This letter is a responsive letter in the case that the IRS responds to your "Request for Refund" letter by stating something similar to the following:

“The position you have taken has no basis in law and represents a frivolous position.  The tax laws are very clear and have been tested in the courts—including the Supreme Court of the United States.  Claims such as yours have been considered and rejected repeatedly as frivolous and without merit by the federal courts.”

Be forewarned that the IRS will try to do everything in their power to scare and intimidate you not to leave the tax system or request refunds, including attempting to illegally assess $500 frivolous return penalties on people who file retroactive “Request For Refund” letter found in this book.  They don’t have any legal authority to assess penalties for frivolous income tax returns, but they will try to bluff you into thinking you owe such penalties.  You are encouraged to stand tall, challenge jurisdiction, and question authority by ending your participation in the tax system and sticking to your guns.

---

<<ADDRESS>>
<<CITY>>, <<STATE>> <<ZIP>>

<<DATE>>

 

 

 

 

 

Directed personally to:

DIRECTOR, Service Center

Internal Revenue Service,

Department of the Treasury

<<CITY>>,  <<STATE>>   <<ZIP>>
Attn:  ____________________________

 

References:

(1) My Request for Refund Affidavit dated March 31, 2001; Certified Mail # 7099-3400-0018-1518-3209.

(2)   IRS Response letter from Ms. Jackson, 1-866-899-9083, Mail Stop 4451, dated June 14, 2001.

Enclosures:

       (1)  Response to Freedom Of Information Act, dated Feb 18, 1997.

Subject:  My Response to Your Ref. (2)

Dear __________________,

SECTION 1: CLARIFICATION OF THE STATUS OF THIS CORRESPONDENCE AND REFERENCE (1)

For the purposes of income tax returns, Ref. (1) constitutes ONE RETURN spanning multiple years, submitted for the same error and omission in previous years.  The 1040X forms were used as a convenience to simplify your job, but there was no obligation for me to actually use those forms, since I had no demonstrated or justified tax liability or obligation to file under 26 U.S.C. Section 6012.   A “tax return” is only legally defined as a “return” if it establishes and fulfills a tax liability, which so far you have failed to demonstrate by failing to address any of the issues raised in Ref. (1) or this correspondence.

Likewise, this correspondence shall not constitute a “return”, but simply a clarification of a the previous Request for Refund (but not “return”) found in Ref. (1).

SECTION 2:  RESPONSE TO REFERENCE (2)

Your position that I have requested a refund for an overpayment of taxes utilizing a frivolous claim that wages and payments for services are not gross income, is in error, frivolous, and without foundation in the law.  I did not make such a claim.  I merely did not earn “wages” or “compensation for services” as such terms are defined in the Internal Revenue Code.  I also did not earn “taxable income” derived from a “taxable source” within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. Section 861 and implementing regulations found in 26 C.F.R. Sec. 861-8(a).

I am not an “employee” as such “term” is defined in Law and in the Internal Revenue Code. 

Federal Register, Tuesday, Sept. 7, 1943, §404.104, pg. 12267:

Employee:  “The term ‘employee’ specifically includes officers and employees, whether elected or appointed, of the United States, a State, territory, or political subdivision thereof or the District of Columbia or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing.”

§3401(c ) EMPLOYEE—“For purposes of this chapter, the term employee includes [only] an officer, employee or elected official of the United States, a State or any political subdivision thereof, of the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing.  The term also includes an officer of a corporation.”

Because I am not an “employee,” or “Employees” as previously defined, I cannot, did not, and do not earn “wages,” as such terms are defined in the Internal Revenue Code.  The term wages is defined in 26 U.S.C. §3401.

§3401(a) as : (a) Wages—“…the term ‘wages’ means all remuneration…for services performed by an employee for his employer…”

Further, I am not subject to the Public Salary Act of 1939, title I, §1, and, pursuant to such act, I did not earn “compensation for personal services” and therefore have no “gross income” or income includible in gross income, as such terms are defined.

