|FORMS: 2.16 LETTER TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY|
|RIGHT Click here for the Word 97 version of this document|
The message below was written by one of our readers, and was intended to be sent to the United States Secretary of the Treasury. It established legal proof of your status you can use in a court of law. It also plants a fire under the tail of the Secretary to refute your findings.
<<CITY>>, <<STATE>> <<ZIP>>
SECRETARY OF TREASURY
1500 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NORTH WEST
WASHINGTON, D.C. (20220)
Dear Secretary O’Neil,
To the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agents, officers, and computers keeping records on <<YOUR NAME>> (ref.no. <<SSN/TIN>>). Your records are in error, the undersigned is a NONRESIDENT ALIEN with respect to the "United States" as those terms are defined in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) and 26 C.F.R §31.3121(e) and has never had income “effectively connected to a trade or business” within the "United States".
I COME NOW to file this Memorandum to inform you of my discoveries and demand the IRS correct the errant records contained within your systems. Below are the specific conclusions I have reached and what I would like for you to do:
MY CITIZENSHIP STATUS
1. The issues as to whether there are different meanings for the term "United States", and whether there are three different "United States" operating within the same geographical area, and one "United States" operating outside the Constitution over its own territory (in which it has citizens belonging to said "United States"), were settled in 1901 by the Supreme Court in the cases of De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1 and Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901). In Downes supra, Justice Harlan dissented as follows:
prevails with some --
indeed, it found expression in arguments
at the bar --
that we have in
this country substantially or practically two national governments;
one, to be maintained
all its restrictions;
to be maintained by
Congress outside and independently
of that instrument, by exercising such powers
as other nations of the earth are accustomed to exercise.”
“It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.”
[Downes supra, page 382, emphasis added]
2. This theory of a government operating outside the Constitution over its own territory, with citizens of the "United States" belonging thereto under Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) of the Constitution, was further confirmed in 1922 by the Supreme Court in Balzac v. Porto Rico, 258 U.S. 298, wherein that Court affirmed, at page 305, that the Constitution does not apply outside the limits of the 50 States of the Union, quoting Downes supra and De Lima supra; that, under, the "United States" was given exclusive power over the territories and the citizens of the "United States" residing therein.
3. The issue arose again in 1944, in the case of Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, Tax Commissioner of Ohio, 324 U.S. 652, wherein the U.S. Supreme Court stated as follows at page 671-672:
Quoting Fourteen Diamond Rings v. United States, 183 U.S. 176; cf. De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1; Dooley v. United States, 182 U.S. 222; Faber v. United States, 221 U.S. 649; cf. Huus v. New York & P.R.S.S. Co., 182 U.S. 392; Gonzales v. Williams, 192 U.S. 1; West India Oil Co. v. Domenech, 311 U.S. 20.
The Court, in Hooven supra, indicated that this was the last time it would address the issue; it would just be judicially noticed.
4. The issue arose in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 240 U.S. 1. In that case, the high Court affirmed that the "United States" could levy a tax on the income of a nonresident alien when that income derived from sources WITHIN the "United States" i.e. (its territorial jurisdiction).
5. Based upon the decision in Brushaber supra, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, promulgated the Court's decision as Treasury Decision 2313 (see EXHIBIT #1). T.D. 2313 declared that Frank R. Brushaber was a NONRESIDENT ALIEN with respect to the "United States". T.D. 2313 also declared that the Union Pacific Railroad Company was a DOMESTIC CORPORATION with respect to the "United States" (i.e. its territorial jurisdiction).
6. The Complaint filed by Mr. Brushaber shows that he was a nonresident of the "United States" (D.C.), residing instead in the State of New York, in the borough of Brooklyn, and a Citizen thereof, with his principal place of business in the borough of Manhattan. He owned stocks and bonds issued by the Union Pacific Railroad Company, upon which a cash dividend was declared to him by said company, a domestic corporation of the "United States". Union Pacific was chartered by an Act of Congress for the territory of the federal state of Utah, in order to build a railroad and telegraph line and other purposes. It is a matter of public record that the Union Pacific Railroad Company was a domestic "United States" corporation, of the federal state of Utah, residing in the District of Columbia, with its principal place of business in Manhattan, New York. It was created by an Act of the "United States" Senate and House of Representatives (under their exclusive authority, granted by the Constitution for the United States at 1:8:17) on July 1, 1862 by the 37th Congress, 2nd Session, as recorded in the Statutes At Large, December 5, 1859 to March 3, 1863 at Chapter CXX, page 489. Considering the foregoing evidence of the diversity of citizenship of the two parties, it is clear that Mr. Brushaber was a "nonresident alien with respect to the United States", who had income from sources within said "United States". His income derived from the Union Pacific Railroad Company, a corporate citizen created by Congress and residing WITHIN the "United States" (i.e. the District of Columbia). (see EXIBIT #2)
[A] domestic corporation is an artificial person whose residence or domicile is fixed by law within the territorial jurisdiction of the state which created it. That residence cannot be changed temporarily or permanently by the migrations of its officers or agents to other jurisdictions. So long as it is an existing corporation its residence, citizenship, domicile, or place of abode is within the state which created it. It cannot reside or have its domicile elsewhere; neither can it in legal contemplation be absent from the state of its creation.
