The text below is the text
of a
letter I sent multiple times to four specific individuals within the
IRS.
Since this letter is a touch
over 8,000
words, and is 15 pages of ten point font on legal size paper, the
IRS' reply, IF ANY, will be on a subsequent web page.
Editorial addition: There
are two letters I have received from the IRS. They are linked below. As
you will see when you read them, they are "letters", but they do not
classify as a "response".
I've placed further comments
and information below the text of this letter.
Dale R. Eastman
P.O. Box nnnn
Xxxxxx, XX
nnnnn-nnnn
IRS
Mark Everson
Commissioner, IRS
1111 Constitution Ave, NW
Washington, District of Columbia
20224
Certified Mail: 7003 2260 0001 1963 4851
1st mailing: December 7, 2006
Dear Mark Everson,
(Dear R. M. Owens,)
(Dear Dennis L. Parizek,)
(Dear Thomas D. Mathews,)
Failure to meet the
criteria on this page within the generous period of
time given is an admission that you agree that this letter and its
stated facts will activate estoppel.
Failure to substantively
respond to this letter by January 15, 2007 is
an admission that you are knowingly
violating
my Unalienable Rights as
guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Failure to substantively
respond to this letter by January 15, 2007 is
an admission that you are knowingly demanding other or greater sums
than are authorized by law.
Failure to substantively
respond to this letter by January 15,
2007 is an admission that you do not have authority to collect
the taxes in question from me.
Failure to certify your
answers under penalties of perjury is admission
that you are knowingly
violating
my Unalienable Rights as guaranteed
under the U.S. Constitution.
Failure to certify your
answers under penalties of perjury is an
admission that you do not have the authority to collect the taxes in
question from me.
Responding to this letter with a form Letter 3175 or any similar
non-factual and/or non-substantive reply is a failure to respond to
this letter.
There are 139 statements of fact that you are required to deny with
proof
in order to prove that you are not violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
The statements of fact presented to you have supporting evidence
presented in the form of Supreme Court citations, Statute citations,
Regulation citations, and IRM citations. Each numbered statement
of fact defaults to an admission of the fact as true if you fail to
address such numbered statement of fact.
These statements of fact are based upon the presumption that the tax
laws in question are created under the authority of Article 1, Section
8 of the U.S. Constitution. If the tax laws in question are
created under the authority of Article 4, Section 3 of the U.S.
Constitution then you are to advise me of this IMMEDIATELY.
I make this statement upon my own knowledge earned from my own diligent
studies of the written words of law, since
the IRS refused and
continues to refuse to answer important questions about the
written
words of law contained in the IRC code sections and Treasury
Regulations thereunder.
This letter, and your answers (or failure to answer) WILL be uploaded
to the internet. If any fact I have presented is wrong, PROVE IT
NOW so that others will be informed as to such an error.
I certify under penalties of perjury that the following 139 statements
of fact are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Dale R. Eastman
Notary:
X_____________
X_________________
_________________
Commission expires:
Page 1 of 15
|
All bold face and/or underline emphasis in the cited Supreme Court
cases are mine for the purpose of embossing the points of importance to
make them stand out from the stilted English the Justices used in the
case decisions. All bold face and/or underline emphasis in the
other citations are mine for the purpose of bringing certain points of
importance into focus and awareness.
1. Admit or deny: When an official
does an act the Constitution does not allow, an official loses all
official immunity and such an official can be sued in his/her
INDIVIDUAL (personal) CAPACITY.
2. Admit or deny: Article 1, Section
8 of the U.S. Constitution states:
The Congress shall have Power To lay
and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and
provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United
States; but all Duties, Imposts and
Excises shall be uniform throughout
the United States; |
3. Admit or deny: Article 1, Section
2 of the U.S. Constitution states:
Representatives
and direct Taxes
shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included
within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which
shall
be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including
those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not
taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. |
4. Admit or deny: Article 1, Section
9 of the U.S. Constitution states:
No
Capitation, or other direct, Tax
shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration
herein
before directed to be taken. |
5. Admit or deny: Prior to the alleged1
ratification of the 16th Amendment Congress had the power to
lay Direct Taxes only if laid subject to the rule of apportionment.
6. Admit or deny: Prior to the
alleged ratification of the 16th Amendment Congress had the
power to lay Duties, Imposts and Excises only if laid subject to
the rule of uniformity.
7. Admit or deny: The power to lay a
Direct-Unapportioned Tax would be a “new power of taxation.”
8. Admit or deny: Amendment 16 of the
U.S. Constitution states:
The Congress shall have power to lay
and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source
derived,
without
apportionment among the several states, and without regard to
any
census or enumeration. |
9. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme Court case of EISNER v. MACOMBER
, 252 U.S. 189 (1920):
[T]he Sixteenth Amendment was adopted, in
words lucidly expressing the object to be accomplished:
'The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.'
---
A proper regard for
its genesis, as well as its very clear language,
requires also that this amendment shall not be extended by loose
construction, so as to repeal or modify, except as applied to income, those provisions
of the Constitution that require an apportionment according to
population for direct taxes upon property, real and personal. This
limitation still has an appropriate and important function, and is not
to be overridden by Congress or disregarded by the courts.
In order,
therefore, that the clauses cited from article 1 of the
Constitution may have proper force and effect, save only as modified by
the amendment, and that the latter also may have proper effect, it becomes essential to
distinguish between what is and what is not 'income,' as the term is
there used, and to apply the
distinction, as cases arise, according to truth and substance, without
regard to form. Congress cannot by any
definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by
legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to
legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be
lawfully exercised. |
---------------------------
1 That fact
that the Sixteenth Amendment was NOT
ratified, proven by Bill Benson in The
Law That Never Was, makes no difference to this affidavit of
facts, thus: The word “alleged”
or “allegedly” when used in
reference to the 16th Amendment and when used directly preceding the
word “ratified” may be ignored.