Public Salary Act of 1939, TITLE I—“SECTION 1.§22(a) of the Internal Revenue Code relating to the definition of ‘gross income’ (is amended after the words ‘compensation for personal service’) includes [only] personal service as an officer or employee of a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing.”

My claim for a refund of an overpayment of taxes is based upon the legitimate and lawful claim that I derived no income from any source effectively connected to the conduct of a “trade or business” within the United States and no “taxable income” as lawfully defined.  Therefore, I lawfully placed zero on the appropriate line of the 1040X form and in Ref. (1).  Your agency cannot force me to make a false statement under the penalty of perjury in the process of forcing me to claim  that I do have “taxable income”.

Following are your own statutes and regulations that provide evidence that I am outside your jurisdiction and had no “taxable income”.  These statutes and regulations are well settled in law and certainly are not “frivolous” which means “without merit.”

26 U.S.C. §871 (b)(2): GRADUATED RATE OF TAX…

“(2) DETERMINATION OF TAXABLE INCOME.—In determining taxable income…gross income includes ONLY gross income which is effectively connected with the conduct of a TRADE OR BUSINESS within the United States.”

Because Claimant is not engaged in a “trade or business” within the United States, pursuant to 26 C.F.R. §1.871-1. (b)(1)(i), for the purposes of the income tax, he is in a class of “non-resident alien individuals,” defined as follows:

26 C.F.R. §1.871-1: “…(b) Classes of non-resident aliens-

                (1)     In general.  For purposes of the income tax, nonresident alien individuals are divided into the following classes:

                                (i)                  Nonresident alien individuals who at no time during the taxable year engaged in a trade or business in the United States…”

Pursuant to 26 C.F.R. §1.871-7, Claimant is not subject to the graduated income tax imposed by 26 U.S.C. Section 1.

26 C.F.R. §1.871-7: “Taxation of nonresident alien individuals not engaged in trade or U.S. business…

(c ) Imposition of tax

                 1)       …a nonresident alien individual…is NOT subject to the tax imposed by Section 1.” [26 U.S.C., Subtitle A, Chapter 1]

Further, as evidenced by the following letter, obtained via a Freedom of Information request, there is no implementing C.F.R. or Federal Register regulation providing you with the lawful authority to impose this erroneous frivolous filing fee.  Such a penalty is only applicable to corporations and NOT individuals.

As you are aware, pursuant to 44 U.S.C.A. §§1504-1507, before a citizen of the several States of the United States can be bound by, or adversely effected by a law or regulation, having general applicability to such Citizens, it must be published in the Federal Register.  Such laws and regulations are then categorized pursuant to their applicable Title in the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.).  26 U.S.C. §7805(a) states:

“…the Secretary shall prescribe all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of this title.”

The Internal Revenue Code is not self-executing.  Without an implementing regulation, applicable to a particular type of tax, a statute has no force of law, and imposes no duties or penalties.  As evidenced by the attached Enclosure (1), which is a Freedom of Information Act Response from the Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service:

“There are no published regulations under Internal Revenue Code Sections 6702 and 6703, which authorize the imposition and collection of penalties for filing frivolous returns.”

Furthermore, the Parallel Table Authorities for 26 C.F.R. reveals that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is the only authority authorized to use distraint or assess penalties for nonpayment of income taxes only Title 27 issues ONLY.  The following is taken from the Parallel Table of Authorities in the back of the Title 26 Code of Federal Regulations [C.F.R.].  It is a list of the ONLY 26 C.F.R. Part 301 Regulations that derive their Authority for implementation from Title 26 USCS or 26 IRC [Income Taxes].  Note the conspicuous absence of any penalty, interest, levy or seizure for the Title 26 Voluntary Income Tax found under Part 1 of the regulations instead of part 301 of the regulations.  Again, it is inconceivable that the Congress would legislate penalties for the individual income tax, since the supreme Court and the IRS have both substantiated that such a Tax is voluntary and NOT based upon distraint.  It would be absurd to impose penalties for non-compliance, when such an option is what made the tax voluntary to begin with!

