Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page

119. During the congressional debate on the income tax amendment, it was stated that the income tax would not touch one hair of a working man's head.

16. When the Internal Revenue Service requests information from an individual, the Privacy Act

requires the IRS to inform each individual whom it asks to supply information, on the form which it

uses to collect the information or on a separate form that can be retained by the individual –

a. the authority which authorizes the solicitation of the information and whether disclosure of

b. the principal purpose or purposes for which the information is intended to be used;

c. the routine uses which may be made of the information, as published pursuant to

d. the effects on him, if any, of not providing all or any part of the requested information.

(See 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3); IRS Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return Instruction

18. The Paperwork Reduction Act requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to

include with any information requests, a statement to inform the person receiving the request why

the information is being collected, how it is to be used, and whether responses to the request are

voluntary, required to obtain a benefit, or mandatory. [See 44 U.S.C. 3504(c)(3)(C)]

19. The Internal Revenue Service complies with the Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act by

setting out the required statements on the IRS Form 1040 Instruction Booklet. (See IRS Form

1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return Instruction Booklet, Privacy Act Notice set out therein; 26

20. The Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act statements which the Internal Revenue Service

currently uses with respect to the federal income tax state that: "Our legal right to ask for

information is Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001, 6011, 6012(a) and their regulations. They

say that you must file a return or statement with us for any tax you are liable for. Your response is

mandatory under these sections." (IRS Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return Instruction

21. Internal Revenue Code Section 6001 states: "Every person liable for any tax imposed by this title,

or for the collection thereof, shall keep such records, render such statements, make such returns,

and comply with such rules and regulations as the Secretary may from time to time prescribe.

Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary it is necessary, he may require any person, by notice

served upon such person or by regulations, to make such returns, render such statements, or

keep such records as the Secretary deems sufficient to show whether or not such person is liable

for tax under this title. The only records which an employer shall be required to keep under this

section in connection with charged tips shall be charge receipts, records necessary to comply

with Section 6053(c) and copies of statements furnished by employees under Section 6053(a)."

"(a) General Rule. When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any person

made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or for the collection thereof, shall make a

return or statement according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary.

Every person required to make a return or statement shall include therein the information

required by such forms or regulations . . .(g) Income, estate and gift taxes. For

requirement that returns of income, estate, and gift taxes be made whether or not there is

23. Subparts B and C referred to at Internal Revenue Code Section 6011(g) contain Internal Revenue

Code Sections 6012 through 6017a. (See 26 U.S.C. 6011(g); Title 26, United States Code,

24. Congress displayed its knowledge of how to make someone "liable for" a tax at 26 U.S.C. 5005,

which states that: "(a) The distiller or importer of distilled spirits shall b e liable for the taxes

25. Congress displayed its knowledge of how to make someone liable for a tax at 26 U.S.C. 5703,

which states that: "(a)(1) The manufacturer or importer of tobacco products and cigarette papers

26. The persons made liable at Internal Revenue Code Sections 5005 and 5703, for the taxes

imposed at Internal Revenue Code Sections 5001(a)(1) and 5701, respectively, are the persons

described at Sections 6001 and 6011 required to make returns and keep records. (See 26 U.S.C.

27. Section 1461 is the only place in Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code where Congress used

28. The person made liable by Congress at Section 1461 is a withholding agent for nonresident

29. There is a canon of statutory construction, "expressio unius est exclusio alterius", which means

the express mention of one thing means the implied exclusion of another. (See Black's Law

30. Congress could have, but did not, make anyone else other than the withholding agent referred to

in Section 1461, "liable for" any income tax imposed in Subtitle A. (See 26 U.S.C. 1461; Title 26,

31. Up until 1986, the statement required by the Privacy and Paperwork Reduction Acts set out in the

IRS Form 1040 instruction booklet, mentioned only Internal Revenue Code Sections 6001 and

6011 as the authority to request information. (See IRS Form 1040 instruction booklet, 1985 ed.;

IRS Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return Instruction Booklet, Privacy Act Notice set out

32. The United States Supreme Court has held in C.I.R. v. Acker , 361 U.S. 87, 89 (1959), and in U.S.

v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351, 358-359 (1957), that a regulation that purports to create a legal

"...all citizens of the United States, wherever resident, and all resident alien

individuals are liable to the income taxes imposed by the Code whether the income

34. The statute the above regulation, 26 CFR 1.1 -1 implements, which is 26 U.S.C. 1, nowhere uses

35. Because the corresponding statute in 26 U.S.C. 1 does not use the word "liable" or "liable to",

then the im plementing regulation for the section, 26 CFR 1.1-1 cannot, which makes the

implementing regulation imposing the otherwise nonexistent liability invalid and unenforceable.

