Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a tax protester had to be shown to have known that he was violating the obligation to pay taxes on his wages before he could be subject to a criminal penalty for failing to pay.

Facts

---

The defendant, John L. Cheek, was an airline pilot who for six years had failed to file the tax returns he was required to file. He was tried for tax evasion (Internal Revenue Code section 7201) and willful failure to file a return or pay tax (Internal Revenue Code section 7203). While admitting that he had not filed his returns, he argued that his conduct was not willful. He testified that he did not believe that his wages were taxable income; and that he believed that the income tax was unconstitutional. He was convicted, and appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court based on these defenses.

Issue

---

The Supreme Court was presented with the same question raised individually by each of these defenses:

1. Is it a defense to fail to obey a law based on the honest belief that said law is unconstitutional?
2. Is it a defense to fail to obey a law based on the honest belief that the law was not intended to reach the activities in which the individual was engaged?

Result

---

The Court, in an opinion by Justice White, found that the defendant's belief that the tax laws were unconstitutional was an unreasonable mistake of governing law – not a defense, no matter how honestly held. To the contrary, Cheek's acknowledgement that his failure to file tax returns was based on such a belief was evidence of the willfulness of his crime. However, believing that his wages were not income was an unreasonable mistake of non-governing law – which may be a defense, because the statute required that the violation of the statute must be done willfully in order to be punished. The Court interpreted "willfully" as meaning that the person had knowledge of the law and the purpose to violate the law.

The Court then concluded that, because the tax code is so complicated, the defendant could have been in error about what income was taxable, and remanded the case to the trial court to re-try on that issue.

Later developments

---

Some tax protesters have incorrectly cited this case as "proof" that it is possible to avoid paying taxes without punishment by using the kind of defense raised by Cheek. This belies the fact that Cheek was the subject of a criminal prosecution. He was required to repay all of the taxes that he had failed to pay up to that point. Further, the case was remanded and Mr. Cheek was again convicted and sentenced to jail time. The second conviction was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in United States v. Cheek, 3 F.3d 1057 (7th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1112 (1994)).

External link

---

United States Supreme Court cases | United States rights of the accused case law | United States taxation and revenue case law | 1991 in law