IRS: A Case for Fraud

The Internal Revenue Service is a sore point of contention for nearly every American. What follows is the reasoning based upon the federal government’s own code, statute, and ordinance considering also case law and citing of Constitutional protections which illustrate that “IRS” actions may just be the largest fraud and extortion scheme ever perpetrated in the history of mankind.

I’d call this a teaser, but it’s actually a hefty golden chunk at the of the core of the matter: “The tax system is based on voluntary compliance, and the taxpayers complete and return the forms with payment of any tax owed.“; quoted from (26 CFR §601.602 (a)) Which raises the question “is it owed?” directly following the primary question, “are you a qualified taxpayer?”. Revocation is addressed at 26 USC §1362 as “(d) Termination (1) By revocation (A) In general” as applied to incorporate entities, which as you may grasp in what follows, is what rather than who “IRS” is actually addressing.

Brace for Impact…

What is Cognitive Dissonance?: in short, mankind learns by attaching new information to present knowledge and past experience.  If new ideas have no concepts or experience to latch onto in our present knowledge, there is resistance to the new information.  People resist change and fear the unknown for much the same reasons.  With these topics, expect to experience cognitive dissonance and be ready to navigate your emotions around the natural response: “I’ve never heard this before…“

While alarming in their magnitude, these concepts may seem confrontational if you presently believe paying your taxes is somehow patriotic. It may indeed be patriotic, if, and only if, these are “our taxes”, a valid duty and liability of “we the people” to begin with. I hope this overview will make the idea easier to approach.

The label “conspiracy theory” is likely to jump to mind simply as the easiest explanation close at hand. If the “nugget” I gave you at the outset hasn’t marshaled your focused and undivided attention, I fear you’re well beyond my assistance. When we sit with a cup of coffee and danish for a leisurely read through Title 26 known as the “tax code”… which never happens, because, no one ever does that. Those who read this twisted and tangled stuff must somehow profit from it; there must be a motivation. It otherwise wouldn’t be worth the agonizing and painful ordeal to untangle it for consumption and comprehension.

So what’s my motivation?, [1] to keep what I’ve earned as private property thereby alleviating a significant financial burden, and [2] to assist my fellow Americans to do the same in throwing off the bridle of servitude and bondage to which we the people were in no way intended to be “subject to” nor “liable for”. At the end of this post, I calculate that effect on America at “nearly $8600 per man, woman, and child”… annually. How’s that scan at your house? Admittedly, there may be [3] some profit in offering an example or template on my private exchange. Let’s see who is listening.

If in fact we are not “subject to” nor “liable for” tax or such duty, then stating this fact is in no way a violation of “law”, any misdemeanor, nor inappropriate challenge to any valid authority. It’s our responsibility as Americans as we the people; because we are intended to be and ought to be self-governing.

Key Terms and Definitions

In order that you might more easily make sense of what you are reading and the points as stated, a simple and abbreviated review of the key terms will be included within this post as endnotes at the end of the post. More elaborate definitions with extensive citing might be found on the Cornerstone Definitions page; a work ever in progress. A link number will be featured with the first use of the term, whisking you to the definition at the end. Each end-note definition includes a “return hook” at the end which will return you to where you were in the text. Additional uses of the term highlighted green so you can see what has an established reference definition (as best I can).

Key Points of the Argument

What follows are a synopsis of my own twenty-six points presented to the “respondent”. It an effort to make the very complex technical expression of the claim easier to approach and comprehend. Such revocation and claim is addressed to the IRS Commissioner, as the only officer responsible for the actions of the agency. At this writing, that lawful notice is in it’s seventh version of update and improvement.

Often the communication routed from the “IRS” to Americans through the mail suggesting a “debt”, responsibility to pay that debt, and the penalties, interest, and looming legal threats associated are not authorized nor signed by any originating officer, stating their lawful name, and to which a lawful response, query, or rebuttal can be directed. That in itself is a violation of federal statutes within United States Code (18 USC §1342: Postal fraud by fictitious name). “IRS” is not a who, neither “we” nor “us”, but an “IT”; a Special Heinous “IT”. I’m searching for an acronym alternative to “IRS”; let me know what you come up with.

