LEGAL DISCLAIMER
I am not a Tax Lawyer, Nor do I play Dan Evans on the internet.
I am not a Certified Public Accountant, Nor do I play Paul Thomas on the internet.
I am not an Enrolled Agent, Nor do I play Richard Macdonald on the internet.
DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR ANYTHING ON THIS PAGE.
Go look it up for yourself.

U.S. Federal Income Tax

Subjugation by taxation

THE IRS REFUSES TO ANSWER

Table of Contents

2 of 6 Questions, Abridged

I was one of 1,200 people who sent six questions to John Snow, Secretary of Treasury and Mark Everson, Commissioner of the IRS. (Not a typo. ONE THOUSAND & TWO HUNDRED)

1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 (in addition to any other pertinent sections) to determine my taxable domestic income?

2) If some people should not use those sections to determine their taxable domestic income, please show where the law says who should or should not use those sections for that.

Anybody that doesn't know a thing about the 861 EVIDENCE can still understand the simple logic of the first two questions. Either I am to use 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 to determine my taxable income, or I am not.

Does the following letter look like it was sent by anyone who even read what they were replying to?

This is an image of the IRS' failure to answer a simple yes/no question.

Do you see ANYTHING that even begins to answer yes or no to the first question?

Neither do I.

With that informative letter in your mind, check out this exact quote:

“IRS Mission: Provide America’s taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all.”

Something is incongruous. Something does not fit. Something does not belong in this group.

Which evidence carries more weight?

The WRITTEN words of law?
The nonresponsive replies to specific written questions about the law?
The refusal to reply to written questions about the law?