[Fowler v. Chillingworth, 113 So. 667, 669 (1927)] [emphasis added]
7. Related cases are Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 171 (1796): Hylton was a Congressman; his salary was income from sources WITHIN the "United States". See also Springer v. U.S., 102 U.S. 586 (1881): Springer, a Virginia Citizen, operated a carriage business in the District of Columbia.
8. The first paragraph of the Secretary's Treasury Decision (EXHIBIT #1) is quoted here as follows:
Taxability of interest from bonds and dividends on stock of domestic corporations owned by nonresident aliens, and the liabilities of nonresident aliens under Section 2 of the act of October 3, 1913.
To collectors of internal revenue:
Under the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railway [sic] Co., decided January 24, 1916, it is hereby held that income accruing to nonresident aliens in the form of interest from the bonds and dividends on the stock of domestic corporations is subject to the income tax imposed by the act of October 3, 1913.
[footnote and emphasis added]
9. The above decision by the Secretary of the Treasury determined that a tax on income derived from rents, sales of property, wages, professions, or a trade or business WITHIN the "United States", was applicable to such "income" when payable to a nonresident alien, i.e. a Union State Citizen.
10. All income tax provisions under 26 U.S.C., subtitle A (an excise tax on "income"), are divided between sources WITHIN and WITHOUT the "United States". They are imposed upon the worldwide income of citizens of the "United States" and aliens residing therein, and upon nonresident aliens (of all kinds) receiving income from sources WITHIN said "United States" and WITHIN the other parts of the American Empire which fall WITHIN the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Congress of the "United States", pursuant to 1:8:17 and 4:3:2.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY GRANTED TO CONGRESS
11. The Constitution gives to Congress the power to act for the 50 Union States as an international representative and to do so without (outside) the boundaries of each of those 50 States. These powers are expressed in Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 1 thru 16 (1:8:1-16).
12. The Constitution gave to Congress a seat of government, known as the District of Columbia. In time, Congress created a government for the "District", and this "District" became a federal state by definition. However, this "state" (D.C.) is not "united" by or under the Constitution for the United States of America. D.C. has never joined the Union.
13. Furthermore, the Constitution granted to Congress the authority to govern the "District", just as the Legislatures of each of the several States of the Union govern their States within the geographical limits of those States. As Congress began to legislate for the "District", under authority of 1:8:17 and 1:8:18, the difference between the citizens of the "District" and the Citizens of the Union became apparent, in that the citizens of the "District" did not possess the right of suffrage or other rights (see Balzac supra, De Lima supra, and Downes supra) and therefore were not recognized as a part of the Sovereignty of "We the People". The Constitution for the United States of America provided no means of taxing these "District" citizens of the "United States". A method of forming municipal governments and of exercising taxing power over these citizens within the territories of the "United States" was decided by The Insular Cases (see the Bidwell cases, supra). "The Constitution was made for States, not territories," wrote Daniel Webster. "... [T]he Constitution of the United States as such does not extend beyond the limits of the States which are united by and under it ....", wrote author Langdell in "The Status of Our New Territories", 12 Harvard Law Review 365, 371.
14. The distinction between "citizens of the United States" and "Union State Citizens" has been fully recognized by the Congress and the Courts as follows:
15. Congress identifies these citizens of the "District" as "individuals" or citizens who reside in the "United States" and who are subject to the direct control of Congress in its local taxing and other municipal laws.
16. In De Lima supra, the U.S. Attorney defined federal taxes with the following words, at page 99-108:
Congress imposed a federal excise tax on the "income" of these citizens or "individuals" at 26 U.S.C., Section 1, as a local tax:
Hence the term "from sources WITHIN the United States".