1. A statement of responsibility that such NOTICE¹ of trespass² and standing³ with evidence requires a lawful response or an acquiescence⁴ (acceptance in silence) of the sworn testimony⁵ is established and can be entered and referred to as evidence.
2. A stated standing that the entity⁶ addressed is not the man to which notice is presented, nor responsible for the “titles⁷” and “stylized” monikers with which he/she is associated in the notice. This also presents the challenge to produce the valid contract or due process⁸ of law by which “performance” as such entity would be required. [If no such contract or due process exists, they cannot produce it and your testimony remains undisputed.]
3. A stated standing that the man addressed, even by their own lawful given name or Trade Name, which is NOT usually addressed in the notice, and the challenge to produce the valid contract or due process of law by which such “performance” would be required of the man, a living soul. [If no such contract or due process exists, they cannot produce any.]
   • So, at this point, neither the fictitious entities they have chosen to address (which are not “you” and for which you are not trustee⁹, neither are you responsible) nor the actual man (which is “you” but isn’t addressed in the notice) can be bound as no contract or due process of law is established to compel such performance.
4. A directive to public servants requiring that any officer taking up this issue provide with any response a full identification of where such officer can be addressed for any rebuttal¹⁰ or further trespass along with certifications of accountability such as a current “oath of office” and a “public official bond¹¹” honoring their actions in office.
5. A statement that those presently addressed in Title 26 and the Code for Federal Regulations do not include the man presented with the notice (mailed to your address), nor any entity named in the notice, therefore neither the man nor the entities addressed can be “subject¹² to” tax or duty, nor “liable¹³ for” any payment of tax as both “you” and the entities for which you are not “trustee” are exempt by classification.
   • This is why it is critical to review the definitions prior to reviewing the standing and citations. Common use of words, which both people and agents think they comprehend, take on different and altered specific legal meanings when addressed in lawful matters.
6. A statement and declaration¹⁴ of status establishing that you stand without the jurisdiction¹⁵, the lawful right to assert authority, of the Federal Government… The description for standing outside such jurisdiction as “non-resident alien¹⁶” is specifically immune and excluded from income tax within Title 26.
   • That is non-resident and alien not to the nation, but to the jurisdiction, the right to assert authority by Federal Government, “United States¹⁷“, or D.C. We the people are self-governing and are not “subjects” of federal government.
7. Quo warranto¹⁸: says “produce the citation granting authority to proceed in such matter“. It is a challenge to jurisdiction with this matter, by which in the court system or other judicial process, adjudication¹⁹ cannot proceed until such authority is established and confirmed on the record. To respond or any intent to proceed without any valid authority is yet another trespass.
8. The initial and obvious presumptions²⁰ which result in trespasses are as follows; that “i” as addressed or in attempted association with fictitious entities, outside any valid contract:
   • am “subject to” or “liable for” tax
   • bear responsibility to perform to “pay”
   • am responsible for accounts with balances due
   • am responsible to perform within given time frames
   • am subject to penalty, interest, or liability
   • am subject to appeal any invalid legal proceeding without (outside) lawful due process
9. A statement of standing that “IRS” proceeds in a mismatch of “like-kind” entities by crossing into foreign jurisdictions to utter fictitious obligations upon a man and living soul with whom “IRS”, an “IT”, cannot stand in parity²¹.
   • This is related to conditions of valid contracts including a meeting of minds and two parties competent to contract. What we’re saying is “IRS” neither belongs in my mail box, nor addressing me directly.
10. This standing and declaration challenges “IRS” to prove the presumption that “i”, a living man, am subject to be associated with any organization, association, or class and such titles and labels without my consent, which are attempts at rendering “me” both “subject to” and “libel for” all the presumptions listed in #9.
    • Of course, no such valid association established by valid contract or due process exists, and, explaining how “IRS” agents and agency, with prevailing culture and tradition, routinely accept that “everyone pays taxes“, rather than comprehending the terms used in their own code which excludes most Americans by classification²². This particular point and sub-points are the longest in the current version of the claim²³.
    • Deeming²⁴ the people members²⁵ of a class is how they very often subject us to things for which we are not lawfully responsible. “The class is subject, and you are member to the class…“, without material facts and substantive documentation, is simply hearsay and presumption.
11. The stand and declaration that using titles and references to my given name and Trade Name²⁶, a lawful “person²⁷“, is a trespass which includes trespass upon private property and common law copyright.
12. A directive to cease and desist use of such titles reviewed in points #2, #3, and #11 until “IRS” can produce the valid contract or due process of law which authorizes “IT” to do so.
13. A statement and standing that “i”, a living soul, am addressed as but am not qualified as the “office, title, role, or post” expressed²⁸. It is use of common language for which legal impact carries higher responsibility unknown to the addressee as addressed in otherwise familiar terms. “IRS” attempts to associate the addressee with function as “employee²⁹” and/or “fellow employee” to pull the addressee into a classification by which they can be led to ACCEPT liability and subjection. If you accept the role and responsibility that goes with it under “penalty of perjury³⁰“, “IRS” can certainly hold you responsible for it.
    • That is, until you realize that you’ve been defrauded and you call them on their duplicity, deceit, and mischaracterization.
    • They call you “employee“, and you might think by common perception that you are, but by definition in the Title 26 code, “you” don’t likely fit that description. The actual definition being unknown to you, you accept the presumption and are held accountable for your acceptance.
