Chicago Attorney Withholds $8,000 in Federal Taxes as Political Protest
Rachel Cohen, a 31-year-old community organizer and attorney in Chicago, has intentionally left an $8,830 federal income tax bill unpaid. In a widely viewed TikTok video from March 2, Cohen stated plainly, “I’m not paying my federal income tax this year.” According to a tax document reviewed by CNBC, she filed her return but deliberately withheld payment to protest U.S. immigration detention policies, including facilities operated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and recent military strikes on Iran conducted without congressional approval.
Cohen’s action places her within a long-standing, though legally risky, tradition of “war tax resistance.” While voicing dissent against government policies is a protected right, the intentional refusal to pay legally owed federal taxes violates U.S. law and can trigger severe financial and criminal penalties.
The Legal and Financial Risks of Tax Resistance
Tax professionals and legal experts emphasize that protest does not exempt individuals from tax obligations. “It’s completely OK to be unhappy and be dissatisfied with our government,” said Josh Youngblood, owner of The Youngblood Group, a Dallas-based tax firm and enrolled agent. “But not paying taxes, or engaging in tax fraud or evasion, is not the answer. The IRS has broad collection powers.”
Michele Frank, an associate professor of accountancy at Miami University, explained that consequences begin immediately. “Penalties and interest start accruing the day a payment is late,” she said. “Long-term consequences can include wage garnishment, federal tax liens on property, and in extreme cases, jail time.” Federal courts have a robust history of rejecting tax protester arguments as frivolous, often imposing additional sanctions.
Cohen told CNBC she is fully aware of these risks and that her public stance may increase scrutiny from federal authorities. Her protest is targeted at federal spending priorities, not the concept of taxation itself; she paid approximately $3,000 in Illinois state taxes, expressing support for how those funds support local services.
A Renewed Wave of War Tax Resistance
Cohen’s decision reflects a resurgence of interest in war tax resistance, a practice with deep historical roots in the United States. “It’s been going on pretty much as long as we’ve been a country,” Frank noted. Typically, such resistance sees increases during periods of war or major government controversies.
The National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee (NWTRCC), an educational nonprofit founded in the early 1980s by anti-Vietnam War activists, has observed this trend firsthand. According to coordinator Lincoln Rice, the group’s website averaged about 40,000 unique annual visitors until the war in Gaza began in 2023. Traffic surged dramatically, reaching over 110,000 visitors in January 2026 alone.
“I don’t think anyone’s making the decision to practice war tax resistance based on one single action,” Rice said. Major political events often serve as the “final straw” that prompts individuals to explore the tactic. The NWTRCC does not encourage refusal to pay taxes but provides information on methods and legal risks. Approaches vary: some file returns and withhold payment, others pay less than owed, and some choose not to file at all—a path with steeper penalties.
Personal Stories and Decades of Defiance
Ruth Benn, a longtime war tax protester and NWTRCC volunteer counselor, has followed a common approach: filing federal returns but refusing to pay the balance. According to an IRS account summary reviewed by CNBC, she currently owes about $27,000 in federal taxes, including accumulated interest and penalties from multiple years.
Benn described receiving annual IRS letters detailing growing penalties and interest. She met with the agency in 2009 regarding her debt. Over the decades, she has experienced small state refund seizures and had approximately $800 taken from a bank account in the 1990s. She has not faced wage garnishment. Benn began her resistance during anti-war activism decades ago and sends the IRS an annual letter explaining her stance, choosing transparency over hiding income.
“It’s unpredictable,” Benn said of the process. “That’s the hard part of this particular anti-war protest. You don’t know what’s going to happen when.”
Specific Penalties and Potential for Criminal Charges
The IRS does not recognize moral or religious objections as grounds for non-payment. The penalty structure for non-compliance is stringent:
- Failure to File Penalty: 5% of taxes due per month (or partial month), capped at 25%.
- Failure to Pay Penalty: 0.5% of unpaid balance per month, also capped at 25%.
- Frivolous Return Penalty: A $5,000 civil penalty for returns lacking sufficient information to calculate tax liability or based on legally rejected arguments.
- Fraud Penalty: A 75% civil penalty if the IRS determines underpayment was due to fraud.
Youngblood noted that if a taxpayer fails to file, the IRS can eventually prepare a “substitute for return” on their behalf, typically without the deductions and credits the taxpayer would have claimed, leading to a higher assessed liability. After a “90-day letter” proposing the balance due, collection actions can commence, including refund offsets, wage garnishment, and asset seizures.
Critically, there is no statute of limitations on the IRS’s ability to pursue a “false or fraudulent return.” For criminal matters, willful failure to pay can be prosecuted as a felony. Data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission shows original sentencing in 360 federal criminal tax fraud cases during fiscal year 2024, an 11% increase from fiscal year 2020. These cases encompass tax evasion and willful failure to file or pay.
The IRS has explicitly warned that relying on “frivolous” arguments—such as claiming tax filing is voluntary or disputing what constitutes income—can trigger additional civil penalties and, in serious cases, criminal prosecution for tax evasion or filing false documents.
For individuals considering similar acts of resistance, experts and experienced protesters alike urge a thorough understanding of the potential for unexpected, long-term financial and legal repercussions.