17. A Citizen of one of the 50 States, residing therein, is a nonresident alien with respect to this local taxing power of Congress (see Brushaber supra). Outside the geographical area of the "United States" [as that term is defined at 26 C.F.R. 1.911-2(g)], Congress lacks power to support the local government by imposing a tax on the incomes of nonresident aliens (ones outside the locality, i.e. Citizens of the 50 States) UNLESS they reside within that jurisdiction by residence, or UNLESS the source of their income is situated WITHIN that geographical territory. Any income arising from sources therein must be withheld at the source by the "withholding agent" (see T.D. 2313, 26 C.F.R. 871, and 26 U.S.C. 1461), unless the recipient is engaged in a trade or business therein. For a full discussion of this local taxation, see pages 55 and 99-108 of De Lima supra. For confirmation of the domestic municipal jurisdiction of the "United States", see Downes supra at pages 383-388.
18. Congress has control of these "individuals", whether they "reside" WITHIN the "United States" (i.e. territorial states) or WITHOUT the "United States". These "individuals" (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of Congress, such as a citizen born in the District of Columbia or in one of the territories), whether they reside within "United States" territories, without the "United States" in the "foreign countries" [as defined at 26 C.F.R. 1.911-2(h)], or abroad, are still liable for the federal income tax, unless they abrogate that citizenship by naturalization or otherwise. (See 26 C.F.R. 871-5, -6 and -12 and 1.932-1). However, at 26 U.S.C. 911 (a)(1), Congress has exempted from taxation all "foreign earned income" of these citizen individuals, except for Puerto Ricans (see 26 C.F.R. 1.932-1(b), IRS Form 2555).
19. Another type of nonresident aliens are those citizens of contiguous countries such as Mexico, Canada and other foreign countries. These foreigners, residents or nonresidents (as the case may be), are subject to the tax on incomes received from any place in the American Empire, i.e. in these united States and in the "United States". A Union State Citizen, previously nonresident, may lose his nonresident status by residing within the territorial sovereignty of the "United States" for 183 days (26 C.F.R. 1.871-7(d)(2)) and thereby becomes subject to the local tax on incomes received from sources within and without the "United States" (i.e. worldwide income).
THE INCOME TAX IS A LOCAL TAX IMPOSED WITHIN
THE "UNITED STATES".
20. The definitions used in 26 U.S.C. are very clear in defining "State" and "United States". In every definition that uses the word "include", only the words that follow are defining the term. For example:
21. 26 U.S.C. 3121(e)(1) State. --The term "State" includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
22. 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(9) United States. -- The term "United States" when used in a geographical sense includes only the States and the District of Columbia.
23. The federal government has used these definitions correctly, but IRS agents seem to assume that they mean the 50 States of the Union (America) when they look at the word "States" in 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(9). You cannot use the common, everyday meaning of the terms "United States" or "State" when talking about the federal tax laws and many other laws that are enacted under the local, municipal authority of the "United States" government.
24. Another example is the Omnibus Acts at 86th Congress, 1st Session, Volume 73, 1959, and 2nd Session, Volume 74, 1960, Public Laws 86-70 and 86-624. These Acts reveal the crafty way in which the federal government uses correct English and how Congress changes the meanings of words by using its own definitions. For example, all the United States Code definitions had to be changed to allow Alaska and Hawaii to join the Union of States united under the Constitution. When Alaska joined the Union, Congress added a new definition of "States of the United States". This definition had never appeared before, to wit:
Where is it otherwise expressly provided? Answer:
When Hawaii was admitted to the Union, Congress again changed the above definition, to wit:
Sec. 18. (a) Section 4262(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to the definition of "continental United States" for purposes of the tax on transportation of persons) is amended to read as follows: "(1) Continental United States. -- The term 'continental United States' means the District of Columbia and the States other than Alaska and Hawaii."
WHAT ARE THE STATES OTHER THAN ALASKA AND HAWAII?
25. They certainly cannot be the other 48 States united by and under the Constitution, because Alaska and Hawaii just joined them, RIGHT? The same definitions apply to the Social Security Acts. So, what is left? Answer: the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, etc. These are the States OF (i.e. belonging to) the "United States" and which are under its sovereignty. Do not confuse this term with states of the Union, because the word "of" means "belonging to" in this context.
