Federal Income Tax Liability Is Strictly Constitutional!
Are you truly required to pay a Federal income tax? ......... Understanding the special legal conditions of the Federal income tax.
Date: 4/18/2014 7:10:11 AM ( 7 y ) ... viewed 2039 times
December 12, 2020 Federal Income Tax Liability is Based Upon A Federal Privilege! -
"...The Court had already said several times by 1920 that the income tax was an indirect tax and an excise on a privileged activity.
They don't want anybody to know there's a privilege involved or they will start wondering 'what is the privilege I am being taxed on?'
A close reading of the Regulations reveals that 'citizen or resident of United States' is a term of art describing a federal statutory privileged status. Persons who declare this status have the privilege of being taxed at a graduated rate on their Income from sources within the United States, while anybody else has to pay a flat 30% tax on such income. Of course 'United States' has a very limited definition in federal tax law. But they try to disguise this limit with ambiguous language."
June 21, 2020 - Before The "Constitution" -
"... Encouraged by the possible achievement of total and complete freedom Americans defeated the world’s super power of the time. No longer were they subjects of King George III. Not only were Americans free of an English king they were free of the thirteen States which traced their origins to the English monarchy. American free inhabitants, according to Article IV of the Articles of Confederation need not subject themselves to any government, so they were not subject to taxation."
"The first two Organic Laws of the United States of America, the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 and the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 create total and complete freedom for those American free inhabitants who are willing to do what is needed to claim it. The third and fourth Organic Laws, the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 and the Constitution of September 17, 1787 present a written law environment which permits a second set of so-called Founding Fathers eager to create a fake government intent on more taxation."
This Blog-writer finds Ed's analysis of the four Organic Laws utterly outstanding and especially when it pertains to taxation! This writer is convinced that any attempt toward understanding federal income taxation and its issues must be based on a foundation of the four Organic Laws otherwise there will be a complete lack of bearings!
June 16, 2020 -
"...No matter the name of the tax the Congress is limited in its taxation to federal territory which it calls 'the United States.' "
June 12, 2020 - Two Different Types of 'citizen of the United States' Statuses -
"... the federal statutory meaning of 'citizen' (as used in the phrase 'citizen or resident of the United States' in the Revenue Acts) is revealed in Treasury Regulations to mean 'a person born in the United States and subject to ITS jurisdiction.' (26 CFR Section 1.1-1(c).
This proves that 'United States' in that context refers only to areas of exclusively federal jurisdiction. The use of 'United States' to describe a singular entity is common in federal law: United States is defined at 28 USC Section 3002 as 'a federal corporation.'
In the famous Brushaber Supreme Court case, Brushaber declared himself a 'Citizen of New York' and was clearly deemed a citizen of the State of New York that was part of the United States Union. ... this Supreme Court he petitioned was merely an Article I Supreme Court. Yet Brushaber’s right of free association was respected, and Brushaber was NOT automatically deemed to be a 'citizen of the United States' for federal tax purposes, as doing so would amount to subjecting him to involuntary servitude as well as violating his First Amendment right as a citizen of a State of the Union of United States to freely associate.
Although Brushaber was clearly a 'citizen of the United States' within the meaning of the federal Constitution, the Treasury Department in Treasury Decision 2313 labelled Brushaber a 'nonresident alien' for federal tax purposes, and subject to tax ONLY on his income from 'sources within the [federal] United States.' The Court did not discuss Brushaber’s status at all—it only refused to enjoin withholding of income tax from Brushaber’s income from Union Pacific Railroad stock. This was actually proper, since Union Pacific was a federally chartered corporation and was a 'U.S. source.' The court did not even mention this. All it said cryptically was that the 16th Amendment did not give Congress any new taxing power. The Court even stated that it could not enjoin any company from voluntarily paying income tax. (Setting the stage for what we have today–where almost ALL companies assume they and their workers are subject to federal income tax and voluntarily pay it!)
This was not the climate back in 1916–Brushaber, a stockbroker by trade, was fighting the withholding of income tax from exactly ONE company’s stock. No other company he had stock in was doing this! This was only 3 years after the 16th Amendment, and before the confusion of what is taxable and what is not had become widespread.
Contrast this with the Cook v Tait case a few years later in 1923. George W. Cook, an American born citizen who had lived in Mexico for more than 20 years, was deemed to be a 'citizen of the United States' within the meaning of the term in federal Revenue Law, and on that basis was denied a refund of tax he had paid under protest, from income he had received from property in Mexico City!
So neither Cook nor the property nor the income from the property were located in the United States. Yet Cook was found to be liable for income tax on his income from property in Mexico. Why? Because Cook had filed a 1921 1040 tax return for that year and had answered a question on the form 'Are you a citizen or resident of the United States?' with a “Yes”. 1921 was the first year they explicitly asked for this declaration of citizen status on the form.
This is ALL it took for Cook to volunteer himself into federal taxing jurisdiction. This fact is not discussed in the decision or anywhere in the case—I know this is what happened because I have seen Cook’s 1921 tax return. It was taken for granted that Cook was a 'citizen of the United States' in the case–he openly called himself a citizen of the United States, using the term interchangeably with 'American citizen.'