14. A statement and observation that it appears that the only way “IRS” can proceed to press any authority or legal right is to have the unsuspecting ACCEPT responsibility for the performance, duty, and liability for taxes. Of course, such is quite literally a “confession” under threat of additional fines, penalties, additional interest, and possible legal persecution as an accepted liability. This in the face of and in direct contrast to the prohibition of being “compelled… [to] witness against himself”; a protection memorialized with the Fifth Amendment³¹.
    • No, it’s not lawful nor legal, unless the “IRS” can get you to admit and accept such duty under penalty of perjury. Again, that’s only valid until you realize the overstep and trespass and stand for your rights, redress of the trespassers, and require remedy for damage³² done.
15. A statement and standing that all such “confession” or previous agreement is hereby void, such terms and conditions not being fully disclosed, lacking authorization by two like-kind parties competent to contract, and other violations of a valid contract.
16. A statement, standing, and exhibits presented as proof of “IRS” trespass and violation including specific utterance³³ with analysis of how many items are trespass, inclusion of an invoice relating value required for remedy if the claim is not adequately rebutted, and a suggestion that such “form letters” if directed at an unqualified recipient without jurisdiction results in “systematized harassment, abuse, and extortion”.
17. A review of the meaning of “livelihood³⁴” as the right of man to pursue this without interference, as opposed to “income” or “wages” where the “IRS” oversteps “ITs” granted scope of authority inflicting opportunity cost and in effect, interference with interstate commerce. These are obfuscation of concepts you believe you are familiar with, but whose Title 26 definition is not likely associated with your private pursuit of “livelihood”.
18. A statement and standing that “IRS” bears no lawful authorization to track “me” nor any activity or property as a “man” without “ITs” jurisdiction; without any subject classification. You might cite “unreasonable search and seizure” from Amendment IV³⁵.
19. A statement and standing that further encroachment of private property results in embarkation of trespass. This also expresses intent to both redress grievance and seek remedy for any and all additional trespass and damage; including remedy pursued in an officer’s private capacity for unlawful actions while in office.
    • This notice establishes that any “immunity of office” no longer exists as any trespass would proceed beyond notice and opportunity to redirect the action; a display of will and intent confirming criminal acts. If the officer trespasses the people’s rights, the man assuming the office “vacates” the office in failing the public trust.
    • The office or “desk” at which a man sits bears clearly defined boundaries. “IT” isn’t responsible for the decisions such man makes which exceed granted scope of authority; the man is accountable for those excessive actions and poor decisions. Therefore “his” private property is on the chopping block in consideration of remedy to repair the damage they have chosen to pursue, malfeasance or misfeasance of the granted authority while in office. Such is the requirement and need for “public official bonds“.
20. A call to confirm any authority to pursue Title 26, that such was ever “lawfully enacted” as it is expressed with 26 USC §7806 that “…cross references in this title… shall be given no legal effect.” furthermore, that (b) “…No inference, implication, or presumption of legislative construction shall be drawn or made… of this title be given any legal effect” and these subject to “…it’s enactment into law”. So, was this ever enacted for those to whom it was intended, as well as any inclusion for “men”, “women”, or “we the people”?
    • I highly doubt it… yet here is the “opportunity to defend” and produce the proof that Title 26 is, at the very least, “positive law“, statute, code, and ordinance properly legislated, bearing executive approval, and entered to the public record for those addressed, let alone any “law” which addresses and includes the average American.
21. A statement and call to defend the actions of “IRS” agents which utter claims of debt without any “express delegation”, any acceptance of accountability for their actions with the office and agency, avoiding being redressed or challenged on their charges and presumptions. Such is a felony clearly outlined as 18 USC §1342: Postal fraud by fictitious name and 18 USC §514: Fictitious Obligations.
    • “IRS” is not a “man” which can stand in parity among “men” to claim anything, “IT” is a fictitious entity, an incorporation³⁶, and sending demands for payment through the United States mail along with threats aren’t just problematic, these are clearly defined violations: 18 USC §876(d): Mailing threatening communications.
22. A stand and statement that further demands routed through the USPS will be met with additional claims for redress, grievance, and remedy as well as criminal charges for actions displaying will and intent to harm and injure beyond notice and opportunity to avert the actions.
23. A stand and statement which asserts that any use of pronouns by such incorporate entity such as “we”, “us”, and/or “our” is an attempt to raise any perception of “IRS”, a fictitious entity, inanimate creation, and incorporation, to parity with the living as if “IT” bears any “honor among men” where none can exist.
    • Frankly, I’d like to suggest they go “we” elsewhere.
24. Is a notice that “IRS” should expect additional claims to remedy damage for trespass previously uttered which is not presented for remedy presently, and/or any further damage resulting from additional utterance and trespass which may be pursued hereafter. This leaves the door open to readdressing with additional claims any further trespass.
25. A directive and requirement that this notice be attached to any record bearing a title or name based upon my given name so that any agent or agency employee may have an opportunity to review the reasoning and avoid future error and any resulting civil liability.
26. This is a special reasoning that asks the respondent to consider that if “IRS” is not the government agency bearing a lawful granted authority, then perhaps it is farther afield of any granted scope of authority than is conceived and may be liable for even far more serious trespasses than reviewed herein.