26. Congress can also change the definition of "United States" for two sentences and then revert back to the definition it used before these two sentences. This is proven in Public Law 86-624, page 414, under School Operation Assistance in Federally Affected Areas, section (d)(2):
27. This one section, all by itself, contains all the evidence you need, by words of construction, to prove that the term "United States" on either side of these sentences did not mean the 50 States united by and under the Constitution. If that is not conclusive to you, then see the following:
In paragraph (a), Alaska and Hawaii only fit the definition of "State" before joining the Union. That means the definition of "State" was never meant to be the 48 now 50 States of the Union unless distinctly expressed. If paragraph (b) confuses you, the following is submitted:
28. The word "geographical" was never used in tax law until Alaska and Hawaii joined the Union, and it is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code. So, we must use the definition found in the Standard Random House Dictionary:
29. Were you born in the "United States"? The preposition "in" shows that the "United States" in this question is a place, a geographical place named "United States". It is singular, even though it ends in "s". It also can be plural when referring to the Union States which are places which exist by agreement.
30. Here are two questions, your own answers to which will solve the dilemma. In a geographical sense, where is the State of Texas located on the continent? In a geographical sense, here is the "United States" (Congress) located on the continent?
31. Now, since typewriters were purchased from the areas that just joined the Union, namely Alaska and Hawaii, according to Title 1, Congress had to use a term that is NOT used in the Internal Revenue Code, in order to buy the same typewriters from the same geographical area:
And, for declarations made under the penalties of perjury, the statute at 28 U.S.C. 1746 separately defines declarations made WITHIN and WITHOUT the "United States" as follows:
The latter clause above is the penalty clause that is found on IRS Form 1040 and similar IRS forms. And, 28 U.S.C. 1603(a)(3) states as follows:
EXAMPLES OF THE TWO DEFINITIONS OF THE TERM "United States" IN 26 U.S.C.
32. 26 U.S.C. Subtitle F, 7701(a)(9):
33. 26 U.S.C. Subtitle D, section 4612(a)(4)(A):
34. The Supreme Court stated in Hepburn & Dundas v. Ellsey, 6 U.S. 445, 2 Cranch 445, 2 L.Ed 332, that the District of Columbia is not a "State" within the meaning of the Constitution. Therefore, it is apparent that the meaning of the term "States" in the first definition above can only mean the territories and possessions belonging to the "United States", because of the specific mention of the District of Columbia and the specific absence of the 50 States (inclusio unius est exclusio alterius). The District of Columbia is not a "State" within the meaning of the Constitution (see Hepburn supra). Therefore, the 50 States are specifically excluded from this first definition of the term "United States".
35. Congress has no problem naming the "50 States" when it is legislating for them, so, in the second definition of the term "United States" above, Congress expressly mentions them, and there is no misunderstanding. If a statute in 26 U.S.C. does not have a special "word of art" definition for the term "United States", then the First Definition of the term "United States" is always used (see above) because of the general nature of that term as defined by Congress.
36. When citizens or residents of the first "United States" are without the geographical area of this first "United States", their "compensation for personal services actually rendered" is defined as "foreign earned income" in 26 U.S.C., Section 911(b) and 911(d)(2), as follows:
37. A citizen or resident of the first "United States" does not pay a tax on his "compensation for personal services actually rendered" while residing outside of the first "United States", because Congress has exempted all such compensation from taxation under 26 U.S.C., Section 911(a)(1), which reads as follows:
38. When residing without (outside) this "United States", the citizen or resident of this "United States" pays no tax on "foreign earned income", but is required to file a return, claiming the exemption (see IRS Form 2555).
39. 26 C.F.R., Section 871-13(c) allows this citizen to abandon his citizenship or residence in the "United States" by residing elsewhere.
40. 26 C.F.R., Section 1.911-2(g) defines the term "United States" as follows:
None of the 50 united States comes under the sovereignty of the "United States", and subsection (h) defines the 50 States united by the Constitution as "foreign countries":
All of the 50 States are foreign with respect to each other and are under the sovereignty of their respective Legislatures, except where a power has been expressly delegated to Congress. The Citizens of each Union State are foreigners and aliens with respect to another Union State, unless they establish a residence therein under the laws of that Union State. Otherwise, they are nonresident aliens with respect to all the other Union States.
41. The regulations at 26 C.F.R., Section 1.1-1(a) state, in pertinent part:
26 U.S.C., Section 1 imposes a tax on "taxable income" as follows, in pertinent part:
42. The regulations promulgated to explain 26 U.S.C., Section 1 are found in 26 C.F.R. Section 1.1-1, and state in pertinent part:
Please note that the term "taxable income" is not used as such in the above statute because the "income" of those classes of individuals mentioned is taxable as "taxable income".