36. There is no statute anywhere in Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code which makes any person

26 CFR 1.1441-1 Requirement for the deduction and withholding of tax on payments to

this chapter, or an alien individual who is a resident of Puerto Rico, Guam, the

38. There is no other place anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code or 26 CFR where the word

39. 26 CFR 1.1441-1 is the definition for the term "individual" that appears at the top of the IRS form

1040 in the phrase "U.S. Individual Income Tax Return". (See IRS Form 1040 U.S. Individual

40. IRS form 1040NR is the form required to be used by nonresident aliens. (See IRS form 1040NR)

41. If Form 1040NR is used for nonresident aliens, the only thing left that an "individual" appearing in

42. The term "citizen of the United States" is defined as follows in 26 CFR 31.3121(e) State, United

(b)…The term 'citizen of the United States' includes a citizen of the `Commonwealth of

Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands, and, effective January 1, 1 961, a citizen of Guam or

The terms ''includes'' and ''including'' when used in a definition contained in this

title shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of

2. The word "includes" is defined by the Treasury in the Federal Register as follows:

Treasury Definition 3980, Vol. 29, January-December, 1927, pgs. 64 and 65 defines the

"(1) To comprise, comprehend, or embrace…(2) To enclose within; contain; confine…But

granting that the word ‘including' is a term of enlargement, it is clear that it only

enlargement. It thus, and thus only, enlarges the otherwise more limited, preceding

general language…The word ‘including' is obviously used in the sense of its synonyms,

3. The definition of the word "includes" found in Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 763 is as

"Include. (Lat. Inclaudere, to shut in. keep within.) To confine within, hold as an

inclosure. Take in, attain, shut up, contain, inclose, comprise, comprehend, embrace,

involve. Term may, according to context, express an enlargement and have the meaning

of and or in addition to, or merely specify a particular thing already included within

general words theretofore used. "Including" within statute is interpreted as a word of

enlargement or of illustrative application as well as a word of limitation. Premier Products

4. If the meaning of the word "includes" as used in the Internal Revenue Code is "and" or "in

addition to" as described above, then the code cannot define or confine the precise meaning of

§ "person" found in 26 CFR 301.6671-1 (which governs who is liable for penalties

5. If the meaning of "includes" as used in the definitions above is "and" or "in addition to", then the

code cannot define any of the words described, based on the definition of the word "definition"

definition: (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 423) A description of a thing by its

properties; an explanation of the meaning of a word or term. The process of stating the

exact meaning of a word by means of other words . Such a description of the thing

defined, including all essential elements and excluding all nonessential, as to distinguish

6. Absent concrete definitions of the above critical words identified in question 417, the meaning o f

7. When the interpretation of a statute or regulation is unclear or ambiguous, then the by the rules of

statutory construction, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the taxpayer as indicated in the

"In view of other settled rules of statutory construction, which teach that a law is

presumed, in the absence of clear expression to the contrary, to operate prospectively;

that, if doubt exists as to the construction of a taxing statute, the doubt should be

resolved in favor of the taxpayer..." Hassett v. Welch., 303 US 303, pp. 314 - 315, 82

8. In the majority of cases, doubts about the interpretation of the tax code are resolved in favor of

9. An ambiguous meaning for a word violates the requirement for due process of law by preventing

a person of average intelligence from being able to clearly understand what the law requires and

does not require of him, thus making it impossible at worst or very difficult at best to know if he is

10. Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 500, under the definition of "due process of law"

The concept of "due process of law" as it is embodied in Fifth Amendment demands

that a law shall not be unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious and that the means

selected shall have a reasonable and substantial relation to the object being sought.

11. If the definition of the word "includes" means that it is used synonymously with the word "and" or

"in addition to", then it violates the requirement for due process of law found in the Fifth

12. The violation of due process of law created by the abuse of the word "includes" found in the

preceding question creates uncertainty, mistrust, and fear of citizens towards their government

13. The violation of due process caused by the abuse of the word "includes" (in this case, making it

mean "and" or "in addition to) identified above could have the affect of extending the perceived

jurisdiction and authority of the federal government to tax beyond its clear limits prescribed in the

14. An abuse of the word includes to mean "and" or "in addition To" indicated above could have the

affect of increasing and possibly even maximizing income tax revenues to the U.S. government

through the violation of due process, confusion, and fear that it creates in the citizenry.

15. Fear and confusion on the part of the citizenry towards their government and violation of due

process by the government are characterized by most rational individuals as evidence of tyranny

16. The U.S. Constitution provides the following definition for "treason" in Article III, Section 3, Clause

"Treason against the United States shall consist only of levying war against them,

17. Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1583, provides the following definition for "war":

"Hostile contention by means of armed forces, carried on between nations, states,

18. Agents of the IRS involved in seizures of property use guns and arms against citizens, making

19. IRS seizures can and do occur without court orders, warrants, or due process required by the

20. Property seizures as described above amount to an act of war of the government against the

21. Acts of war against citizens, when not based on law, are treasonable offenses punishable by

22. Violation of due process produces injustice in society, which is why the founding fathers required

23. The purpose of the government is to write laws to prevent, rather than promote , injustice in

society, and thereby protect the right to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness of all

Only foreigners working here and citizens working abroad are liable for income tax

1. The term "from whatever source derived" as used in the Sixteenth Amendment does not mean

that the source of income or the situs for taxation is irrelevant or inconsequential in determining

2. Interpreting the phrase "from whatever source derived" to mean that the source or situs is

irrelevant, makes the federal income tax applicable to any country or location in the world and

renders 26 U.S.C. §861 and 26 U.S.C. §862 irrelevant and unnecessary, which clearly is an