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 2 of 15
|
The fundamental relation of 'capital' to 'income'
has been much discussed by economists, the former being likened to the
tree or the land, the latter to the fruit or the crop; the former
depicted as a reservoir supplied from springs, the latter as the outlet
stream, to be measured by its flow during a period of time. For the
present purpose we require only a clear definition of the term 'income,'
as used in common speech, in order to determine its meaning in the
amendment, and, having formed also a correct judgment as to the nature
of a stock dividend, we shall find it easy to decide the matter at
issue.
After examining dictionaries in common use (Bouv. L. D.; Standard
Dict.; Webster's Internat. Dict.; Century Dict.), we find little to add to
the succinct definition adopted in two cases arising under the
Corporation Tax Act of 1909 (Stratton's Independence v. Howbert, 231
U.S. 399, 415 , 34 S. Sup. Ct. 136, 140 [58 L. Ed. 285]; Doyle v.
Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U.S. 179, 185 , 38 S. Sup. Ct. 467, 469 [62 L.
Ed. 1054]), 'Income may be defined as
the gain derived from capital, from
labor, or from both combined,' provided it be understood to
include profit gained through a sale or conversion of capital assets,
to which it was applied in the Doyle Case, 247 U.S. 183, 185 , 38 S.
Sup. Ct. 467, 469 (62 L. Ed. 1054).
Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing
attribute of income
essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The
government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted,
placed chief emphasis upon the word 'gain,' which was extended to
include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three
words was either overlooked or misconceived. 'Derived-from-
capital'; 'the gain-derived-from-capital,' etc.
Here we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to
capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of
exchangeable value, proceeding from
the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed,
and coming in, being 'derived'-that is, received or drawn by the
recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal- that is income derived from property.
Nothing else answers the description.
The same fundamental conception is clearly set forth in the Sixteenth
Amendment-'incomes, from whatever
source derived'-the essential thought being expressed with a
conciseness and lucidity entirely in harmony with the form and style of
the Constitution.
|
10. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
has stated in effect, that the meaning of “income” is defined by the
intent of the people when the 16th Amendment was allegedly ratified.
11. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
has stated in effect, that Congress can NOT define the meaning of the
term “income” since
the word “income” is
now in the Constitution.
12. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
has stated, subsequent to the alleged ratification of the 16th
Amendment, that the requirement of “apportionment
according to population for direct taxes upon property” “is not to be overridden by Congress or
disregarded by the courts.”
13. Admit or deny: The requirement of
“apportionment according to
population for direct taxes upon property” “is not to be overridden by Congress or
disregarded by the courts” means the 16th Amendment did NOT
remove the requirement that DIRECT TAXES MUST BE APPORTIONED.
14. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
has stated that gain or profit, proceeding (derived) from the
(invested) property, severed from the capital (invested property),
however invested or employed, is 16th Amendment, Constitutional income (return on
investment) and that such “income” can be taxed
regardless of the source (invested property) of such income (return on
investment).
15. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme Court case of BRUSHABER v. UNION
PACIFIC R. CO., 240 U.S. 1 (1916):
... the bill alleged twenty-one
constitutional objections specified in that number of paragraphs or
subdivisions. As all the grounds assert a violation of the
Constitution, it follows that, in a wide sense, they all charge a
repugnancy of the statute to the 16th Amendment, under the more
immediate sanction of which the statute was adopted.
The various
propositions are so
intermingled as to cause it to be difficult to classify them. We are of
opinion, however, that the confusion is not inherent, but rather arises
from the conclusion that the 16th Amendment provides for a hitherto
unknown power of taxation; that is, a power to levy an income tax
which, although direct, should not be subject to the regulation of
apportionment applicable to all other direct taxes. And the
far-reaching effect of this erroneous
assumption
will be made clear by
generalizing the many contentions advanced in argument to support it,
as follows: (a) The
Amendment authorizes only a
particular character
of direct tax without apportionment, and therefore if a tax is
levied
under its assumed authority which does not partake of the
characteristics exacted by the Amendment, it is outside of the
Amendment, and is void as a direct tax in the general constitutional
sense because not apportioned.
|
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 3 of 15
|
---
But it clearly
results that the
proposition and the contentions under it, if acceded to, WOULD CAUSE
ONE PROVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION TO DESTROY ANOTHER; that is, they
WOULD RESULT IN BRINGING THE PROVISIONS OF THE AMENDMENT
exempting a
direct tax from apportionment INTO
IRRECONCILABLE CONFLICT WITH THE
GENERAL REQUIREMENT that all direct taxes be apportioned.
Moreover,
the tax authorized by the Amendment, being direct, would not come under
the rule of uniformity applicable under the Constitution to other than
direct taxes, and thus it would come to pass that the result of the
Amendment would be to authorize a particular direct tax not subject
either to apportionment or to the rule of geographical uniformity, thus
giving power to impose a different tax in one state or states than was
levied in another state or states. This result, instead of simplifying
the situation and making clear the limitations on the taxing power,
which obviously the Amendment must have been intended to accomplish, would create radical
and destructive changes in our constitutional
system and multiply confusion. |
16. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
DENIED that the Sixteenth Amendment allows a Direct-Unapportioned tax,
because such an amendment “would
cause the Constitution to conflict with itself.”
17. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
DENIED that the Sixteenth Amendment allows a Direct-Unapportioned tax,
because such an amendment would cause radical and destructive changes
in our constitutional system.
18. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme Court case of BRUSHABER v. UNION
PACIFIC R. CO., 240 U.S. 1 (1916):
This is the text of the Amendment:
'The Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived,
without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to
any census or enumeration.'
It is clear on the face of this text
that it does not purport to confer power to levy income taxes in
a
generic sense,-an authority already possessed and never questioned… |
19. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
DENIED that the Sixteenth Amendment allows a new power to lay a Direct
Tax that is NOT subject to the rule of apportionment.
20. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme Court case of STANTON v. BALTIC
MINING CO, 240 U.S. 103 (1916):
The bill contained many averments on the
following subjects, which may be divided into two generic classes:
---
(B) those dealing
with the practical
results on the company of the operation of the tax in question,
evidently alleged for the purpose of sustaining the charge which the
bill made that the tax levied was not what was deemed to be the
peculiar direct tax which the 16th Amendment exceptionally authorized
to be levied without apportionment, and of the resulting
repugnancy of
the tax to the Constitution as a direct tax on property because of its
ownership, levied without conforming to the regulation of apportionment
generally required by the Constitution as to such taxation.
Without attempting
minutely to state
every possible ground of attack which might be deduced from the
averments of the bill, but in substance embracing every material
grievance therein asserted and pressed in argument upon our attention
in the elaborate briefs which have been submitted, we come to
separately dispose of the legal propositions advanced in the bill and
arguments concerning the two classes.
---
Class B. Under this
class these propositions are relied upon:
(1) That as the 16th Amendment
authorizes only an exceptional direct income tax without apportionment,
to which the tax in question does not conform, it is therefore not
within the authority of that Amendment.
(2) Not being
within the authority of
the 16th Amendment, the tax is therefore, within the ruling of Pollock
v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 157 U.S. 429 , 39 L. ed. 759, 15 Sup. Ct.
Rep. 673; 158 U.S. 601 , 39 L. ed. 1108, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 912, a direct
tax and void for want of compliance with the regulation of
apportionment.
As the first proposition is plainly
in conflict with the meaning of the 16th Amendment as interpreted in
the Brushaber Case, it may also be put out of view. |
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 4 of 15
|
As to the second, while
indeed it is
distinct from the subjects considered in the Brushaber Case, … a brief
analysis will serve to demonstrate that the distinction is one without
a difference, and therefore that the proposition is also foreclosed by
the previous ruling.
---
But, aside from the
obvious error of
the proposition, intrinsically considered, it manifestly
disregards the
fact that by the previous ruling it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment
conferred no new power of taxation... |
21. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court denied the proposition that
“The 16th Amendment authorizes only an exceptional direct income tax
without apportionment”.
22. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
has TWICE STATED that the 16th
Amendment conferred no new power of taxation.
23. Admit or deny: The Supreme Court
has TWICE DENIED that the
Sixteenth Amendment allows a Direct-Unapportioned tax.
24. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme
Court case of Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911):
These cases involve the constitutional
validity of 38 of the act of
Congress approved August 5, 1909, known as 'the corporation tax' law.
Stat. at L. 1st Sess. 61st Cong. pp. 11-112-117, chap. 6, U. S. Comp.
Stat. Supp. 1909, pp. 659-844-849.
---
The tax under
consideration, as we have construed the statute, may be
described as an excise upon the
particular privilege of doing business
in a corporate capacity, i. e., with the advantages which arise
from
corporate or quasi corporate organization; or, when applied to
insurance companies, for doing the business of such companies. As was
said in the Thomas Case, 192 U. S. supra, the requirement to pay such
taxes involves the exercise of privileges, and the element of absolute
and unavoidable demand is lacking.
---
This tax, it is expressly stated, is to be
equivalent to 1 per centum
of the entire net income over and above $5,000 received from all
sources during the year,-this is the measure of the tax explicitly
adopted by the statute. The income is not limited to such as is
received from property used in the business, strictly speaking, but is
expressly declared to be upon the entire net income above $5,000 from
all sources, excluding the amounts received as dividends on stock in
other corporations, joint stock companies or associations, or insurance
companies also subject to the tax. In other words, the tax is imposed
upon the doing of business of the character described, and the measure
of the tax is to be income, with the deduction stated, received
not
only from property used in business, but from every source. |
25. Admit or deny: The Flint v. Stone
Tracy case is in regard to the
tax act of 1909.
26. Admit or deny: The tax act of
1909 is a tax on corporate net income.
27. Admit or deny: The tax act of
1909 is “an excise upon the
particular privilege of doing business in a corporate capacity”.
28. Admit or deny: The 1909 income
tax act is an excise tax.
29. Admit or deny: The requirement to
pay an excise tax “involves the
exercise of privileges, and the element of absolute and unavoidable
demand is lacking.”
30. Admit or deny: An excise tax is a
tax upon a privilege.
31. Admit or deny: An excise tax can
be legally ducked by not doing the
privileged activity.
32. Admit or deny: A direct tax has
“the element of absolute and
unavoidable demand.”
33. Admit or deny: A tax that can not
be avoided in one's everyday
affairs of life is a direct tax.
34. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme
Court case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S.
429 (1895):
Ordinarily, all taxes paid primarily by
persons who can shift the
burden upon some one else, or who are under no legal compulsion to pay
them, are considered indirect taxes; but a tax upon property holders in
respect of their estates, whether real or personal, or of the
income
yielded by such estates, and the payment of which cannot be avoided,
are direct taxes. Nevertheless, it may be admitted that,
although this definition of direct taxes is prima facie correct, and to
be applied in the consideration of the question before us, yet the
constitution may bear a different meaning, and that such different
meaning must be recognized. |
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 5 of 15
|
---
We inquire,
therefore, what, at the
time the constitution was framed and adopted, were recognized as direct
taxes? What did those who framed and adopted it understand the terms to
designate and include?
---
Luther Martin, in
his well known
communication to the legislature of Maryland in January, 1788,
expressed his views thus: 'By the power to lay and collect taxes they
may proceed to direct taxation on
every individual, either by
a
capitation tax on their heads, or an
assessment on their property.
---
Mr. Dexter observed
that his
colleague 'had stated the meaning of
direct taxes to be a capitation
tax, or a general tax on all the
taxable property of the citizens; and
that a gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Nicholas] thought the meaning was
that all taxes are direct which are
paid by the citizen without being
recompensed by the consumer; but that, where the tax was only
advanced
and repaid by the consumer, the tax was indirect.