Summary and Closing Thoughts

For the final paragraphs I summarize the content and reasoning in this section, pointing out:

• The host of agents and other tax “professionals” responsible for the content and proper application of Title 26 which should have informed me that “i” am not qualified as “taxpayer³⁷” by definition.
• That dishonoring, or not accepting, my sworn statement presented in honor is likely to render any “respondent” responsible to cover the value of the claim. (yeah… no kidding.)
• That supporting current government fraud, grift, and misallocation for supposed laudable purpose is not in my interest as “…he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” [2 John 1:11]. “Gee, thanks for offering, but no more…”
• That pursuit of “IRS” presumption is likely to expose agents, agency, administrators, and any complicit tax or legal professional as accomplice with a host of violations of listed federal and state code, for which “i” a man and free American am not likely directly responsible, but for which “agents” and “officers” of the “United States” most certainly are.
• A restatement as at the outset that the “respondent” officer addressed has the responsibility to respond in honor or their lack of response is an action of acceptance of the sworn testimony as “truth”. This supports the standing and establishment of such administrative procedure as a valid body of evidence.

The NOTICE closes with an affirmation that the notice is a sworn statement and testimony under penalty of perjury which renders it a higher authority than any un-sworn testimony, statement, or opinion.

Burning Questions…

Why don’t your accountant, your tax preparer, tax attorneys, defense attorneys, “IRS” agents, all that “IRS” documentation, and federal judges who adjudicate “income tax related” matters tell us these things?

The “tax code” establishes an entire fraudulent industry. I queried Grok3 at grok.com the following question:

Estimate the present annual revenue generated from income tax for the United States including tax revenues collected from private persons and public corporations, as well as any fees collected for tax preparation, record keeping, prosecution of violations, defense of claimed violations, and government expenditures to oversee the “income tax” industry.”

After 70 seconds, Grok responded in detail, but the result of both corporate and individual revenues exceed 2.93 trillion United States “dollars”. Individual tax revenues are nearly five times corporate tax revenues. For impact sake, if the individual revenues were returned and divided among the American population (not that such is any just action), the 2.4 trillion divided by 341.4 million is an impact of nearly $8600 USD per American man, woman, and child annually. How’s that affect your house?

So, there’s some money involved; which plays to “motive”. And to add to your outrage, most people don’t explain big numbers, so allow me some elaboration: 2.93 trillion is written:

$2,930,000,000,000 or

nearly three million MILLIONS…

How many of those involved in the industry profit by the problems caused by the perception that taxes are mandatory? I suggest “all of them” profit; however, very few are fully aware of these facts. By descriptions in the United States Code, it parallels “racketeering”, if not serving as a prime example of the concept. [ref: 18 USC §1961 and §1962]

It’s called “constructive fraud“; assuming those actors are aware of the effects of their conduct. The “voluntary tax system” proceeds on culture and traditions, rather than the facts, that income taxes are “required” and paying down the “national debt” is a patriotic endeavor. Previously, I established an argument that such “debt” is no responsibility of “we the people”. You might enjoy that reasoning… though, I do suggest a brain break and brewing another pot of coffee in preparation! You might need it…

POST: What is an American National? (~30-40 min. read)

I hope you have found these efforts interesting and informative, if not transformational and encouraging to the re-establishment of the people’s freedom, and the greatest nation on Earth (so far…).