3. The federal income tax applies only to taxable income, which, generally speaking, is "gross

4. The federal income tax regulations generally define "gross income" to mean "all income from

(a) General definition. Gross income means all income from whatever source derived,

unless excluded by law. Gross income includes income realized in any form, whether in

money, property, or services. Income may be realized, therefore, in the form of services,

meals, accommodations, stock, or other property, as well as in cash. Section 61 lists the

more common items of gross income for purposes of illustration. For purposes of further

illustration, Sec. 1.61-14 mentions several miscellaneous items of gross income not listed

specifically in section 61. Gross income, however, is not limited to the items so

5. There are certain types of income which Congress has exempted by statute as identified in 26

6. There are other types of income not enumerated above which are not exempted by statute, but

are nonetheless excluded by law, for income tax purposes, because they are excluded from

(a) The tax imposed by chapter 1 is upon income. Neither income exempted by statute or

fundamental law , nor expenses incurred in connection therewith, other than interest,

Certain items of income specified in section 22(b) are exempt from tax and may be

excluded from gross income. These items, however, are exempt only to the extent and in

the amount specified. No other items may be excluded from gross income except (a)

those items of income which are, under the Constitution, not taxable by the Fe deral

Government; (b) those items of income which are exempt from tax on income under the

provisions of any act of Congress still in effect; and (c ) the income excluded under the

7. The phrase "fundamental law" indicated above in the older regulations means the U.S.

8. The above older regulation, 26 CFR §39.21-1 (1956) and 26 CFR 39.22(b)-1 (1956) has never

been explicitly repealed or superceded by newer regulations and is still in force.

"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 1.8 61-14T for determining taxable income from sources within the United

10. 26 USC § 61 lists some of the more common "items" of income which are taxable, such as

compensation for services, interest, and dividends, among others. Section 1.861-8(d)(2) of the

federal income tax regulations are to be consulted in determining in which situations these "items"

(2) Allocation and apportionment to exempt, excluded, or eliminated income. [Reserved]

11. 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2) of the regulations lists several types of income which are "not

(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

(A) In the case of a foreign taxpayer (including a foreign sales corporation (FSC))

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

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

12. Only income derived from certain activities related to international or foreign commerce are

included on that list of non -exempt types of income appearing in 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii)

13. The domestic income of most U.S. citizens is absent, and therefore excluded, from the list

14. 26 USC § 861(b), and the related regulations beginning at 26 CFR § 1.861-8, the sections to use

to determine one's taxable income from sources within the United States, regardless of

15. For U.S. citizens living and working exclusively in the 50 states and receiving all income from

within the 50 states, that 26 U.S.C. §861(b) and related regulations beginning at 26 CFR §1.861-

16. "Items" of income are identified in 26 U.S.C. §61 while "sources" of income are identified in 26

1. The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., mandates that forms and regulations of

federal agencies that require the provision of information must bear and display OMB control

2. 1 C.F.R. 21.3 5 requires that OMB control numbers shall be placed parenthetically at the end of a

3. The following tax regulations contain OMB control numbers at the end of these regulations:

4. 26 U.S.C. 6012 does not specify where tax returns are to be filed. (See 26 U.S.C. 6012.)

5. 26 U.S.C. 6091 governs the matter of where tax returns are to be filed. (See 26 U.S.C. 6091.)

6. By the plain language of Section 6091, regulations must be promulgated to implement this

"(4) ‘rule' means the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular

applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy

or describing the organization, procedure , or practice requirements of an agency . . . ."

8. 5 U.S.C. 552 describes in particular detail various items which must be published by federal

"(1) Each agency shall separately state and currently publish in th e Federal Register for

(A) descriptions of its central and field organization and the established places at

(D) substantive rules of general applicability adopted as a uthorized by law, and

statements of general policy or interpretations of general applicability formulated

9. The Department of the Treasury as well as the IRS acknowledge the publication requirements of

the Administrative Procedure Act in 31 C.F.R. 1.3 and 26 C.F.R. 601.702. (See 31 C.F.R. 1.3; 26

10. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue promulgated the Treasury Regulation set out at 26 C.F.R.

602.101 to collect and display the control numbers assigned to collections of information in

Internal Revenue Service regulations by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the

11. The Internal Revenue Service intended that 26 C.F.R. 602.101 comply with the requirements of

OMB regulations implementing the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, for the display of control

numbers assigned by OMB to collections of information in Internal Revenue Service regulations.

12. 26 C.F.R. 602.101(c) displays a table (the "Table") which on the left side lists the CFR part or

section where the information to be collected by the Internal Revenue Service is identified and

described, and on the right side, lists the OMB control number assigned to the OMB-approved

13. The Table displayed at 26 C.F.R. 602.101 in the 1994 version of the Code of Federal Regulations

lists 1.1 -1 as a CFR part or section that identifies and describes information to be collected by the

14. 26 C.F.R. 1.1 -1 relates to the income tax imposed on individuals by 26 U.S.C. 1.

15. The OMB control number assigned to the form to be used to collect the information identified and

18. The IRS Form 2555 is used to collect information regarding foreign earned income. (See IRS

19. The OMB control number assigned to the IRS Form 1040 Individual Income Tax Return is 1545-

20. The Table set out at 26 C.F.R. 602.101 has never displayed the OMB control number 1 545-0074

as being assigned to the collection of individual income tax information identified and described

by 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1. (See 26 C.F.R. 602.101(c), current and all historical versions.)