43. 26 C.F.R., Section 871-13 states as follows:
(a) In general. (1) An individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States at the beginning of the taxable year but a nonresident alien at the end of the taxable year, or a nonresident alien at the beginning of the taxable year but a citizen or resident of the United States at the end of the taxable year, is taxable for such year as though his taxable year were comprised of two separate periods, one consisting of the time during which he is a citizen or resident of the United States and the other consisting of the time during which he is not a citizen or resident of the United States.
44. The federal income tax is a local tax for the "United States" to support local government and, in order to become liable to this tax, a State Citizen must be a resident therein (i.e. a resident alien), or receive income from sources therein, or be engaged in a trade or business therein.
45. In 26 U.S.C., Section 7701(b)(1)(A) & (B), Congress defined the statutory difference between "resident alien" and "nonresident alien" as follows:
46. The undersigned is not a "resident" (as that term is defined in the above statutes) nor citizen of this "United States". The undersigned is a nonresident alien as that term is defined in subsection (B), and has the same status as the Plaintiff in Brushaber supra.
INDIVIDUALS REQUIRED TO MAKE RETURNS OF INCOME
47. The following individuals are required to make returns of income:
48. The undersigned (clearly) is not defined in the above statutes, but is defined in the following statute as one who is not required to make a return.
49. 26 C.F.R., Section 1.6013-1 states:
(b) Nonresident Alien. A joint return shall not be made if either the husband or wife at any time during the taxable year is a nonresident alien.
The undersigned is nonresident alien with respect to the "United States", with no income derived from sources within the "United States".
50. 26 C.F.R., Section 871-7 states, in pertinent part, as follows:
Except as otherwise provided in Section 1.871-12, a nonresident alien individual to whom this section applies is not subject to the tax imposed by section 1 or section 1201(b)  but, pursuant to the provision of section 871(a), is liable to a flat tax of 30 percent upon the aggregate of the amounts determined under paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section which are received during the taxable year from sources within the United States. [emphasis added]
51. Please note 26 C.F.R., Section 1.871-4(b), Proof of residence of aliens, which establishes a key legal presumption:
52. Further facts are illustrated by the definition of "withholding agent" at 26 U.S.C., Section 7701(a)(16):
53. 26 U.S.C., Section 1441 refers to nonresident aliens who receive income from sources within the "United States", as set forth in Section 871 (a)(1). These sections do not apply to the undersigned. The undersigned, has not had taxable income to present, and I do not foresee any taxable income in my future.
54. Your attention is invited to 26 C.F.R., Section 31.3401(a)(6)-1(b), which states as follows:
55. As a rule, Military Retirement Pay of a nonresident alien individual is exempted from the income tax at 26 C.F.R., Section 31.3401(a)-1(b)(1)(ii), with the following exception:
and at 26 C.F.R., Section 935-1(a)(3):
Section 574 (1) of The Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Act states that:
For the purposes of taxation in respect of the personal property, income, or gross income of any such person by any State, Territory, possession, or political subdivision of any of the foregoing, or the District of Columbia, of which such person is not a resident or in which he is not domiciled ... personal property shall not be deemed to be located or present in or to have a situs for taxation in such State, Territory, possession or political subdivision, or district. [emphasis added]
55. When the undersigned received the initial correspondence, a copy of exhibit #4 was filed with the District Director in Kansas City, Missouri. No rebuttal has been received. The time for a rebuttal has elapsed. (see exibit #4)
If there is anything confusing to the readers of this documentary evidence, please do not try to explain the content of the dissembled income tax rules and regulations to Me.
The undersigned is in no way subjected to any derivative liability. The procedures set forth in 26 C.F.R. do not authorize the Secretary or his delegate to manufacture income and tax it where a Person is without the taxable class. 26 C.F.R., Section 871 is unclouded in that, where there is no income from sources within the "United States" by a nonresident alien, the choice is delegated to that Person by Congress as to whether a return is to be filed or not (see 26 C.F.R. 1.871-8). Where the Secretary determines the existence of taxable income when there has been no return, he should sign the substitute return and assume the responsibility for the determination as required by 26 U.S.C. 6020 (b)(1). Treasury Decision 2313 explains that the withholding agent is responsible for withholding the tax from sources within the "United States", for filing a Form 1040NR and for paying over the tax withheld from said nonresident alien. (See Treasury Decision 2313 and 26 C.F.R. 1.1461-3). Therefore, no taxable income has existed, therefore, no penalties or interest should accrue or apply to the undersigned.
