extra time to file and pay because April 15 falls on a Sunday in 2007, and the following day, Monday, April 16, is Emancipation Day, a legal holiday in the District of Columbia .”

This actually makes sense. It would be ridiculous to have Re-enslavement Day fall before Emancipation Day, wouldn’t it?

* * *

This tax season there is good news and bad news. The good news is that people are discontent with the income tax. But the bad news, D. W. MacKenzie points out, is that most people want someone other than themselves to bear the brunt of it.

April 22 is Earth Day, but if life on earth is the standard, perhaps the wrong thing is celebrated that day. John Semmens explains.

The welfare state comes in for lots of criticism by defenders of freedom. However, Robert Murphy thinks one type of welfare gets too little attention: corporate welfare.

When government ventures down the road to “social justice,” it does so on the premise that people do not deserve their good fortune. That’s a big mistake, writes Anthony de Jasay.

It’s widely believed that government must precede the institution of private property and social cooperation. Yet in many ways America belies that notion, as Andrew Morriss documents in the last of his series on property in America .

Many states are moving to centralize the regulation of cable-television franchising. It looks like a promising reform, but be careful what you ask for, says Adam Summers.

If the market order emerges spontaneously through built-in incentives to act for mutual interest, where does ethics enter the picture? Does ethics enter at all? Douglas Den Uyl and Douglas Rasmussen resolve the paradox.

Here’s what our columnists have cooked up: Richard Ebeling finds hope in people deserting the welfare state. Donald Boudreaux says if we ignore the life-saving nature of the market economy, fixes for possible global warming will be lethal. Robert Higgs traces the causes of the Great Contraction that began in 1929. Charles Baird looks at F. A. Hayek’s views on unions. And Jude Blanchette, reading Michael Kinsley’s claim that the price of stocks is irrational, protests, “It Just Ain’t So!”

Books on big-government conservatism, diversity, classical economics, and lawyers come under review.