21. The OMB has not approved the IRS Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return as the proper

form on which to make the return of individual income tax information identified and described at

22. The Table displayed at 26 C.F.R. 602.101 in the 1995 version of the Code of Federal Regulations

does not list 1.1 -1 as a CFR part or section that identifies and describes information to be

23. The Internal Revenue Service caused the entry for 1.1 -1 to be deleted from 26 C.F.R. 602.101,

by publishing the deletion at 59 FR 27235, on May 26, 1994. (See 26 C.F.R. 602.101; 59 FR

24. The published deletion was accomplished under the supervision of Internal Revenue Service

employee Cynthia E. Grigsby, Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate). (See

1. 26 U.S.C. 6331 is the alleged authority by which distraint in the collection of Subtitle A income

2. 26 U.S.C. 6331(a) identifies the only entities against whom distraint may be instituted.

3. 26 U.S.C. 6331(a) identifies that levy may be made against only the following individuals:

(a)...Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or

elected official, of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or

instrumentality of the United Sta tes or the District of Columbia, by serving a notice of levy

on the employer (as defined in section 3401(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected

"...the term [employee] includes o fficers and employees, whether elected or appointed, of

subdivision, thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality

of any one or more of the foregoing. The term 'employee' also includes an officer of a

5. IRS Form 668-A(c)(DO) is the Notice of Levy form routinely delivered to private, nongovernmental

employers by the IRS to institute distraint against their employees. [See IRS Form

6. The reverse side of IRS Form 668-A(c)(DO) shows 26 U.S.C. §6331 but has paragraph (a)

7. The removal of 26 U.S.C. §6331(a) from the reverse side of IRS Form 668 -A(c)(DO) could lead

private employers who do not employ federal "employees" to incorrectly honor a Notice of Levy.

8. Inclusion of 26 U.S.C. §6331(a) on the reverse side of the IRS Form 668-A(c)(DO) would make it

less likely to cause private employers to misinterpret or misapply the law in processing an IRS

9. The Fourth Amendment requires that all seizures of property by the U.S. government must be

10. The Fourth Amendment requires that the person who signs or issues the warrant authorizing

seizure must be a neutral magistrate as indicated in the annotated Fourth Amendment:

Issuance by Neutral Magistrate .--In numerous cases, the Court has referred to the

necessity that warrants be issued by a ''judicial officer'' or a ''magistrate.''[1] ''The point of

the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it

denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw

from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a

neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the

often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime. Any assumption that evidence

sufficient to support a magistrate's disinterested determ ination to issue a search warrant

will justify the officers in making a search without a warrant would reduce the Amendment

to a nullity and leave the people's homes secure only in the discretion of police officers.''[2]

These cases do not mean that only a judge or an official who is a lawyer may issue

warrants, but they do stand for two tests of the validity of the power of the issuing party to

so act. ''He must be neutral and detached, and he must be capable of determining

whether probable cause exists fo r the requested arrest or search.''[3] The first test cannot

be met when the issuing party is himself engaged in law enforcement activities,[4] but the

Court has not required that an issuing party have that independence of tenure and

guarantee of salary which characterizes federal judges. [5] And in passing on the second

test, the Court has been essentially pragmatic in assessing whether the issuing party

11. The IRS routinely seizes property from citizens without first litigating to obtain a warrant from a

12. The Supreme Court said that persons are entitled to a due process hearing prior to the seizing of

"The right to a prior hearing has long been recognized by this Court [Supreme Court]

under the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments…[T]he court has traditi onally insisted that,

whatever its form, opportunity for that hearing must be provided before the deprivation at

Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 , Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 U.S. 551, United States v.

13. The due process hearing prior to seizure must occur at the point where the seizure of property

"If the right to notice and a hearing is to serve its full purpose, it is clear that it must be

granted at a time when the deprivation can still be prevented. At a later hearing, an

individual's possessions can be returned to him if they were unfairly or mistakenly taken

in the first place. Damages may even be awarded him for wrongful deprivation. But no

later hearing and no damage award can undo the fact that the arbitrary taking that was

subject to the right of due process has already occurred. This Court [the Supreme Court]

has not embraced the general proposition that a wrong may be done if it can be undone."

(See Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 647, 31 L.Ed.2d 551, 556,.Ct. 1208 (1972)

14. 26 U.S.C. §7805(a) authorizes and empowers the Secretary of the Treasury as follows:

Except where such authority is expressly given by this title to any person other than an

officer or employee of the Treasury Department, the Secretary shall prescribe all

needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of this title, including all rules and

regulations as may be necessary by reason of any alteration of law in relation to internal

15. There are no implementing regulations applicable to Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal

Regulations which authorize assessment of the tax imposed under 26 U.S.C. §1 or 26 U.S.C.

16. There are no implementing regulations applicable to Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal

Regulations which require record keeping for the tax imposed under 26 U.S.C. §1 or 26 U.S.C.

17. There are no implementing regulations applicable to Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal

Regulations which authorize IRS collection of the tax imposed under 26 U.S.C. §1 or 26 U.S.C.