Clearly Cook was unaware of any difference between the Constitutional and statutory meanings of “citizen of the United States”, and this cost him the case. The Court did nothing to explain this, as the income tax scam very much depends on people confusing these two different types of 'citizen of the United States' statuses. All the Court said was that Cook’s claim (that Congress had no power to tax a 'citizen' who is not located in the United States on income from property with a situs that is outside of the United States) was unfounded, i.e. that Congress does have such power, and that this has already been established by previous cases.
This decision left most people with the false impression that Congress can automatically tax the worldwide income of any American citizen. This is not correct. Had Cook simply refused to file a return when the Collector demanded it, the Collector would have been powerless to do anything about it. The lower court even admitted this was so, as a practical matter. The Collector would not have been able to file a lien in Mexico City for the collection of U.S. taxes. What no one told Cook was that he would legally not have been in the taxing jurisdiction at all if he had simply refused to file a return. Since he would have thereby avoided any declaration of statutory 'citizen of the United States' status.
This was before Social Security Numbers were forced down our throats. Today, the scam is more sophisticated. Nearly every company in the USA indiscriminately reports all payments as 'trade or business' payments to IRS. They force payees to give them a SSN. This SSN is 'generally identified' by IRS as 'belonging to a U.S. citizen.' So now, IRS gets a license to harass you simply because an ignorant payer forced you to give them your SSN! However, the regulation also provides that one may provide IRS proof of foreign status and get a 'different status' assigned to the SSN—i.e. the status of 'foreign person'/nonresident alien, just like the American Frank Brushaber.
... being free requires knowing what the real law is. I teach my clients that their rights are self-evident as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence and this is really all the law they need to know. Ironic that people have to be taught something that is stated to be 'self-evident'! I have a United States Code book 2012 edition Volume One with the Organic Laws that I show to anyone I meet in person. It makes quite an impression on people to see it right there on the page!
I teach that the right to avoid tax using means permitted by law is ALSO self-evident. Your research has helped me tremendously with better explaining how to opt out of income tax to clients, and giving them the confidence that they are only exercising their rights by doing so. Instead of starting the discussion INSIDE the federal taxing jurisdiction and trying to argue a way out of it, like I used to, we now begin the discussion OUTSIDE of the jurisdiction under the Organic Laws and ask “how exactly do you (or how would you) end up IN the federal taxing jurisdiction?” Then we unravel how that happens in each case.
It is always via actions that are deemed to be voluntary, though the system is based mostly on using presumption, deception and intimidation to manufacture evidence of a person’s consent to be taxed. The way to opt out is to recognize the FRAUD and to report it. And to never allow IRS or any state tax agency to rely on that fraudulent information to presume there is a filing requirement or any tax liability.
... It seems like we had only about a year or two where liberty prevailed, before the forces of centralized power started scheming and conspiring, as they always and always will. ... We don’t need to fight this system. All we have to do is stop buying into it, and help educate others so THEY will stop buying into it."
June 8, 2020 -
"Federal power is strictly limited."
June 1, 2020 -
"...the federal taxing power limits the income tax to effectively being an excise tax on the exercise of federal privilege. The government cannot lawfully pretend you are exercising a federal privilege in order to tax you when you are only exercising your fundamental rights.
However, if you can be duped or intimidated into volunteering, none of this matters.
The point is to recognize that, due to these limits on federal taxing power:
Anybody who claims you are 'required by law' to give them a Social Security number in connection with a private contract is DEAD WRONG.
Anybody who claims you are 'required by law' to furnish them a W-4 withholding allowance certificate and/or that they are 'required by law' to withhold income taxes from your private sector remuneration for your labor is DEAD WRONG.
Anybody who claims they are 'required by law' to report payments made to you in connection with any private contract is DEAD WRONG.
Anybody who claims you are 'required by law' to report the money you made from your job or your private business as 'gross income' to IRS is DEAD WRONG.
Anybody who claims you are 'required by law' to deduct and withhold income taxes from your private employees is DEAD WRONG.
Anybody who claims you are 'required by law' to pay employment taxes in connection with your payments made to your private employees is DEAD WRONG."
May 30, 2020 - Got A Tax Assessment? -
"As long as no assessment of tax is made, there is legally no tax liability and no tax to collect!"
“Tax liability is a condition precedent to the demand. Merely demanding payment, even repeatedly, does not cause liability. For the condition precedent of liability to be met, there must be a lawful assessment, either a voluntary one by the taxpayer or one procedurally proper by the IRS.
Because this country's income tax system is based on voluntary self-assessment, rather than distraint, Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 176, 80 S.Ct. 630, 646-47, 4 L.Ed.2d 623 (1960), the Service may assess the tax only in certain circumstances and in conformity with proper procedures.” - Bothke v. Fluor Engineers and Constructors 834 F.2d 804 (9th Cir. 1987)
"As the Bothke court stated in the above cite, there are only two ways an assessment of tax can
1) You voluntarily assess yourself with tax on a tax return; Or -
2) IRS makes an involuntary assessment (but only 'in certain circumstances and in conformity with proper procedures.') This means the facts must warrant the assessment of tax and the IRS must use proper procedure in determining those facts and concluding that the law applies to those facts before a lawful assessment can be made."[27[
The above quotes (from a 'Lawful Tax Avoidance' consultant - since 2010) makes perfect sense from the perspective of what the Law actually requires rather than what the conventional beliefs may be about "taxes."