He thought that
both opinions were just, and not inconsistent, though the gentlemen had
differed about them.
He thought that a general tax on all
taxable property was a direct tax, because it was paid without
being
recompensed by the consumer.'
---
Albert Gallatin, in
his Sketch of the
Finances of the United States, published in November, 1796, said: 'The
most generally received opinion, however, is that, by direct taxes in
the constitution, those are meant which are raised on the capital or
revenue of the people; by indirect, such as are raised on their
expense.
---
The general line of
observation was
obviously influenced by Mr. Hamilton's brief for the government, in
which he said: 'The following are presumed to be the only direct taxes:
Capitation or poll taxes, taxes on lands and buildings, general
assessments, whether on the whole property of individuals, or on their
whole real or personal estate.
All else must, of necessity, be
considered as indirect taxes.' 7 Hamilton's Works (Lodge's Ed.) 332.
Mr. Hamilton also
argued: 'If the
meaning of the word 'excise' is to be sought in a British statute, it
will be found to include the duty on carriages, which is there
considered as an 'excise.' ... An argument results from this, though
not perhaps a conclusive one, yet, where so important a distinction in
the constitution is to be realized, it
is fair to seek the meaning of
terms in the statutory language of that country from which our
jurisprudence is derived.' 7 Hamilton's Works (Lodge's Ed.) 333.
If
the question had related to an
income tax, the reference would have been fatal, as such taxes have
been always classed by the law of Great Britain as direct taxes.
---
From the foregoing it is apparent
(1) that the distinction between
direct and indirect taxation was well
understood by the framers of the constitution and those who adopted
it; (2) that, under the state system of taxation, all taxes on real
estate or personal property or
the rents or income thereof were
regarded as direct taxes; (3) that the rules of apportionment and of
uniformity were adopted in view of
that distinction and those systems;
(4) that whether the tax on carriages was direct or indirect was
disputed, but the tax was sustained as a tax on the use and an
excise;
(5) that the original expectation was
that the power of direct taxation
would be exercised only in extraordinary exigencies; and down to
August
15, 1894, this expectation has been realized. |
35. Admit or deny: Any unavoidable
tax on property is a direct tax.
36. Admit or deny: The following list
is a non-exclusive list of property I have a right to own:
- Right to Life;
- Right to Liberty;
- Right to Property;
- body;
- mind;
- soul;
- gold;
- silver;
- money;
- Federal Reserve Notes;
- personal property;
- real property;
- labor;
- rights to exchange property with others;
- property traded for
like valued property;
- revenue.
37. Admit or deny: A Direct Tax is a
tax on ANY of the above listed property.
Failure
to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 6 of 15
|
38. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained on Page 2580 of the House Congressional Record dated March
27, 1943:
The income tax is,
therefor, not a
tax on income as
such, It is an excise tax with
respect to certain
activities and privileges which is measured by reference to the income
they produce. The income
is not the subject of the tax: it is
the
basis for determining the amount of tax. |
39. Admit or deny: The income tax is an excise tax.
40. Admit or deny: The income tax is a tax on the
doing of “certain activities and privileges”.
41. Admit or deny: Income “is the basis for
determining the amount of tax” upon the privileges or privileged
activities.
42. Admit or deny: Dale R. Eastman
has not done any excise
taxable privileged activity, nor has he invoked any excise taxable privilege
that makes him liable
to pay an “income” tax.
Failure to state, under penalties of perjury,
the excise taxable privilege
you allege I invoked, or the excise
taxable privileged activity you allege I did that makes me
liable to pay an "income" tax IS ADMISSION that I have NOT invoked any excise taxable privilege or
done any excise taxable
privileged activity that would subject me to the liability of an “income” tax.
Failure to respond to this
letter by January 15, 2007 IS ADMISSION that you are attempting to
knowingly violate my unalienable
rights to property as guaranteed
under the U.S. Constitution.
Failure to respond to this
letter by January 15, 2007 IS ADMISSION that you are attempting to
knowingly violate the Constitutional proscription against
Direct-Unapportioned taxation.
Failure to state, under penalties of perjury,
the excise taxable privilege
you allege I invoked, or the excise
taxable privileged activity you allege I did that makes me
liable to pay an "income" tax IS ADMISSION that you are attempting to
knowingly violate my unalienable
rights to property guaranteed
under the U.S. Constitution.
Failure to state, under penalties of perjury,
the excise taxable privilege
you allege I invoked, or the excise
taxable privileged activity you allege I did that makes me
liable to pay an "income"
tax IS ADMISSION that you are attempting to knowingly violate the
Constitutional proscription against Direct-Unapportioned taxation.
Any attempt to assert that I am arguing that “the income tax is unconstitutional”
is a bold faced lie, born of deliberate malice; outright ignorance of
what the preceding pages state; or both. Such a lie or ignorance
is preemptively denied:
THE INCOME TAX IS
PERFECTLY CONSTITUTIONAL.
It is the mis-application of the income tax laws by the IRS, its
employees, agents, and officers (whether the malfeasance is malicious,
deliberate, or ignorant), that is unconstitutional. Although the
previous statement applies to myself, it certainly may apply to other Citizens of the
50 united
States.
As shown by the previous pages of this document, Congress has enacted
an excise / privilege tax upon certain privileges and privileged
activities.
As shown by the previous pages of this document, if Congress enacted a
Direct-Unapportioned tax upon the Citizen’s property, such an Act would
be unconstitutional.
Congress has NOT enacted a
Direct-Unapportioned tax upon the Citizen’s
property according to the written words of the IRC2
and the
Secretary of Treasury has NOT “officially
interpreted” the IRC into a Direct-Unapportioned tax according
to the written words of the CFR3.
---------------------------
2 Internal
Revenue Code, otherwise known as
Title 26 of the USC (United States Code) for those citizens new to the
issue who will be reading this document.
3 Code of
Federal Regulations for those citizens
new to the issue who will be reading this document. CFR’s have
the full force and effect of law when properly promulgated
(disseminated).