The fact that the undersigned was not aware of the above information in the earlier years of life and reported the "earned income" from labor in the foreign States of the Union as a local tax of the "United States", does not change my status as a Citizen of the Republic of Union States. Nor does it change the status from nonresident alien to an "individual" defined in 26C.F.R., Section 1.1-1. Nor does it justify the Secretary's actions taken when he has been repeatedly informed by the "PATRIOTS" of their true status. The Secretary is required to know the law he is administering, and to do so with justice and equity within the parameters set forth by Congress. Arbitrary actions are discouraged by the Executive, the Congress and the Courts. The undersigned can find no Act, Law or Statute that requires policing the domestic Citizens that file incorrect forms with the Internal Revenue Service that implicate a taxable income. It is also not my job to educate the "IRS".
The employees of the "IRS" should be informed of the tax laws as they actually exist, not misinformed to defraud WE THE PEOPLE of the 50 States of the Union. The bill for my time spent over the last 18 years, trying to decipher the IRS rules and regulations is as follows; At $125 per hour. About 43,159 hours are billable. The stress placed on myself and my parents over this phony scheme, threatening letters, and propaganda spread throughout the media and directed to the undersigned and my parents is another $3,000,000 you can add to my remuneration. The employees of the IRS did everything imaginable to conceal the truth that has been explained by this document, and the FAMILY GAURDIAN WEB SITE.
If you think the amount above is exorbitant, think about all the good people of OUR great Nations that turn over hard earned non-taxable income to the IRS in error. Please, have a letter of apology sent to my parents signed by the Secretary of the Treasury along with $2,000,000 for the undue stress caused by their son seeking the truth about the income tax fraud perpetuated continually throughout their lives.
If there is some reason I have had taxable income in the past that I am not aware of, Please, inform Me immediately with the applicable regulations pertinent to a natural Sovereign Citizen of the Union States. If there is an error in this document please inform me immediately. If there is no error in this document, promptly release the Notice of Federal tax liens on the property at 92 Lemans Court, Lake St. Louis, Missouri. Return the $8,126 (with interest and penalties it should come to about $25,000) that was stolen from my account in 1994/5. Correct the errant records contained in your systems.
Please instead use as the target of your illegal acts of avaricious extortion some other ignorant product of the deficient American public education that you helped implement (Dept. of Education) who is too stupid to know that you don’t have jurisdiction over him either.
If the IRS does somehow negate any of this document, please remember, the income tax laws are void due to the VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTORINE.
For more evidence please see http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/taxes.htm. If you need help correcting your errant records, feel free to seek my opinion as to how I want records on this Sovereign Natural National Citizen to read. Who, after all, is better to ask? Should you wish to dispute any of the contents of this letter, please first provide a signed, notarized response to the questions at:
You have 15 days to find errors in this document that would negate the intent of this document and provide your written, signed, notarized rebuttal to the above questions. Otherwise, your lack of response constitutes a legal admission of the facts and conclusions described herein. Be sure to sign any rebuttal, per 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief, per 28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
Executed on this _____day of _________________,________.
All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice U.C.C. 1-207
<<CITY>> , <<STATE>> Republic
United States of America
NOTARY AND PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF _____________ )
COUNTY OF ___________ )
On __________________________ before me ___________________personally appeared ______________________ personally known to me (proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
I do hereby certify that I have served _______________________________________________(name of agency or person served) with a true copy of the within document (circle one) (personally)/(by Certified Mail with Return Receipt Requested), from/at _______________________________________________________________ (city and state mail was sent from).
Witness my hand and official seal.
Signature of Notary:_______________________________________
Certified Mail #:______________________________________
 See Langdell, "The Status of our New Territories," 12 arvard Law Review 365, 371; see also Thayer, "Our New Possessions," 12 Harvard Law Review 464; Thayer, "The Insular Tariff Cases in the Supreme Court," 15 Harvard Law Review 164; Littlefield, "The Insular Cases," 15 Harvard Law Review 169, 281.
 "Domestic" in the "United States" statutes means inside D.C., the possessions, territories, and enclaves of the "United States", i.e. federal states.
 Please note that the U.S. Constitution always denoted "Citizen" and "Person" in capital letters until the 14th Amendment, wherein citizen and person were not capitalized.
 This term "state" evidently does not embrace one of the 50 States (where I am a free inhabitant), united by the Constitution, because they are separate governments or foreign states with respect to the "United States" (i.e. D.C., its territories, possessions and enclaves).
 Capital gains tax.