May 23, 2020 - "The Congress is Limited in its Taxation"!
"No matter the name of the tax the Congress is limited in its taxation to federal territory which it calls 'the United States.'" By: Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera.
August 6, 2019 - It's So Simple! - (In A Nutshell) -
"Don't 'voluntarily' tax yourselves for taxes you don't owe --- wake up and realize that if you aren't receiving a federal paycheck you don't owe federal income taxes. It's really that simple, folks, and always was."
December 9, 2019 - The "Nutshell" Expanded - "IRS Fraud 101 - Tacit Admission" -
By Anna Von Reitz -
I recently mentioned that HR - 1 [House Resolution 1] of 2017 is a tacit admission of wrong-doing with respect to the so-called Sixteenth Amendment, in that it attempts to redefine the taxing authority under which the "Income Tax" is collected and to place it under the general taxation provisions of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1.
Why is that important?
They are admitting that they've been collecting this tax under false premises for decades.
They are admitting that they had no subject matter jurisdiction over money accrued from our labor as men and women--- our earnings and salaries that they taxed as "personal" --- meaning "corporate" income.
As Thomas Freed has said, regardless of any power to create a tax, there must also be the ability to write law to enforce it. "The fact that the 16th Amendment never gives Congress the authority to write law with respect to the enforcement of this alleged direct taxing power....is just ignored...."
Notice that Congress has the power to tax us, but only under the limits and constraints of the Constitutions. And next....
Notice that Congress can tax Federal Citizens, both Territorial and Municipal, any way it wishes to tax them. Constitutional constraints don't apply to Federal Employees and their direct dependents.
This is another case of the foreign court system operating under Roman Law and "Let him who will be deceived, be deceived."
All my American Readers now know that this law was created for and applied to whom? United States Citizens and "citizens of the United States" ---- Federal Employees and their Dependents, in other words.
Federal workers are not in receipt of any Constitutional guarantees, so they were fair game and not protected by Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, nor by Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4.
Federal citizens of both kinds, military and Federal Civil Service, are defined
by the Constitutions and are not parties to these agreements, so they can be abused at will.
Simply by redefining all of us as "Volunteers" working for the Federal Government for free, as "Withholding Agents", they could strip us of our constitutional protections, too. And they did.
So what does this change in the source of claimed authority from the Sixteenth Amendment to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 do?
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 contains no ability and no claim to the ability to impose an un-apportioned direct tax on us and our earnings and salaries.
They can continue to do whatever they like to the Federal Employees and their Dependents, just as they always could before, but for those of us who declare our proper political status as Americans, the actual constitutional protections clamp down again.
If Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 is the only basis for the income tax, then it must also take the form of an impost, duty, or excise tax and the source of that impost, duty, or excise tax must be explicitly stated in the written law and that source must be taxable.
And we already know that 15 USC 17 specifically excludes any "excise taxation of labor", and we also know that as originally enacted in 1913 and still maintained as Subtitle A, Chapters 1-6, the intended "foreign persons" were all the Federal Employees, so that there is no possible application to the earnings and salaries of Joe Average Americans working in these United States.
Take home message --- direct un-apportioned taxation of the earnings and salaries of average Americans as Federal "income" has always been illegal. ...
August 28, 2019 - In Support of The Above Quote:
May 17, 2013 - "A Clip Of Internal Revenue Service Scrutiny Of Non-Profit Groups, PART 1 -
This clip, title, and description were not created by C-SPAN.
"Former IRS Head Steve Miller Admits Income Taxes are Voluntary" -
User-Created Clip -
JUNE 9, 2013 "IRS admitts Tax System Payments are Voluntary."
August 30, 2019 -
A Comment from a private tax consultant -
"It is a 'voluntary system of payment of taxes' as he says, in the sense that forced collections of amounts due are resorted to only when the taxpayer fails to VOLUNTARILY pay what he owes.(i) The IRS does not have the manpower to forcibly collect from everyone, so they do depend on maintaining people's confidence in the fair treatment of taxpayers(ii) by the IRS to ensure that people will pay what they owe without making the IRS come after them. Basically he is saying, we cannot afford to make our customers hostile to the point where they will not voluntarily pay.
He is not saying here that it is voluntary in the sense that one could just decide not to pay and that there would be no consequences."
This Blog-Writer's Comment:
(i) Regarding: "What he owes" - What any American may truly "owe" in taxes is only what that American individual is Lawfully liable for. What constitutes "Federal Income Tax Liability" is what this blog is all about.
(ii) The term "taxpayers" is a legal term that needs to be defined and not automatically assumed that it pertains to every American individual. In fact it can't be assumed that it apples to any American at all!
April 23, 2019 - The Combination of Both the Rules of English Grammar Plus The Organic Laws Is What Rules! -
"The latest constitutional word on federal taxation is the 16th Amendment. Although it is just one sentence it can be easily misunderstood, if the reader is not well-grounded in the Organic Laws and the rules of English grammar."