Table 1:  Parallel Table of Authorities 26 C.F.R. to 26 USCS

C.F.R. to USCS
IRS Regulations	Internal Revenue Code
26 Part 301	26 §6011
26 Part 301	31 §3720A
26 Part 301	26 §6245
26 Part 301	26 §7805
26 Part 301	26 §6233
26 Part 301	26 §6326
26 Part 301	26 §6404
26 Part 301	26 §§6324A-6324B
26 Part 301	26 §6241
26 Part 301	26 §§6111-6112
26 Part 301	26 §6223
26 Part 301	26 §6227
26 Part 301	26 §6230-6231
26 Part 301	26 §6033
26 Part 301	26 §6036
26 Part 301	26 §6050M
26 Part 301	26 §6059
26 Part 301	26 §2032A
26 Part 301	26 §7624
26 Part 301	26 §3401
26 Part 301	26 §§6103-6104
26 Part 301	26 §1441
26 Part 301	26 §7216
26 Part 301	26 §6621
26 Part 301	26 §367
26 Part 301	26 §6867
26 Part 301	26 §6689

You can look at the Parallel Table of Authorities yourself at:

In addition, the following court ruling clearly expresses your lack of authority to assess penalties:

“…the Act’s civil and criminal penalties attach only upon the violation of a regulation promulgated by the Secretary; if the Secretary were to do nothing, the Act itself would impose no penalties on anyone…only those who violate the regulations (not the Code) may incur civil or criminal penalties, it is the actual regulation issued by the Secretary of the Treasury and not the broad authorizing language of the statue, which is to be tested against the standards of the 4^th Amendment.”  Calif. Bankers Assoc. v. Shultz, 416 U.S. 25, 44, 39 Led2d 812, 94 S.Ct. 1494

Your own Internal Revenue manual, which is reflective of the ruling case law on this subject states that you have no delegated authority to issue a civil penalty or to collect penalties without a judgment signed by a magistrate:

IRM 546 §19(b)(2) “the civil penalty for non-compliance may be imposed only by filing a suit in the name of the United States, naming the taxpayer as a defendant and securing a judgment.”

The supreme Court agrees with this conclusion in the following case:

“Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint.” Flora v. U.S. 362 U.S. 145, 1959.

[Emphasis added]

In case you don’t understand, “distraint” is defined as follows and is the equivalent of “force” or “coercion” or “compulsion” in the collection of debts and legal liabilities:

“…the act or process of DISTRAINT whereby a person (the DISTRAINOR), without prior court approval, seizes the personal property of another located upon the distrainor’s land in satisfaction of a claim, as a pledge for performance of a duty, or in reparation of an injury.  Where goods are seized in satisfaction of a claim, the distrainor can hold the goods until the claim is paid and, failing payment, may sell them in satisfaction.”  [Barron’s Law Dictionary, Steven H. Gifis, 1996, p. 150, ISBN 0-8120-3096-6]

Your assessment of penalties and demand for money, without the authority of law, your lawless actions to penalize me that have not been legally defended or explained or justified based on your delegated authority, constitutes extortion under the color of law, mail fraud and conspiracy against the rights of a Citizen, for which you will be help personally liable should legal action become necessary.

DEMAND FOR IMPARTIAL ADJUDICATORY HEARING PRIOR TO CONTINUING COLLECTION ACTIVITIES

Further, if you do not intend to immediately abate this erroneous civil penalty and to address the requests and claims made in Ref. (1), this correspondence shall constitute a demand for a formal impartial adjudicatory hearing prior to any further attempt to collect either taxes or penalties.  Such hearing shall be for the purpose of determining the rights of the parities and will provide an opportunity for your agency to provide any evidence it might have to validate its claim that it has the authority to enforce a civil penalty on me, or that it has any jurisdiction in the case of a nonresident alien such as myself not involved in a “trade or business in the United States” to assess or make me liable for income taxes.   You are put on notice now that this hearing will be video recorded and audio recorded, and will be posted on the internet for all to see, and that attendance at such hearing constitutes implied consent on your part to be recorded.

CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF ABSENCE OF RIGHT TO LEVY, LIEN, OR SEIZE ASSETS OF CLAIMANT

Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Section 6331(a):

United States Code

TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE

Subtitle F - Procedure and Administration

CHAPTER 64 - COLLECTION

Subchapter D - Seizure of Property for Collection of Taxes

PART II – LEVY

 (a) Authority of Secretary

If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall be sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property and rights to property (except such property as is exempt under section 6334) belonging to such person or on which there is a lien provided in this chapter for the payment of such tax. 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 States 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 official. If the Secretary makes a finding that the collection of such tax is in jeopardy, notice and demand for immediate payment of such tax may be made by the Secretary and, upon failure or refusal to pay such tax, collection thereof by levy shall be lawful without regard to the 10-day period provided in this section.

This correspondence shall constitute constructive notice that I do NOT meet the definition of a person on whom you are authorized to institute distraint of the type above based on the definition of “employee” found above, and you are forewarned that you will be held personally liable under 26 U.S.C. §7214(a) for unlawful use of your authority if you violate the above restrictions on your legal authority.  I have also warned my financial institutions and county recorder that a illegal fraud illegal taking of property may be perpetrated by you in the future against my property rights and to bring that to my attention promptly and disregard it.

SECTION 3: REINSTATEMENT OF REQUESTS FOUND IN REFERENCE (1):

Once again, I respectfully request that you take the time and accept you professional and legal responsibility under the IRS’ Taxpayer Bill Of Rights, contained in IRS Publication 1 as follows, and respond to all issues and requests made in Ref. (1):

“IRS Employees will explain and protect your rights as a taxpayer throughout your contact with us.”

“IRS will waive penalties when allowed by law if you can show you acted reasonably and in good faith or relied on the incorrect advice of an IRS employee.”

I have operated in good faith to date and would like for you to establish immediately any evidence to the contrary or the claims in Ref. (1), or else this assertion shall be an established fact in the absence of refutation within 15 days under the Uniform Commercial Code.  You will note that the basis of “rights” is the law, and you therefore can’t live up to your obligations as an IRS agent above to “explain and protect my rights as a ‘taxpayer’” without addressing the specific law that you believe makes me liable to pay income tax and in turn, refutes my claims, and establishes my “rights” or absence thereof. The notable absence of documented liability to date provided by you means I am still entitled to a refund in full of all taxes paid over the last three years.  To live up to your obligations and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, you must respond to and refute each and every legal issue raised in Ref. (1) that you regard as frivolous and explain why you believe it is frivolous.  Any other approach would constitute a violation of due process under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and a frivolous and abusive misuse of your public office and the authorities delegated to it, not to mention an abusive and harassing failure on your part to establish any jurisdictional or delegated authority to act in my specific case. 

Federal Procedure §2.455 states as follows: “If a party’s allegations of jurisdictional facts are challenged by an adversary in any appropriate manner, he or she must support them by competent proof.”

_______________________________________________________________________

" 'The extent of the authority of the people's public agents is measured by the statute from which they derive their authority, not by their own acts and assumption of authority.'

" 'Public officers have and can exercise only such powers as are conferred on them by law...'

" 'The powers of State officers being fixed by law, all persons dealing with such officers are charged with knowledge of the extent of their authority,' " Sittler v. Board of Control of Michigan College of Mining and Technology, 333 Mich. 681, 53 N.W.2d 681 (1952)

_______________________________________________________________________

"[W]hen an officer acts wholly outside the scope of the powers granted to him by statute or constitutional provision, the official's actions have been considered to be unauthorized." Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1523 (D.C. Cir. 1984):

I would like to remind you that each and every issue raised in Reference (1) has been thoroughly researched and your claim in Ref. (2) that:

“The position you have taken has no basis in law and represents a frivolous position.  The tax laws are very clear and have been tested in the courts—including the Supreme Court of the United States.  Claims such as yours have been considered and rejected repeatedly as frivolous and without merit by the federal courts.”