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 7 of 15
|
43. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRM4
section 4.10.7.2.3.1:
4.10.7.2.3.1 (05-14-1999)
Income Tax
Regulations
The Federal Income Tax Regulations
(Regs.) are the official Treasury
Department interpretation of the
Internal Revenue Code and follow the numbering sequence of
Internal
Revenue Code sections. |
44. Admit or deny: The Federal Income
Tax Regulations are the official Treasury Department interpretation of
the Internal Revenue Code.
45. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRM section 4.10.7.2.3.4:
4.10.7.2.3.4 (05-14-1999)
Authority of the
Regulations
The
Service is bound by the regulations. |
46. Admit or deny: The Internal
Revenue Service is bound by the regulations.
47. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 1:
Sec. 1. Tax imposed
(a) Married
individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses
There is hereby
imposed on the taxable income
of ...
(b) Heads of
households
There is hereby
imposed on the taxable income
of ...
(c) Unmarried
individuals (other than surviving spouses and heads of households)
There is hereby
imposed on the taxable income
of ...
(d) Married
individuals filing separate returns
There is hereby
imposed on the taxable income
of ...
(e) Estates and
trusts
There is hereby
imposed on the taxable income
of .. |
.
48. Admit or deny: Each subsection,
1(a) through 1(e) inclusive, contains the following text:
… a tax determined in accordance with the
following table: |
49. Admit or deny: The income tax is
imposed upon taxable income.
50. Admit or deny: If taxable income equals zero,
no tax is due.
51. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 63:
Sec. 63. Taxable income
defined
(a) In general
Except as provided
in subsection (b),
for purposes of this subtitle, the term "taxable income"
means gross
income minus the deductions allowed by this chapter (other than
the
standard deduction). |
52. Admit or deny: The section 63 definition of taxable
income is NOT the rules for
determining taxable income.
53. Admit or deny: If one does not
have gross income as
it is statutorily defined, one can NOT have “taxable income”.
54. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 61:
Sec. 61. Gross income
defined
(a) General
definition
Except as otherwise provided
in this subtitle, gross income
means all
income from whatever
source
derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1) Compensation
for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar
items;
(2) Gross income
derived from business; |
---------------------------
4 Internal
Revenue Manual, which is the
‘employee handbook’ of IRS employees for those Citizens new to the
issue who will be reading this document.
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 8 of 15
|
55. Admit or deny: Except as
otherwise provided Gross income means:
- all income from
whatever source derived;
- compensation for
services,
- gross income derived
from business;
56. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme Court case of COMMISSIONER v. GLENSHAW
GLASS CO., 348 U.S. 426 (1955):
[ Footnote 11 ] In discussing 61 (a) of the 1954 Code, the House
Report states:
"This section corresponds to
section 22 (a) of the 1939 Code. While the language in existing section
22 (a) has been simplified, the all-inclusive nature of statutory gross
income has not been affected thereby. Section 61 (a) is as broad in
scope as section 22 (a).
"Section 61 (a) provides that
gross income includes `all income from
whatever source derived.' This
definition is based upon the 16th Amendment and the word `income' is
used in its constitutional sense." H. R. Rep. No. 1337, supra,
note 10,
at A18.
A virtually
identical statement appears in S. Rep. No. 1622, supra, note 10, at
168. |
57. Admit or deny: “All income
from whatever source derived” means “All 16th
Amendment, Constitutional
income from whatever
source derived.”
58. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within the Supreme Court case of WRIGHT v. UNITED STATES,
302 U.S. 583 (1938):
The Court has hitherto consistently
held that a literal reading of a provision of the Constitution which
defeats a purpose evident when the instrument is read as a whole, is
not to be favored.
---
'From whatever source derived,' as it is
written in the Sixteenth Amendment, does not mean from whatever source
derived. |
59. Admit or deny: “All income
from whatever source derived” is NOT to be read literally.
60. Admit or deny: Since 16th
Amendment, Constitutional
income is the return on invested property regardless of the
source invested in, (see fact 14) then the proper interpretation of section
61(a) is to read it to mean:
Except as
otherwise provided in this
subtitle, [statutory] gross
income means all [return on investment,]
[Constitutional] income from whatever
[investment] source derived,
including (but not limited to) the following items [of
non-statutorily
defined gross income]… |
61. Admit or deny: Compensation for
labor is NOT 16th Amendment “income” and thus, “all income from whatever source derived”
does NOT act to bring compensation
for labor into the statutory definition of gross income.
62. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 61:
Sec. 61. Gross income
defined
(b) Cross references
For items
specifically included in gross income, see part II (sec. 71 and
following). |
63. Admit or deny: If “All income from whatever source derived”
touched every item (of non-statutorily defined gross income), there
would be no need for part II (sec. 71 and following) to specifically
include certain items (of non-statutorily defined gross income) into
(statutorily defined) gross income.
64. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.61-1:
Sec. 1.61-1 Gross income.
(a) General definition. Gross
income means all
income from whatever source derived, unless excluded by law. |
65. Admit or deny: The U.S.
Constitution is known as organic law and/or fundamental law.
66. Admit or deny: “Excluded by law” in CFR section
1.61-1(a) also means “excluded by
Constitutional law”.
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 9 of 15
|
67. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.61-1:
Sec. 1.61-1 Gross income.
(b) Cross
references.
To the extent that
another section of
the Code or of the regulations thereunder, provides specific treatment
for any item of income, such other
provision shall apply
notwithstanding section 61 and the regulations thereunder.
|
68. Admit or deny: IRC section 61 and
Treasury Regulation 1.61-1 et seq. are outranked by any and every other
Code section or Regulation thereunder that addresses an item of income.
69. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.61-2:
Sec. 1.61-2 Compensation for services,
including fees, commissions, and similar items.