September 12, 2019 - "The Law That Never Was" -
As told by: - Anna Von Reitz -
... A few weeks ago I told the story of Bill Benson and his heroic efforts to track down the truth about the Sixteenth Amendment and the fact that it was never ratified by our States.
Now, there's a "brick in the wall" for you.
He published his findings and photos and proof in a two volume over-sized book called, "The Law That Never Was".
His reward? He was viciously attacked, railroaded through the courts, his book was suppressed and forced out of publication, he was sent to Federal Prison for his efforts and denied medications he needed to live. And then, he just disappeared into "the Prison System" and neither his lawyer nor I nor any of his other friends knew what happened. He was just gone. And the rats continued their attacks on his lawyer, Jeff Dickstein....
I remember sitting on my porch clutching both volumes of his book and crying like a schoolgirl. Why? Because I knew just how much those books really cost.
It's not just the time and money and skill it took to compile "The Law That Never Was", its the suffering and separation and heartache and loss of health and everything else that the work cost Bill and Jeff and their families.
When they attacked Bill, they attacked us. All of us. And when they attack me and try to smear me with their brush, it's the same thing. Make no mistake. When you hear some idiot saying that I libeled them or slandered them or that I "lied" to you or that I am a "Nazi Zionist" or some other crap, be aware that they are doing what they always do --- accusing me of their own sins, and attacking all of us who have paid the price to establish the facts and bring you the news.
Here's the rest of the story --- a friend came back just recently and told me that contrary to my worst fears and assumptions, Bill Benson is alive and well and his book is back in publication and available for sale again!
I sat at my desk and shook my head and wept.
You can't destroy the truth. Somehow, despite everything, Americans keep standing up for it. Even Americans who have been profoundly abused, like Bill Benson and his wife and family, have stood tall and not given up.
"The Law that Never Was" is not cheap at $140, but given the large format and photographs and small press runs, you can bet that Bill is selling it at very little more than cost.
Imagine what it is really worth to have proof that the Sixteenth Amendment was never ratified by our States? With this book in your back pocket, all you have to do is prove that you aren't a "citizen of the United States".
Here's the website for Bill's online store:
January 9, 2020 - Congress Did Not Give Enforcement Authority To The IRS! -
"Here's Kicker Number 1 Regarding IRS/BATF" By Anna Von Reitz -
Yesterday, I told you why all these IRS Liens and Levies are Hokum.
But it gets even better.
Not only are the only powers of distraint related to the IRS overtly lodged with the BATF, but, the IRS is not allowed to access distraint powers lodged in any other Agency acting under any other Title of Federal Code -- including Title 27---that is, the BATF Title.
What this means is that the IRS doesn't have ANY access to ANY powers of distraint through the BATF, either.
I defer to one of my favorite researchers:
"Related to your recent accurate article on the IRS - about enforcement regulations only connected to Title 27 - ATF activities - TRUE - here's the clincher on this fact. See 1 CFR 21.21(c) below - that basically says: The IRS is not allowed to use Title 27 enforcement regulations. The IRS cannot use any "enforcement" regs from any other U.S.C. Title other than Title 26.
All Title 26 (alleged) code section violations -- HAVE TO HAVE A TITLE 26 'ENFORCEMENT' REGULATION in the Parallel Tables of Authority. There are 'NO' enforcement regulations (meaning $ collection regulations) for any Title 26 violations.
Title 26 'Enforcement' regulations are regs 'APPROVED' by Congress, but there are 'NO' enforcement regs for any Title 26 violations. Why? Because the whole 1040 tax return scheme is 100% 'VOLUNTARY' and when someone doesn't file a 1040 tax return and pay income taxes - they are 'effectively" un-volunteering to pay, thus, Congress gave NO 'AUTHORITY' or 'RIGHT' to the IRS to file a lien or levy or seize anyone's bank acct. or garnish their wages, pensions, or social security payments -- so this is why there are no valid 'ENFORCEMENT' (tax collection actions) regulations, in the Parallel Table of Authority promulgated (published) in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in the Federal Register where they have to be published by law - or they are not valid positive law regulations applicable to the living men and women in the states of the union.
Every bank account seizure, wage garnishment or pension seizure by the IRS is an illegal 'taking' - a theft of one's private property in violation of too many laws to mention here and I'm sure the IRS knows they have no 'AUTHORITY' from Congress to seize anyone's bank accounts or other assets as they have never had any authority from Congress to even send anyone an 'Amount Due' notice. This applies even to 'taxpayers' who haven't revoked their election to be treated 'as though' they are 'taxpayers.'
See attached one page 'Enforcement Regulations' - not one regulation relates to Title 26 like they have to be - and 'ALL' tax code 'violations' are Title 26 violations (allegedly). BINGO!!!!
Any IRS officer, agent, or employee will be terminated (fired) if found to be using illegal and un-authorized tax collection actions against anyone. Every tax collection letter, notice, or action by the IRS is 'unauthorized' by Congress. Stand up people.
1 CFR § 21.21 - General requirements: References.
§ 21.21 General requirements: References.
(a) Each reference to the Code of Federal Regulations shall be in terms of the specific titles, chapters, parts, sections, and paragraphs involved. Ambiguous references such as 'herein', 'above', 'below', and similar expressions may not be used.