18. There are no implementing regulations a pplicable to Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal

Regulations which authorize imposition by the government of penalties or interest for nonpayment

b. creating fraudulent certificates of official records to the court to obtain illegal assessments

d. Collect social security direct from taxpayers via levery in direction violation of the las

e. Willfully and intentionally creat fraudulent penalty and interest against taxpayers.

2. The IRS is placing levies on taxpayers federal social security benefits in direct violation of the law.

2. The IRS is exceeding the 15% lawful restriction on collection of continuing levies. (See 26 U.S.C.

3. The IRS is making illegal time barred assessments and concealing those assessments by placing

fraudulent information on taxpayer master files. (See Statutory requirements for a valid

4. The IRS is submitting fraudulent CERTIFICAT ES OF OFFICIAL RECORDS to the courts to

5. Admit that the IRS illegally transfers taxpayer payments from their master file to an account called

"excess collections" for the purpose of creating fraudulent penalty and interest charges against

6. The IRS illegally transfers taxpayer payments from their master file to an account called "excess

collections" for the purpose of creating fraudulent penalty and interest charges against the

7. IRS collection division agents put accounting hold codes on taxpayers' accounting modules which

forces all entry of data to be inputted manually by the agents and prevents the computer from

8. The IRS is short-paying taxpayers' lawful interest owed to them by placing wrongful dates and

codes on taxpayers' master files (See interest owed to taxpayer) (See date of advance payment)

1. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) of the Internal Revenue Code

fails to make the required return, the statutory procedure authorized by Congress for the

determinati on of the amount of tax due is the "deficiency" procedure set forth at subchapter B of

Chapter 63 of the Internal Revenue Code, commencing at Section 6211. (See 26 U.S.C. Sections

2. After IRS has audited a taxpayer, and there is disagreement, the Code of Federal Regulations

requires IRS to take certain procedural steps to ensure the TAXPAYER administrative level

action for hearings on those disagreements, including an examination of the audit with the agent,

followed by a meeting with the IRS' agent's supervisor, followed by a 30 day letter which sets out

the IRS's disputed items with the TAXPAYER and an administrative appeal of the IRS' decision

3. The purpose of these administrative steps is to afford the TAXPAYER an opportunity to have his

disputed audit resolved at the administrative level? In other words, that these are pre-court or prelitigation

steps, which are designed to help the People avoid the expensive procedure known as

4. If the dispute is not resolved at the administrative level, the taxpayer is forced into Tax Court.

5. IRS Publication 1, IRS Publication 5 and IRS Publication 556 , are all given to the taxpayer during

the audit through appeals procedure and that these publications state that these administrative,

7. The IRS is the only party that benefits as taxpayers are forced into Tax Court.

8. The Tax Court, in Minahan v Commissioner 88 T.C. 492, found that the taxpayer's right to

attorney's fees on favorable outcome is jeopardized if the administrative procedures are not

9. The Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 requires the TAXPAYER to go through these

administrative, procedural (due process) steps in order to prove his "cooperativeness" with IRS,

and to shift the burden of proof to the IRS during the administrative hearing and at trial. (See

10. The IRS routinely ignores the Peoples' demands for their procedural, due process, statutory

rights, ignoring IRS Publications 1, 5, and 556, the regulations they are supposed to use in

11. There is no penalty for the IRS agents if they violate the income tax statutes by denying the

People their due process rights, but the statutes contain a multitude of penalties for the People if

they violate the income tax statutes, and those penalties are almost always imposed. (See Index

12. The IRS will often deny a person his administrative, statutory, due process rights because the

statute of limitation (26 I.R.C. 6501 et. seq.) is running out for them to get the statutory Notice of

Deficiency (26 I.R.C. 6212) out and they are in fear of losing the whole year of taxation from that

13. The IRS races to issue a statutory Notice of Deficiency under 26 I. R. C. 6212, rather than give

the People their due process rights to administrative level resolution under 26 C.F.R. 601.605,

14. A Notice of Deficiency is, in most cases, completely erroneous, and always greatly in favor of the

15. Many people default on their Notice of Deficiency because they don't have the money to get to

16. IRS often uses erroneous figures for Income when they send out a Notice of Deficiency.

17. There are other ways that the IRS uses figures that it knows are false on its Notice of Deficiencies

18. The result of this the fact that the TAXPAYER is often sent an entirely false Notice of Deficiency.

19. 26 I.R.C. 6211 is used to determine how a deficiency is made and it does not allow for "0"

20. The Tax Court has, however, ruled that the use of "0" line deduction in IRS issued Notices of

21. The law (26 I.R.C. 6211 Definition of Deficiency) does not permit the "bank deposit analysis"

22. The IRS routinely issues Notices of Deficiency that are based on assessments that the IRS

23. The issuance of a Notice of Deficiency or "90 day Notice" letter is the triggering event and a

person so receiving such a letter must file his case in Tax Court within 90 days or forever be held

to the often totally false liability assessed in the grossly false Notice of Deficiency. (See 26 USC

24. This is why the administrative, statutory due process steps are so important.

25. The federal district court has refused to reach the merits of a claim that Tax Court lacks subject

matter jurisdiction in those cases where the IRS has issued Notices of Deficiency after denying

26. The IRS Handbook for Examination of Returns reads in part, "Examiners are responsible for

determining the correct tax liability as prescribed by the Internal Revenue Code. It is imperative

that examiners can identify the applicable law, correctly interpret its meaning in light of

congressional intent, and, in a fair and impartial manner, correctly apply the law based on the

facts and circumstances of the case. (See IRS' Handbook 4.2 Examination of Returns Handbook,