(a) In general. (1)
Wages, salaries,
commissions paid salesmen, compensation
for services on the basis of a
percentage of profits, commissions on insurance premiums, tips,
bonuses
(including Christmas bonuses), termination or severance pay, rewards,
jury fees, marriage fees and other contributions received by a
clergyman for services, pay of persons in the military or naval forces
of the United States, retired pay of employees, pensions, and
retirement allowances are income to
the recipients unless excluded by
law. |
70. Admit or deny: In light of the
proper Constitutional meaning of the term “income”, the word “income” used in Treasury Regulation
1.61-2 is used in the generic form and means “gross income”. (See
facts 9 through 15 inclusive)
71. Admit or deny: “Compensation
for services on the basis of a percentage of profits” is
Constitutional income as that term is defined by the Supreme Court and
as such that 16th Amendment Constitutional “income” is `“[gross] income to the recipients unless excluded
by law.” (See facts 9 through 15 inclusive)
72. Admit or deny: Compensation for services NOT on the basis of a percentage of profits is
NOT Constitutional income.
(See facts 9 through 15 inclusive)
73. Admit or deny: “Excluded by law”
also means “excluded by Constitutional law.” (See fact 65)
74. Admit or deny: Excluded by
Constitutional law means any tax which is a Direct Tax not laid
according to the Rule of Apportionment. In other words:
75. Admit or deny: Any
Direct-Unapportioned tax upon an item of gross income that is NOT 16th
Amendment “income” is
an item of income that is “excluded by Constitutional law”.
76. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 7806:
Sec. 7806. Construction of title
(b) Arrangement and
classification
No inference, implication, or
presumption of legislative construction shall be drawn or made by
reason of the location or grouping of any particular section or
provision or portion of this title, nor shall any table of
contents,
table of cross references, or similar outline, analysis, or descriptive
matter relating to the contents of this title be given any legal effect. |
77. Admit or deny: The location of
various statutes within title 26 is of no importance in determining
which statutes are involved with a particular item of (generic sense of
the word) income.
78. Admit or deny: Descriptive matter
shall not be given any legal effect.
79. Admit or deny: The following are
representative of descriptions contained within Titles, Subtitles,
Chapters, Subchapters, Parts, and Sections and as such shall NOT be
given any legal effect.
TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
Subtitle A - Income
Taxes
CHAPTER 1 - NORMAL
TAXES AND SURTAXES
Subchapter N - Tax
Based on Income From Sources Within or Without the United
States
PART I - SOURCE
RULES AND OTHER GENERAL RULES RELATING TO FOREIGN
INCOME
Sec. 861. Income
from sources within the United States |
80. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 861:
Sec. 861. Income from sources within the
United States
(a) Gross income
from sources within United States |
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 10 of 15
|
The following items of
gross income shall be treated as income from sources within the United
States:
(3) Personal services
Compensation for labor or personal
services performed in the United States; except that
compensation for
labor or services performed in the United States shall not be deemed to
be income from sources within the United States if -
(A) the labor or services are performed by
a nonresident alien individual temporarily present in the United States
…
---
In addition,
compensation for labor
or services performed in the United States shall not be deemed to be
income from sources within the United States if the labor or services
are performed by a nonresident alien individual in connection with …
|
81. Admit or deny: The gross income
that is “Compensation for labor or
personal services performed in the United States” “shall be treated as income from sources
within the United States.”
82. Admit or deny: The exceptions to
section 861(a)(3) do NOT include Citizens of the 50 united States.
83. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-1:
Sec. 1.861-1 Income from sources
within the United States.
(a) Categories of
income. Part I
(section 861 and following),
subchapter N, chapter 1 of the Code, and
the regulations thereunder determine the sources of income for purposes
of the income tax.
---
The statute provides for the following
three categories of income:
(1) Within the United States.
The gross income from sources within
the United States, consisting of the items of gross income specified in
section 861(a) plus the items of gross income allocated or
apportioned
to such sources in accordance with section 863(a). See Secs. 1.861-2 to
1.861-7, inclusive, and Sec. 1.863-1. The
taxable income from sources
within the United States, in the case of such income, shall be
determined by deducting therefrom, in accordance with sections 861(b)
and 863(a), the expenses, losses, and
other deductions properly
apportioned or allocated thereto and a ratable part of any other
expenses, losses, or deductions which cannot definitely be allocated to
some item or class of gross income. See Secs. 1.861-8 and
1.863-1.
|
84. Admit or deny: Section 861 and
the regulations thereunder “determine
the sources of income for purposes of the income tax.”
85. Admit or deny: (Sub) section
861(b) is THE section to use in regard to determining taxable income
from sources within the United States. (Fact number 84 can
NOT be denied if no Code section or regulation is cited that says who
should use section 861(b) to determine domestic taxable income.)
86. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within IRC section 861:
Sec. 861. Income from sources within the
United States
(b) Taxable income
from sources within United States
From the items of gross income
specified in subsection (a) as being income from sources within
the
United States there shall be deducted
the expenses, losses, and other
deductions properly apportioned or allocated thereto and a
ratable part
of any expenses, losses, or other deductions which cannot definitely be
allocated to some item or class of gross income. The remainder, if any,
shall be included in full as taxable income from sources within the
United States. |
87. Admit or deny: “Compensation for labor or personal
services performed in the United States” is “gross income specified in subsection (a)”
and thus, section 861(b) is THE section to use in regard to determining
taxable income from sources within the United States.
88. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.862-1:
Sec. 1.862-1 Income specifically
from sources without the United States.
(b) Taxable income.
The taxable income from sources
without the United States, in the case of the items of gross
income
specified in paragraph (a) of this section, SHALL BE DETERMINED ON THE
SAME BASIS AS THAT USED IN Sec. 1.861-8 for determining the taxable
income from sources within the United States. |
89. Admit or deny: The taxable income
from sources without the United States shall be determined on the same
basis as that used in Sec. 1.861-8 for determining the taxable
income from sources within the United States.