(b) Each document that contains a reference to material published in the Code shall include the Code citation as a part of the reference.
(c) Each agency shall publish its own regulations in full text. Cross-references to the regulations of another agency may not be used as a substitute for publication in full text, unless the Office of the Federal Register finds that the regulation meets any of the following exceptions:
(1) The reference is required by court order, statute, Executive order or reorganization plan.
(2) The reference is to regulations promulgated by an agency with the exclusive legal authority to regulate in a subject matter area, but the referencing agency needs to apply those regulations in its own programs.
(3) The reference is informational or improves clarity rather than being regulatory.
(4) The reference is to test methods or consensus standards produced by a Federal agency that have replaced or preempted private or voluntary test methods or consensus standards in a subject matter area.
(5) The reference is to the Department level from a subagency.
[37 FR 23611, Nov. 4, 1972, as amended at 50 FR 12468, Mar. 28, 1985]
1 CFR § 21.40 - General requirements: Authority citations.
§ 21.40 General requirements: Authority citations.
Each section in a document subject to codification must include, or be covered by, a complete citation of the authority under which the section is issued, including -
(a) General or specific authority delegated by statute; and
(b) Executive delegations, if any, necessary to link the statutory authority to the issuing agency.
[50 FR 12468, Mar. 28, 1985]"
Just wait, Folks. It gets better. And better. And better.
The Territorial United States Congress gave no power to the IRS to inflict any distraint upon anyone by any means at all. Title 26 is a Red Herring. It's all nothing but Smoke and Mirrors. ...
May 8, 2019 - It Started With the So-called "Victory Tax" for WWII -
Lest We Forget --- and Continue Paying - Anna Von Reitz
Here is a link to a wonderful summation of the history of the infamous Victory Tax --- passed as a wartime measure to "allow" Americans to donate (voluntarily) a portion of their earnings equal to the Federal Income Tax being paid by federal employees to help the war effort.
The problem is that the war ended in 1945 and the rats just kept on collecting and extorting and enforcing.
I recently revealed the exact location of the Presidential Declaration ending the Second World War at the beginning of Title 50.
Here now is the Title and Verse of where, when, by whom --- and how deceptively and purposefully the "Victory Tax" was instituted and carried on for the last 75 years causing untold harm, loss of assets, suffering, and fear for innocent Americans who stepped forward to help these monsters.
From Walter's Web World at digital.net/~kenaston.
Brief Explanation of the Victory Tax -
See also: Victory Tax brocher, scans provided by Phyllis Merryman Cloyd -
Prior to World War II, no one outside the government paid income tax; the people were, and understood themselves to be, immune from that tax. During WWII, Congress passed the Victory Tax (56 Stat. 884) to impose an income tax on every individual in The United States of America, something which had not been done by any previous income tax act. Excepted from that tax were those already paying income taxes per I.R.C. 211(a) - nonresident alien individuals with no United States business or office but living in a "contiguous country" and having income from United States sources.
Read the rest here: https://www.constitution.org/tax/us-ic/hist/victorytax.htm
January 19, 2019 - The Most Certain Way To Realize The Truth About Income Tax Liability Is To Understand The Organic Laws! -
Ed Rivera Knows The Truth About "We The People" and It's Most Probably Not What You Think! -
"...The division of legislative power and the power to tax represents the Framers’ of the Constitution solution to the conundrum: how can a free people be governed and taxed? Once the People’s unalienable rights were recognized by the State governments of the United States of America those rights could not be the subject of legislation or taxation. The People of the United States of the Northwest Territory were subject to being governed and taxed by “the Congress” of the United States of America. The Framers drafted that Constitution so that the People who could not be governed or taxed imagined themselves to be, 'We the People of the United States.'"
Comment: This "method used to deceive the nations" is all about "perception"! This most penetrating insight can never be revealed within any public school. You have to be willing to set all of that "education" aside and come to this fresh with a genuine beginner's mind. However, IMO - most any individual who's livelihood is dependent upon "The Framers" government will probably not be willing to consider another perspective. What do you think? .........
December 17, 2018 - No Profit, No "Income" = No Income Tax Liability! -
The Fastest Move Ever Against The IRS - By Anna Von Reitz -
Now I know many of you are suffering the plague of the IRS or from fear of the IRS, or both.
So there is need for a fast and sure remedy, an answer for all classes of people, in all various political statuses.
Here is the fastest move ever against the IRS, ...
The only domestic currency that the Federales have had since 1913 is the Federal Reserve Note, which by definition is a Promissory Note --- an I.O.U. which is evidence of debt, not evidence of income.
So as long as they don't pay you anything but their eternal indebtedness, you have no profit, and if you have no profit you have no income, which is defined as "profit separated from capital".
This also proves that at least since 1913 they have been knowingly collecting Federal Income Taxes under false pretenses and owe everyone --- including federal employees --- the return of all that credit plus interest.
What were we thinking? What were we allowing them to do?
First, they got our goods and labor for nothing but hot air and paper, and then they taxed us heavily for the privilege.....just another little fact that needs to be brought home to the perpetrators.