27. The IRS Handbook for Examination of Returns also reads in part, " Conclusions reached by

examiners must reflect correct application of the law, regulations, court cases, revenue rulings,

etc. Examiners must correctly determine the meaning of statutory provisions and not adopt

28. When a taxpayer requests what regulations and statutes the examiner used in making his

31. There is no law in which a disclosure officer is authorized to make an assessment.

33. There are over 100 regulations that apply to Form 1040 cross referenced by OMB #1545-0074,

and that the IRS refuses to identify which ones they use in making determinations that a citizen is

35. The evidence underlying the entries on the Certificate of Assessments and Payments is relevant

to the issue of whether an assessment was made. (See Beall v US, Civil Action 89 C 6500 (N.D.

Ill. Eastern Div.), which relies upon Psaty v US, 442 F2d. 1154 (3rd. Cir. 1971), and US v Hart,

36. Without an assessment there is no liability. (See US v Nipper No. 00-5057 (D.C. No. 98-CV-526-

Note: On appeal the government did not provide underlying evidence in support of its tax

assessments and the case was remanded back to the district court for the government to prove

37. The TAXPAYER is helpless as he tries to exercise his statutory (due process) rights to these

lower level administrative remedies to resolve his audit difference without going to tax court.

38. The tax imposed upon individuals required to make a return under Section 6012(a) of the Internal

39. The Section 6020(b) requirement for the Secretary to make the required Section 6012(a) return is

to require the Secretary to compute the taxpayers taxa ble income so the correct amount of tax

40. When an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) of the Internal Revenue

Code fails to make the required return, and the Internal Revenue Service issues a notice of

deficiency, the amount of tax claimed as due by the Secretary is not based upon the taxable

income, but is computed without regard to the requirements of Sections 62 and 63 of the Internal

Revenue Code from which adjusted gross income and taxable income are computed from gross

41. The IRS attempts to obtain assessments of more tax than would otherwise be required by law as

an unauthorized additional penalty on those who are required to, but do not, make federal income

42. The word "shall" as contained in Section 6001 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a

mandatory duty on those to whom the statute applies to keep records, render statements, make

returns and to comply with rules and regulations promulgated by the Secretary of th e Treasury.

43. The word "shall" as contained in Section 6011 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a

mandatory duty on those to whom the statute applies to make a return or statement according to

44. The word "shall" as contained in Section 6012 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a

45. The word "shall" as contained in Section 6020(b) of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a

If any person fails to make any return required by an internal revenue law or regulation

made there under at the time prescribed therefo re, or makes, willfully or otherwise, a

false or fraudulent return, the Secretary shall make such return from his own knowledge

47. Nowhere in the Internal Revenue Code has Congress indicated that the word "shall" as used in

Section 6020(b) of the Internal Revenue Code has a different meaning than as used in Sections

6001, 6011 and/or 6012 of the Internal Revenue Code. (See Title 26, United States Code, in its

48. In the absence of a Congressionally declared distinction for a word used in the same Code (here

the Internal Revenue Code), in the same subtitle (here Subtitle F), in the same Chapter (here

Chapter 61) and in the same Subchapter (here subchapter A) to be given a differen t meaning, the

49. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) of the Internal Revenue Code

fails to make the required return, the Secretary of the Treasury does not make the return

50. The IRS computer system, the IDRS (Integrated Data Retrieval Systems) was programmed to

require a tax return to be filed in order to create a tax module for each taxable year.

51. If an individual required to make and file a return under Section 6012(a) fails to file such a return,

that the Secretary creates a "dummy return" showing zero tax due and owing. (See Blair v. C.I.R.,

57 T.C.M. (CCH) 1396 (1989); Phillips v. C.I.R., 851 F.2d 1492 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Schiff v. United

52. This "dummy return" sets forth no financial data from which the gross income, adjusted gross

income or taxable income can be computed. (See Blair v. C.I.R., 57 T.C.M. (CCH) 1396 (1989);

Phillips v. C.I.R., 851 F.2d 1492 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Schiff v. United States, 71A A.F.T.R.2d

53. This "dummy return" is not signed. (See Blair v. C.I.R., 57 T.C.M. (CCH) 1396 (1989); Phillips v.

C.I.R., 851 F.2d 1492 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Schiff v. United States, 71A A.F.T.R.2d 9303271 (1989).

54. A "dummy return" is physically created on the IRS Form 1040. (See Blair v. C.I.R., 57 T.C.M.

(CCH) 1396 (1989); Phillips v. C.I.R., 851 F.2d 1492 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Schiff v. United States, 71A

55. Congress has not authorized the Internal Revenue Code or Treasury Regulations that authorizes

the creation of "dummy returns". (See Title 26, United States Code, in its entirety.)

56. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) files a return that does not

contain the financial information necessary to allow the IRS to compute gross income, adjusted

gross income and/or taxable income, the IRS calls such a return a "zero return." (See Hopkins v.

United States, 56 A.F.T.R.2d 85-5940 (1985); Nichols v. United States, 575 F. Supp. 320 (D.C.

57. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) files a return that does not

contain the financial information necessary to al low the IRS to compute gross income, adjusted

gross income and/or taxable income, the IRS takes the position that no return has been filed.

(See Hopkins v. United States, 56 A.F.T.R.2d 85-5940 (1985); Nichols v. United States, 575 F.

Supp. 320 (D.C. Minn 1 983); Tornichio v. United States, 81 A.F.T.R.2d 98-1377 (1988).

58. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) files a return that does not

contain the financial information necessary to allow the IRS to compute gross income, adjusted

gross income and/or taxable income, the IRS takes the position that the return is "frivolous" and

imposes a $500 penalty. (See Hopkins v. United States, 56 A.F.T.R.2d 85-5940 (1985); Nichols

v. United States , 575 F. Supp. 320 (D.C. Minn 1983); Tornichio v. United States, 81 A.F.T.R.2d

59. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) files a return that does not

contain a signature made under penalty of perjury, the IRS takes the position that no return has

been filed. (See 26 U.S.C. 6065). (See Doll v. C.I.R., 358 F.2d 713 (3rd Cir. 1966); Elliott v.

60. If an individual required to make a return under Section 6012(a) files a return that does not

contain a signature under penalties of perjury, the IRS takes the position that the return is

"frivolous" and imposes a $500 penalty. (See Green v. United States , 593 F. Supp. 1341 (D.C.

61. An IMF record bearing the code "SFR 150" indicates that a fully paid IRS Form 1040a was filed.

3. During IRS Revenue Officer Phase One training, the recruits study Lesson 23 Section IRC 6020(b). The next 16 statements of fact arise from an inspection of this lesson. On page 23-1, under REFERENCES, "Circular E" is listed. Besides the Circular E, there are no other reference materials listed. 3. "Circular E", more fully known as Circular E, Employer's Tax Guide, is also designated by IRS as Publication 15. "Circular E" deals essentially with employer withholding requirements and Form 941, Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return. In Lesson 23 page 23-1, under CONTENTS, three types of tax returns are listed:

5. In Lesson 23 page 23-1, under INTRODUCTION , the purpose of this Lesson 23 is to instruct the revenue officer trainee about how to deal with situations involving the occasional taxpayer who refuses to voluntarily file returns, using an important administrative tool referred to as 6020(b) procedure.

6. In Lesson 23, Figure 23-1 on page 23 -2 is a reprint of Internal Revenue Code Section 6020(b) and the Regulation at Section 301.6020-1.

7. Lesson 23, Figure 23-2, page 23-3, contains a reprint of Delegation Order 182. The Order lists revenue agents and revenue officers as having delegated authority to execute returns under the authority of 6020(b).

8. The Internal Revenue Manual restricts the broad delegation of Delegation Order No.182 to employment, excise, and partnership taxes.

9. The Secretary has recognized that the delegation authority of D.O. No. 182 is restricted to employment, excise, and partnership taxes because of constitutional issues. (Lawyerdude says that this is a stretch to ascribe reasons to the law. Lawyerdude’s longstanding theory is that reasons should be affixed to statutes to prevent this very type of speculation by an author who does not even sigh his name.)

10. The Internal Revenue Manual lists the following tax returns as being appropriate for action under 6020(b). It lists them at page 23 -3 and 23-4; IRM 5.18.2.3. Note that 1040 is not on this list.

h. Form 1065, U.S. Partnership Return of Income -11. Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return is NOT included in IRM 5.18.2.3 as a return

11. When recommending assessments under 6020(b) the revenue officer will prepare all the necessary returns. The balance of Lesson 23 IRC SECTION 6020(b) for Revenue Officer Phase One training

explains the 6020(b) procedures for computing the tax for Employment, Excise, and Partnership

14. Lesson 23 IRC SECTION 6020(b) does not contain any references to preparing income tax

15. Lesson 23 IRC SECTION 6020(B) makes the statement to the revenue officer trainee, "You have

already studied audit referrals as a means to enforce compliance on income tax returns."

16. The trainee is told that by the end of the lesson he will be able to identify situations when action

17. If the revenue officer is expected to identify situations when action under IRC 6020(b) is

appropriate, logic then, would hold that this necessarily implies that the revenue officer would also

be expected to identify situations when action under IRC 6020(b) would not be appropriate.

Lesson 23 IRC SECTION 6020(b) made it clear that it is not appropriate to use 6020(b) for

18. There are no training instructions within Lesson 23 that pertain to using 6020(b) to prepare and

19. Lesson 23 points to Lesson 25 REFERRALS for instructions on dealing with income tax nonfilers.

Page 23-3, "You have already studied audit referrals as a means to enforce compliance on

20. The language of IRC 6020(b)(1) is very broad, "…if any person fails to make any return…" The

IRS purports that there are ways (plural) to resolve cases for nonfilers with different situations,

different types of taxes and different types of tax returns. (Under WHY THIS LESSON IS

21. IRS makes a distinction in the procedures for dealing with non filers of income tax returns as

opposed to employment, partnership and excise tax returns. (Under WHY THIS LESSON IS

22. IRS uses "6020(b) procedures" to enforce compliance of non filers of employment, excise, and

partnership returns, and uses "Referral to Exam" procedures to enforce compliance of income tax