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 11 of 15
|
90. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.863-1:
Sec. 1.863-1 Allocation of gross
income under section 863(a).
(c) Determination
of taxable income.
The taxpayer's taxable income from
sources within or without the United States WILL BE DETERMINED UNDER
THE RULES OF Secs. 1.861-8 through 1.861-14T for determining
taxable
income from sources within the United States. |
91. Admit or deny: The taxable income
from sources within or without the United States will be determined under the rules
of Sec. 1.861-8 et seq.
92. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8:
Sec. 1.861-8 Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities.
(a) In general--
(1) Scope.
Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in
general terms how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from
sources within the United States after gross income from sources within
the United States has been determined. Sections 862(b) and
863(a) state
in general terms how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from
sources without the United States after gross income from sources
without the United States has been determined. THIS SECTION PROVIDES
SPECIFIC GUIDANCE FOR APPLYING THE CITED CODE SECTIONS by prescribing
rules for the allocation and apportionment of expenses, losses, and
other deductions (referred to collectively in this section as
``deductions'') of the taxpayer. The rules contained in this
section
apply in determining taxable income of the taxpayer from specific
sources and activities under other sections of the Code, referred to in
this section as operative sections. |
93. Admit or deny: Section 861(b)
states in GENERAL TERMS how to determine taxable income from sources
within the United States.
94. Admit or deny: Regulation section
1.861-8 provides SPECIFIC GUIDANCE to apply Code section 861(b).
95. Admit or deny: Regulation section
1.861-8 prescribes THE rules for the allocation and apportionment of
the (referred to collectively) deductions.
96. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8:
Sec. 1.861-8 Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities.
(a) In general--
(3) Class of gross
income.
For purposes of
this section, the
gross income to which a specific deduction is definitely related is
referred to as a ``class of gross income'' and
may consist of one or
more items (or subdivisions of these items) of gross income enumerated
in section 61, namely:
(i)
Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, and
similar items;
|
97. Admit or deny: A class of gross income may
consist of compensation for
services enumerated in IRC section 61.
98. Admit or deny: The following text
is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8:
Sec. 1.861-8 Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities.
(b) Allocation--
(1) In general.
For purposes of
this section, the
gross income to which a specific deduction is definitely related is
referred to as a ``class of gross income''
and may consist of one or
more items of gross income. The rules emphasize the factual
relationship between the deduction and a class of gross income. See
paragraph (d)(1) of this section which provides that in a taxable year
there may be no item of gross income in a class or less gross income
than deductions allocated to the class, and paragraph (d)(2) of this
section which provides that a class of gross income may include
excluded income. |
99. Admit or deny: A class of gross income is
one or more items of gross income with a factual relationship to certain deductions.
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 12 of 15
|
100. Admit or deny: A class of gross income may
include excluded income.
101. Admit or deny: Since A class of gross income may
include excluded income
and since a class of gross
income may consist of compensation
for services enumerated in IRC section 61 then compensation for services may be excluded income.
102. Admit or deny: A prudent person
would examine paragraph (d)(2) to see if their compensation for services (compensation for labor) is excluded income.
103. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8:
Sec. 1.861-8 Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities.
(a) In general--
(4) Statutory
grouping of gross income and residual grouping of gross income.
For purposes of
this section, the
term ``statutory
grouping of gross income'' or ``statutory
grouping''
means the gross income from a specific source or activity which must
first be determined in order to arrive at ``taxable income'' from which
specific source or activity under an operative section. (See paragraph
(f)(1) of this section.) Gross income from other sources or activities
is referred to as the ``residual
grouping of gross income'' or
``residual
grouping.''
---
In some instances,
where the
operative section so requires, the statutory grouping or the residual
grouping may include, or consist entirely of, excluded income. See
paragraph (d)(2) of this section with respect to the allocation
and
apportionment of deductions to excluded income. |
104. Admit or deny: The statutory grouping or the residual grouping may
include, or consist entirely of, excluded income.
105. Admit or deny: A prudent person
would examine paragraph (d)(2) to see if their statutory grouping or their
residual grouping
of gross income may include, or consist entirely of, excluded
income.
106. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8:
Sec. 1.861-8 Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities.
(d) Excess of
deductions and excluded and eliminated income--
(2) Allocation and
apportionment to exempt, excluded, or eliminated income. [Reserved] For
guidance, see Sec. 1.861-8T(d)(2). |
107. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8T:
Sec. 1.861-8T Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities (temporary).
(d) Excess of
deductions and excluded and eliminated items of income.
(2) Allocation and
apportionment to exempt, excluded or eliminated income--
(ii) Exempt income and exempt asset defined--
(A) In general. For
purposes of this
section, the term exempt income means
any income that is, in whole or
in part, exempt, excluded, or eliminated for federal income tax
purposes. The term exempt asset means any asset the income from
which
is, in whole or in part, exempt, excluded, or eliminated for federal
tax purposes. |
108. Admit or deny: The term
exempt income means ANY
income that is, in whole or in part, exempt, excluded, or eliminated for federal income tax purposes.
109. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8T:
Sec. 1.861-8T Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities (temporary).
(d) Excess of
deductions and excluded and eliminated items of income.
(2) Allocation and
apportionment to exempt, excluded or eliminated income--
(iii) Income that
is not considered tax exempt.
The
following items are not
considered to be exempt, eliminated, or excluded income and, thus, may
have expenses, losses, or other deductions allocated and apportioned to
them: |
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 13 of 15
|
110. Admit or deny: Considered exempt
means considered not taxable.
111. Admit or deny: Considered not
exempt means considered not, not taxable.
112. Admit or deny: Double negatives
cancel.
113. Admit or deny: Considered not
exempt means considered taxable.
114. Admit or deny: For all practical
purposes, “He’s a liar” and “He’s considered a liar” have no meaningful
distinction.
115. Admit or deny: Law does not have
to state what it does NOT apply to.
116. Admit or deny: Law does have to
state what it DOES apply to.