The glory of this reply is that it works for everyone at all times and in all circumstances. It doesn't matter if you are a federal employee or working in the private sector. It doesn't matter if the "PERSON" being taxed is an "individual" or a business. It doesn't even matter that the entity being addressed is a PERSON and not a member of the people.
There's no profit in a debt and never has been.
January 19, 2018 -
"...All American citizens, in all 50 states, are all now EXEMPT by constitutional law from any required payment or withholding of the federal personal income tax from their paycheck or wages, earned at their place of employment in one of the fifty states, and everyone should therefore now claim EXEMPT on their W-4 form, as provided in law thereupon, under the supremacy-clause exemption from the employer's authority to withhold, that is made at Title 26 USC (IRC) Section 3402(n), for informed employees to claim.
Go ahead, 'Google' it, - 'H.R. 1 Constitutional Authority Statement'. See for yourself.
Then Google: '26 USC 3402' and scroll down to subsection (n)."
Do Your Own "due diligence" in at least a little research (or continue to sleep with the rest of the sheep ; ~ )!
February 3, 2018 - A former client (who is an Income Tax consultant) writes:
"...I have had a couple of people send me this, and I must say it was interesting. I had no idea Congress was now using a constitutional authority statement when it passes a law. Good to KNOW! It has long been a source of confusion and federal abuse of power that they never cited what Constitutional authority was being claimed for any law they passed.
This would be the first time they have made such a statement for a tax law. And clearly the income tax power goes back to Article I, because the only thing they are taxing is federal privilege, which they always had power to tax.
It is very telling that the 16th Amendment is not mentioned as the authority, as this blows a huge hole in IRS propaganda!
Legally, though, it is old news and does not really change anything. Supreme Court said over 100 years ago that the 16th did not give Congress any new taxing power. I'm afraid people going into court with this as their argument will be disappointed. The tax liability is incurred the same way the obligations of a contract are incurred. One must recognize the implied contract to be able to avoid it. Legal arguments will be of no avail against an income tax obligation, just as there are no legal arguments that will get you out of holding up your end of ANY contract."
July 31, 2018 - Dr. Ed Rivera - "Income Taxation" From The Perspective of The Organic Law -
"The Declaration of Independence is the first and most important part of our organic law. This great document firmly establishes the source of our individual rights and sovereignty. Our only Duty, as a people, is to throw off Government that, 'evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism...' We owe no other duty to government and our Constitution limits government in order to maintain our freedom. National taxation is limited to four taxes: direct, imposts, duties and excises. No national tax is proper that cannot be made to fit in the mold of the four taxes. The Sixteenth Amendment is a further limitation on the power of Congress to tax.
After the ratification of the amendment, an 'income tax' cannot be a direct tax. If an 'income tax' is to be imposed among the several states it must be in the form of the remaining three, indirect taxes, or one of them. The excise is the likely choice, since it regularly produces income of some kind.
The King of Great Britain caused the dissolution of the political connection with the United States of America by his many injurious acts including one, 'For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.' The Congress created an 'income tax' that does not fit within the mold established by the Constitution. Such a tax may only be imposed upon us with our consent. The voluntary yielding to the will of the proposition of another is necessary for valid consent. Such consent is an act of reason, attended by due deliberation and exercised only after full consideration of the values on each side. The blind execution of tax agreements (W-4 and 1040) under penalty of perjury, without sufficient tax knowledge is an act of negligence when committed by a citizen."
August 16, 2018 - The Federal Status of "citizen" vs Nationality as American in Relation To Governmental Obligations -
"... At the beginning of the legislative history there were numerous 'Nationality Acts' in the 1920's and 30's. Then, beginning in the 1940's all of these became 'Nationality and Citizenship Acts'. This is where your nationality got confused and "lumped together" with your political status as a 'citizen' or not.
The organizations passing all these 'Nationality and Citizenship Acts' were all functioning in Territorial jurisdictions, so it was no big leap for them to include 'citizenship' presumptions with the topic of 'nationality'. For them, the two are synonymous.
If you live your life as a 'resident' (temporary sojourner) in the 'State of Wyoming' (a Territorial State of State) you are a federal 'citizen' by definition, so that your nationality and citizenship are tied together.
If you live your life at home in Wyoming, you may or may not be a 'citizen'. It is entirely possible to live your entire life and never be employed by any 'federally connected' employer and to never hold any office related to any federal corporation.
And that is the fundamental difference between 'us' (Americans) and 'THEM' (Federal citizens).
We have no natural obligation to serve and obey the government. The government has a natural obligation to serve and obey us. Our nationality is not tied to any obligatory citizenship, but theirs is. And therein lies the rub and the misunderstanding.
People presume that you must be a citizen, because they are, but in fact this is merely a self-interested and unconscionable presumption on the part of the Territorial United States Government that began in the 1940's and which deserves to be soundly rebutted and refused now.
When you are born on the land of a sovereign State, say, New York -- you are under no obligation to act or serve as a Federal Citizen of any kind. They merely 'presume' on the basis of a long-vanished war that you are a volunteer willing to assume 'Territorial political status'.
So that's how your nationality got balled up with the issue of citizenship, which is by nature entirely different.