23. The stated focus of Lesson 25 REFERRALS is the referral process. (Second paragraph under

24. An objective of Lesson 25 is for the trainee to be able to select which cases should be referred to

25. Lesson 23 IRC SECTION 6020(b) made it clear that the revenue officer is not to use 6020(b) for

enforcing compliance of income tax non filers, but instead is to use the referral process in. ( page

26. In Lesson 25, the reference materials to be used for the lesson are listed under REFERENCES,

and the lone item listed is IRM 52(10) 0. There is no reference to any statute or any internal

27. In Lesson 25, page 25-3, under OBJECTIVES, the trainee is told that after completing this lesson

he will be able to select those cases which should be referred to the Examination Division. (page

28. Lesson 25 pages 25-4 through 25 -9 contain instructions, with examples, showing the trainee how

to complete referral forms. This section of the lesson on the subject of making referrals to Exam

for income tax non-filers concluded with the statement, "Remember: Refusal to file cases

involving Forms 940, 941, 942, 943, 720, 1065, 2290, or CT-1 will not be referred to Exam. These

returns should be prepared under authority of IRC Section 6020(b)." Clearly, IRC section 6020(b)

is to be utilized to enforce compliance of specified business master file returns. In this lesson,

there is no mention anywhere of the statute that authorizes IRS preparation of Form 1040 U.S.

29. IRC 6020(b)(1) is written in very broad language and if taken literally it seems to give

authorization to IRS to make any return for any person who fails to make one. However, we have

seen how the statute is, in fact restricted in its application. Revenue officers, and specified other

IRS employees do have delegated authority to make returns under 6020(b). But, we have seen

that the delegated authority limits the types of returns that can be prepared under 6020(b).

We have seen that the exclusion includes income tax returns, corporate or individual. Since

6020(b) does not permit preparation of income tax returns, and, since the SFR program is merely

a program, with no basis in law, There is no authority for IRS to make an income tax return when

(See also IRM Part 5, Chapter 11 Delinquent Return Accounts; IRM Part 5, Chapter 18

Liability Determination; IRM Part 4 Chapter 23 Section 11; IRM Part 4, Sect. 9 Delinquent &

Substitute Return Processing; Handbook 4.3.20 Frivolous Non filers; Title 26 and its

30. It is well settled in law that government employees need proper delegated authority to operate in

their capacities. IRS employees have no delegated authority to make "Substitute for Returns."

31. Phase One Revenue Officer training material, Lesson 23 IRC SECTION 6020(b) clearly

demonstrates how and why 6020(b), in spite of its language, is not able to allow IRS to make

proper, legally valid, 1040 income tax returns for non filers. Yet, another IRM claims that IRS

does have authority for income tax returns under 6020(b). IRM 5480, states, "SCCB prepares

Forms 1040 under authority of Internal Revenue Code 6020(b)…" Since both manuals cannot

both be correct, how can this be rectified? A. It cannot be rectified. For BMF returns under

6020(b), IRS employees complete the return with all necessary data. The returns include an

employee's signature where the taxpayer would normally sign. 6020(b) returns also disclose the

computed tax liability. With IMF returns (income tax) done via SFR procedures, income

information is never disclosed on the return, tax liability is not disclosed on the return, and there is

never a signature by an employee on a 1040 return. What this means is that "constitutional

issues" are involved with th e income tax, so IRS cannot use the same procedures as they do with

The federal courts are biased against anyone who challenges the federal income tax

1. 26 U.S.C. 7203 purportedly imposes a penalty for the crime of willful failure to file a tax return.

2. Congress enacted 26 U.S.C. 7203 in August, 1954. (See 26 U.S.C. 7203, credits and historical

3. The United States Supreme Court in South Dakota v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 522 U.S. 329 (1998)

stated: "[w]e assume that Congress is aware of existing law when it passes legislation."

4. Congress enacted 44 U.S.C. 3512 in 1980. (See 44 U.S.C. 3512, credits and historical notes.)

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty

for failing to comply with a collection of information that is subject to this subchapter if--

(1) the collection of information does not display a valid control number assigned

(2) the agency fails to inform the person who is to respond to the collection of

complete defense, bar, or otherwise at any time during the agency administrative

6. United States Supreme Court Chief Judge Taney in 1863 protested the constitutionality of the

7. United States District Court Judge Walter Evans, in 1919 protested the constitutionality of the

8. United States Circuit Court Judge Joseph W. Woodrough in 1936 protested the constitutionality of

the income tax as applied to him. [See O'Malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939)]

9. United States District Court Judge Terry J. Hatter and other federal court judges in the 1980s

protested the constitutionality of taxes as applied to them. [See United States v. Hatter, 121 S. Ct.

10. Even in criminal cases where a loss of freedom can be the result, American citizens who are not

judges are precluded by the federal judiciary, and with the express approval and consent of the

Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney, from arguing the constitutionality of the income tax as

11. The Executive and Judicial branches of the federal government label Americans who challenge

the legality of the federal income tax as "tax protesters." (Department of Justice Criminal Tax

12. United States Supreme Court Chief Judge Taney submitted his protest in a letter to the Secretary

13. Letters of protest written to the Secretary of the Treasury by American Citizens are used by the

Executive branch of government, and accepted by the Judicial branch of government, as proof of