117. Admit or deny: Regulation
1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii) is to be read as if it states: “The following
items are considered to be taxable income and, thus, may have expenses,
losses, or other deductions allocated and apportioned to them:”
118. Admit or deny: When
properly decoded, Regulation 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii) clearly states that
the law applies to the “following items”.
119. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within Treasury Regulation 1.861-8T:
Sec. 1.861-8T Computation of taxable
income from sources within the United States and from other sources and
activities (temporary).
(d) Excess of
deductions and excluded and eliminated items of income.
(2) Allocation and
apportionment to exempt, excluded or eliminated income--
(iii) Income that
is not considered tax exempt
(A) In the case of a foreign taxpayer
(including a foreign sales corporation (FSC)) computing its effectively
connected income, gross income
(whether domestic or foreign source)
which is not effectively connected to the conduct of a United States
trade or business;
(B) In computing
the combined taxable income of a DISC or FSC and its related supplier, the gross income of a DISC or a FSC;
(C) For all
purposes under subchapter
N of the Code, including the computation of combined taxable income of
a possessions corporation and its affiliates under section 936(h), the
gross income of a possessions corporation for which a credit is
allowed
under section 936(a); and
(D) Foreign earned income as defined
in section 911 and the regulations thereunder (however, the
rules of
Sec. 1.911-6 do not require the allocation and apportionment of certain
deductions, including home mortgage interest, to foreign earned income
for purposes of determining the deductions disallowed under section
911(d)(6)).
|
120. Admit or deny: The only gross
income of a Citizen of the 50 united
States that is taxable (not exempt) is foreign earned income.
121. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within the instructions for tax Form 1040:
You must report unearned income, such
as interest, dividends, and pensions, from sources outside the United
States unless exempt by law or a tax treaty. You must also report
earned income, such as wages and tips, from sources
outside the United
States. |
122. Admit or deny: The instructions
for Form 1040 REQUIRE the reporting of income earned outside the United
States, and such requirement corresponds correctly to the written words
of law in treasury regulation 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii)(D).
123. Admit or deny: There is NO
corresponding instructions for Form 1040 requiring the reporting of
earned income from sources inside the United States. (Failure
to cite the page number and the URL of the Form 1040 instructions
requiring the reporting of income earned inside the United States
results in a default admission that fact 123 is true.)
124. Admit or deny: The following
text is contained within IRC section 7343:
TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE |
Failure to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 14 of 15
|
Subtitle F - Procedure and Administration
CHAPTER 75 -
CRIMES, OTHER OFFENSES, AND FORFEITURES
Subchapter D -
Miscellaneous Penalty and Forfeiture Provisions
Sec. 7343.
Definition of term "person"
The term "person"
as used in this
chapter includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member
or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member
is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation
occurs. |
125. Admit or deny: The term “person” as used in Chapter
75 includes an
officer of a corporation who as
such
officer is under a duty to perform
the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
126. Admit or deny: The term “person” as used in Chapter
75 includes an
employee of a corporation who as such employee is under a duty to
perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
127. Admit or deny: The term “person” as used in Chapter
75 includes a
member of a partnership who as such partner is under a duty to perform
the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
128. Admit or deny: The term “person” as used in Chapter
75 includes an
employee of a partnership who as such employee is under a duty to
perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
129. Admit or deny: The four
previously described entities (facts 125
through 128 inclusive) are within the
meaning of the dictionary
definition of the word “person”.
130. Admit or deny: If Chapter 75
applied to the dictionary defined
word “person”, then there would be no need for IRC section 7343.
131. Admit or deny: A statutorily
defined term has ONLY the meaning
assigned to it under the statute so defining that term.
132. Admit or deny: IRC section 7343
brings the four previously
described entities (facts 125 through 128 inclusive) under authority of
the penalty statutes in Chapter 75 by including them within the term
“person” as
statutorily defined for Chapter 75.
133. Admit or deny: Absent IRC
section 7343 the four previously
described entities (facts 125 through 128 inclusive) are not “persons”
to which the penalty statutes in Chapter 75 apply.
134. Admit or deny: If absent IRC
section 7343, the four previously
described entities are NOT persons to which Chapter 75 applies when
such persons are within the dictionary meaning of “person”, Then,
absent an IRC section that brings any other dictionary “person” within
the statutorily defined “person”, no other dictionary “person” is
subject to the penalty provisions of Chapter 75.
135. Admit or deny: Chapter 75
penalty provisions ONLY apply to the
statutorily defined “persons” “included” in IRC section 7343.
136. Admit or deny: To argue that
“includes” is a word of expansion in
order to include individuals that are already contained within the
generic dictionary meaning of the word "person" is to prove that if the
generic dictionary meaning of the word person is meant, there would be
no need for a statutorily defined term because the named entities in
IRC section 7343 would already be included in the dictionary meaning.
137. Admit or deny: Dale R. Eastman
is within the dictionary definition
of the word “person”.
138. Admit or deny: Dale R. Eastman
is NOT within the statutory
definition of the word “person”.
139. Admit or deny: Since Dale
R. Eastman is NOT within the
statutory definition of the word “person” the penalty statutes in
Chapter 75 DO NOT APPLY TO Dale R. Eastman.
Failure
to respond
to this letter within the time period listed on page 1 is an admission
that you are knowingly violating my Unalienable
Rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
Page 15 of 15
|
I
know as hearsay from my
reading on the net, that the IRS "conveniently" loses a lot of mail
that they don't like.
I know for a fact, from a
phone
conversation with an IRS flunky, that the IRS "lost" a previously
mailed letter that I sent certified.
IRS flunky: "As a matter
of fact let me check to see if there is anything showing that any
correspondence was received whatsoever regarding your account... And I
don't see any... Its not notated on your account." 243
kb wave file.
Because I know for a fact
that
the
IRS
conveniently "lost" my
previous letter, I've sent them multiple copies (thirteen to date) of
this letter
to
"lose".
|