We now know that the same thing happened worldwide during the Second World War and that 'Nationality Acts' in places as diverse as Italy and Australia and the United States underwent the same kind of change to 'Nationality and Citizenship Acts' at the same time. This implies in turn at that the participants were acting in Territorial capacity and that people were never returned to their natural birthright political status as non-citizen nationals after the Second World War.
This parallels what went on with the so-called Victory Tax. Prior to the Second World War, only Federal Citizens and federal corporations (like the big railroad corporations) were subject to pay 'federal income taxes'. During the war the Territorial United States Congress passed the 'Victory Tax' which allowed average non-Federal citizen Americans to 'voluntarily' contribute an amount equal to that paid by Federal Employees as part of the war effort.
The sunset clause on this legislation stated 'the end of hostilities' which by most reckoning means September 1945, but instead, the Territorial United States Congress just left everything in place as if the Second World War was still going on and people were still 'volunteering' to pay federal income taxes as part of the effort to win it.
Eighty years later and millions upon millions of Americans have been deprived of their natural birthright nationality which does not include any obligations of citizenship and have paid trillions of dollars worth of federal income taxes they never owed.
It's easy enough to see why the Territorial United States Government wanted everyone to be in 'citizenship' status so as to be able to control and commandeer the labor force during the Second World War. It is also easy to see why they wanted the extra income from American workers and why they acted in simple greed and continued on with both these false presumptions after the War---- both Territorial 'citizenship' and 'voluntary federal income tax' have been foisted off and presumed upon millions of Americans without their knowledge or consent. ..."
May 9, 2019 - Anna Reitz -
...When the BATF used to go on "raids" and ransack people's homes under gun-point for the IRS and steal everything of any value, they would seize any jewelry or stock certificates, records, checks, ---anything of value--- except American Silver Dollars. Those they would never touch. Why? Because their system can't deal in actual true Lawful Money and because those dollars were issued by a foreign government. Those dollars belong to the actual United States, not "the" United States.
May 12, 2018 - New Brief Filed at Supreme Court! -
This case is about the meaning of terms contained in the various federal income tax laws. The terms in question include "income", "wages", "salaries", and "compensation for personal service", and the manner in which these terms have been used in the income tax laws. The Amici rely upon the meaning of these words appearing in the income tax laws in effect for more than 40 years prior to 1954. The Petitioners' argument also centers on these and related terms as they have been used in the tax code in effect since 1954.
If the clarification of these terms is acknowledged by the Supreme Court then what more would anyone need to realize the voluntary nature of donating to the IRS when most Americans are EXEMPT (as per notice posted on January 19, 2018 at the top of this blog)?
April 10, 2018 - Related - "the Grace Commission" -
"...When President Reagan assumed office in 1981, inflation had soared to 12.5% prompting him to appoint the Grace Commission which he instructed to 'be bold' and 'work like tireless bloodhounds to cut any excess waste and inefficiency in the government; not to leave any stone unturned in your search to root out inefficiency.' However, what the Commission found was shocking:
'One-third of all income taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the federal government, and another one-third escapes collection owing to the underground economy. With two thirds of everyone’s personal income taxes wasted or not collected, one hundred percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by the Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on services which taxpayers expect from their Government.' -
—PRESIDENT'S PRIVATE SECTOR SURVEY ON COST CONTROL, 1984"
Original Start of This Blog as of April 18, 2014 -
"There has never been a criminal trial in any matter under federal income taxation without a SIGNED tax form in evidence before the court."
June 14th -
"A New Educational Video
This is one of my most favorite ways of clarifying my knowledge on this subject. I highly recommend taking the quiz.
True or false? The testimony of any person that your earnings are derived from federal privilege is enough evidence for a federal court to accept it as true, regardless of whether this testimony is correct:
I got this one correct!
And isn't that interesting how the system works?
Choose one. The 1099, W-2, K-1, and similar tax forms get their power to become evidence that the earnings declared are income and federally-connected from:
A) The clever re-definition in the tax law of ordinary words and phrases such as "wages", "employee", and "trade or business".
B) The lack of any countervailing evidence to the testimony contained on the forms.
C) The presumption of the courts that such testimony is correct.
D) All of these reasons.
I got this one correct!
I'm especially fascinated with the facts of A).
Take the quiz:
Then I took this one and got 100%!
(which made me a "Crack The Code Warrior"!)
April 25th -
Comment at "Lost Horizons" re: today's
announcement for the up coming first annual conference.
What a fabulous sounding 4th of July! I underscore the request for recording the event.
Also interested in knowing whether the presentation regarding the “Constitution” may be coming from a generally “conventional” perspective with a belief that the Constitution stands alone or whether it may come from a perspective with lawful continuity as one of the four Organic Laws – as recognized in the opening pages of the “United States Code”.(1) One of the reasons I’d like to know is that In the second Organic Law (known as the Articles of Confederation) we have the term “free inhabitant”. I have blogged about this:
Dr Ed Rivera has said more:
May 15th -
"Income tax" liability "involves the exercise of privilege."