You have my sincere hopes for your continued success.

• resident – one assigned to an organization or association temporarily in order to render service or do business.
• corporation – an inanimate entity, brought to recognition among other merely legal entities, which can bear claim to property and legal action, but lacking parity with the living.

Definitions

1. notice – a lawful action presenting information and standing whereby the information can be used to hold the addressed party accountable as “respondent”. ↩︎
2. trespass: n; unlawful act committed on the person, property, or rights of another [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
3. standing: sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action being challenged [Cornell LII] ↩︎
4. acquiescence: accept, comply, or submit tacitly or passively [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
5. sworn testimony: a declaration under penalty of perjury; the risk of liability raises the value of the declaration. ↩︎
6. entity: an activity, incorporeal organization, which acts among other corporations or among the living, but with which it cannot rise to parity (equal rights). (I take issue with Cornell’s use of “rights” without regard to lack of parity.) [Cornell LII] ↩︎
7. title: n, where appellation or label (1b) might seem more accurate as “identification” ; expression of capitalization and punctuation also convey status [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
8. due process: fair procedures which may include notice, opportunity to defend, adjudication of facts, valuation of trespass or damage, and resolution and restitution as remedy. (synopsis) [Cornell LII] ↩︎
9. trustee: a third party liable for execution and management of assets ↩︎
10. rebuttal: contradiction or opposition by formal legal argument, plea, or contrary material facts [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
11. public official bond: a surety bond (insurance) which underwrites the actions of an elected or appointed official where errors in office can be billed for remedy of damage; insuring the public trust [SBA] [Law Dictionary] ↩︎
12. subject: one placed under authority or control [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
13. liable or liability: relates a lawful responsibility ↩︎
14. declaration: an official statement, or proclamation, such as an affidavit; often at risk of perjury. [Cornell LII] ↩︎
15. jurisdiction – the right to assert one’s authority within the scope and limit for which such authority is granted. [This is not a place or assigned geographical area; that would be “venue”, a common misconception.] [Cornell LII] ↩︎
16. non-resident alien: a particular U.S. federal classification which is not associated with the District of Columbia federal area, nor subject to “United States” corporate jurisdiction. see: 26 USC 7701: Definitions at (b)(1)(B) ↩︎
17. United States: not simply an abbreviation; defined at 28 USC §3002 as “a federal corporation”. ↩︎
18. quo warranto: a challenge to the right or authority to wield public office or action [Cornell LII] ↩︎
19. adjudication: a weighing of the facts to find truth [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
20. presumptions: a point of possible contention for which no material facts are produced in support, resulting as hearsay evidence [Merriam-Webster] (including the 12 Presumptions of Court) ↩︎
21. parity: on equal lawful footing bearing equivalent rights to stand, be recognized, and pursue a matter. ↩︎
22. classification: to assign to a particular group; united or associated with shared characteristics [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
23. claim: A set of operative facts establishing enforceable rights; or an action at law calling for correction of trespass, damage, or policy. [Cornell LII] ↩︎
24. deem: a unilateral, one-sided determination or judgment [Merriam-Webster] ↩︎
25. member: member: “any of the persons constituting a partnership, association, corporation, guild, etc.”; one portion of an incorporate body; ↩︎
26. Trade Name: your lawful person; your public office, the means by which you express your native “authority”, commonly on paper; often as “authorized representative”. ↩︎
27. person: or “personae”, an office, title, role, or post, quite literally a desk ↩︎
28. express or expressed: clearly written description of a matter so that it can reviewed, considered, and/or adjudicated. ↩︎
29. employee: a specific classification of federal worker with direct relation and specification with Title 26 “tax code”. ↩︎
30. perjury: misrepresenting facts or lying under oath; review the topic HERE. ↩︎
31. Amendment V: to the Constitution, among the Bill of Rights ↩︎
32. damage: a cost inflicted, the responsible actor being liable ↩︎
33. utterance: the language you speak, or the written statements you present, for which you are lawfully liable. ↩︎
34. livelihood: “means of support or subsistence; the minimum (as of food and shelter) necessary to support life [Merriam-Webster] also subsistence ↩︎
35. Amendment IV: to the Constitution, among the Bill of Rights ↩︎
36. incorporation: an incorporeal entity, established by decree or “only existing on paper”, which cannot act on its own, yet is regarded to act, enabled by its governing officers or board ↩︎
37. taxpayer: a specified class of “person” which is “subject to” duty to report income and pay any tax they are “liable for”; any person (office) subject to any internal revenue tax, per
    26 USC 7701(a)(14). ↩︎