Flint vs Stone Tracy Co. 220 U.S. 107 (1911) "Excises are taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain (licensed) occupations and upon corporate privileges; the requirement to pay such taxes involves the exercise of privilege." "...Conceding the power of Congress to tax the business activities of private corporations ... the tax must be measured by some standard... It is therefore well settled by the decisions of this court that when the sovereign authority has exercised the right to tax a legitimate subject of taxation as an exercise of a franchise or privilege, it is no objection that the measure of taxation is found in the income..."
March 24th, 2015 -
A good friend and delightful culinary buddy inspired me to update this blog.:
"Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time." Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2nd 906 at 910.
"It is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove territorial jurisdiction over a crime in order to sustain a conviction therefore." U.S. v. Benson, 495 F.2d, at 481 (5th Cir., 1974).
"The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven." Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).
"Where there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a nullity, and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack." Thompson v Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L. Ed. 381; and Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3 L. Ed. 471.
"the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon the party asserting it." Bindell v. City of Harvey, 212 Ill.App.3d 1042, 571 N.E.2d 1017 (1st Dist. 1991).
"Useful quotes" from: http://www.constitution.org/writ/quo_warranto.htm
July 11th, 2016 -
Just found the most concise abstract of "Breaking The Code" by using the search terms:
"federal income tax"privilege
In my Google search it's the 8th result:
"FEDERAL INCOME TAX LAW IN A NUTSHELL".
The Federal Income Tax is "a tax on only a specialized subset of the larger class of income, consisting exclusively of revenues attributed to the voluntary, profitable use of federal privilege, property or powers-- that is, revenues in which the federal government has a direct ownership interest, and to which it can therefore exercise a direct claim as a matter of right. ...
The income tax is a tax on gains from voluntary involvement in federal activities-either as a worker/office holder, or as an investor or beneficiary-and nothing else."
September 28th, 2016 -
I do not know of a more complete yet most succinct statement regarding the true nature of "The Federal Income Tax" as stated directly above here in the "July 11th" post. And if that statement alone is not sufficiently clear then the newsletter linked above will enlarge upon the thought!
December 9, 2016 -
Re-stating the statement of July 11th: Federal income tax is a tax exclusively attributable to the voluntary and profitable usage of federal privilege, property or powers - producing revenues that the federal government has a direct claim on as a matter of right. (That's thirty-six words and might be too long for some people.) This statement is consistent with the lawful and limited proprietary-basis for government's jurisdiction as taught by professor Dr. Ed Rivera - leading authority on the four Organic Laws of the United States of America.
June 20, 2017 -
"Another big fraud that we are still living with is 'Peter's Pence' --- a tax imposed by the Medieval Church to pay for the expense of the Crusades which was levied on the income of parishioners and collected by the Inquisition every April 15."
July 29, 2017 -
A decent synopsis of the Federal Income Tax history on just two pages!
February 25, 2018 - Comment submitted -
The IRS Withholding form allows for your declaration that you are exempt. You can correct your withholding statement at any time.
“Direct taxes” are additionally limited by the government’s proprietary jurisdiction. If you are not engaged directly with or on government property then you are not subject to the taxation for the government’s privilege.
October 2, 2018 -
According to Anna Reitz - "At last report, the Internal Revenue Service (Inquisition) has decamped from Puerto Rico after destroying as much evidence as possible of their decades of defrauding Americans, and have set up new offices in the American Marianas--clearly intending to continue their piracy from a new location.
Mr. Trump already knows that this is not acceptable and that all traces of both the IRS and the Internal Revenue Service and any would-be Successors must be gone from our shores including our territories and municipalities, and they must stop addressing our people and must remove all liens against American-held assets."
 'Now, Here's A Curious Thing...":
 See Link: "THE NEW INCOME TAX LAW (HR 1) DESTROYS the IRS, the DOJ, and ALL the JUDGES!" at:
 Secondary reference: "We, the sheeple V. The banksters - A Call to Action!" By: Lauren Tratar.;
Primary reference: "President's Private Sector Survey on Cost Control, A Report to the President (January 15, 1984)":
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9044/m1/1/high_res_d/IP0281G.pdf (See page 12)
 Also see article By: Anna Reitz reposted as: "'The Methods' of Hoodwinking, Misrepresentation, and Defrauding."
Blogged at: "The Methods Used to Deceive The Nations."
 In his article: "Finding The Source of The Power of The Congress to Tax Incomes" sent to students and subscribers.
 "without an assessment-- there is NO TAX to collect." page 24:
 IBID, pg. 33.
 "AMERICA: SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED" -
Copyrighted on the 17th of January 2017 By: Anna Maria Riezinger
 "Solving A Crucial Piece Of The Puzzle" By: David William:
 "Finding The Source Of The Power Of The Congress To Tax Incomes" By: Ed Rivera:
 "Taxation In The Constitution" By: Ed Rivera
 In a private email between David Williams and this Blog-writer on Dec 7, 2016.
Also see: "The Truth About The 16th Amendment" -
income tax, federal income tax, income tax system, tax code, tax laws, tax liability, 1099, W-2, K-1, wages, employee, business, federal privilege, income, Articles of Confederation, free inhabitant, crack the code, tax form, jurisdiction, privilege tax, organic law, tax withholding, april 15, grace report, irs, internal revenue service, profit, 16th Amendment, collections, federal paycheck, excise
Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!Print this page
Email this page