…is considered frivolous itself as indicated on page 7 of Ref. (1), in which I predicted you would try to use FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) tactics and an unsubstantiated, undocumented, lawless, and unjustified threats and extortion to coerce me into compliance with a “voluntary” tax system which does NOT make me liable for the payment of income taxes.  You will note that I have followed your advice and researched the laws for myself, and this extensive research took six full months of my personal time. Enclosure (5), Chapter 3, of Ref. (1) reveals the results of the research and exhaustively examines over 200 years of tax laws, Supreme Court Cases, and federal district court cases, and is the foundation of each and every claim made in Ref. (1), which you have established as fact based on your failure to refute or address.  As a matter of fact, Enclosure (5) of Ref. (1) has become the defacto standard among a large organization of tax rights advocates found at an organization called “We The People” and has gone unrefuted since it’s introduction nearly six months ago, in spite of the fact that the document is in use by over 50,000 loyal and patriotic Americans such as myself.  I have found absolutely NO cases or laws that would contradict any of the positions advocated in this letter or in Ref. (1).  The burden of proof therefore once again falls squarely on you and the IRS to now disprove and rebut the presumptions and claims made in Ref. (1) with specific legal cites.  You are encouraged to the same kind of study for yourself and to reveal to me any specific examples (regulations, or Supreme or Circuit court case cites) you might find which would refute every point I made in Ref. (1) in establishing my nonliability for income tax.  In the process of your rebuttal, you are put on notice that the following constraints apply right from your own Internal Revenue Manual:

"Decisions made at various levels of the court system... may be used by either examiners or taxpayers to support a position... A case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court becomes the law of the land and takes precedence over decisions of lower courts... Decisions made by lower courts, such as Tax Court, District Courts, or Claims Court, are binding on the Service only for the particular taxpayer and the years litigated. Adverse decisions of lower courts do not require the Service to alter its position for other taxpayers." [IRM, 4.10.7.2.9.8 (05/14/99)]

Therefore, you can only cite Supreme Court and Circuit Court decisions, and not tax court cases or statutes.  I have also examined the following documents published by DOJ and the Treasury and have found no mention of ANY of the issues raised in Ref. (1) that you claim are frivolous:

1.        Department of Justice, Tax Division, Criminal Tax Manual (1994 version)
(see http://famguardian.org/Publications/DOJTDCTM/DOJTDCTM.htm), 

2.        Chapter 6 of the U.S. Attorney’s Manual (see http://famguardian.org/Publications/USAttyManual/title6/title6.htm)

3.        IRS’ Tax Protester Manual, Training 3203-154, TPDS 85278C (see http://famguardian.org/Publications/IRSTaxProtMan/IRSTaxProHbk.htm)

Therefore, I am forced to conclude that you are bluffing and that are trying to coerce me into surrendering my rights by unethically and despicably attempting to exploit the ignorance you wrongfully assume I have about the law.  This is unconscionable and constitutes a violation of the public trust for which you ought to be censured.  Can we therefore quit the posturing and game playing and get down to any specific issues you have about Ref. (1), please?  It’s harassing to continue to receive in the mail ill-conceived and clearly threatening and illegal correspondences of the kind in Ref. (2).

You are once again reminded that I made in Ref. (1) a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the following:

1.         My complete administrative record, (both written and electronic) for the tax years 1997 through 2000, excluding the content of this correspondence.

2.        My Individual Master File (IMF) specific and not literal, Data Service, Treasury/IRS 24.030 for the tax years 1997 through 2000.

SECTION 4: AFFIDAVIT OF REVOCATION OF SIGNATURES AND RESCISSION OF PREVIOUSLY FILED W-4 FORMS, 1040 FORMS, STATE INCOME TAX FORMS, ET AL. 

I, ________________________(full name) , Citizen of ______________(statename) and domiciled in ___________(countyname) County, California, one of the American union States, hereby extinguish, rescind, revoke, cancel, abrogate, annul, nullify, discharge, and make void ab initio all signatures, belonging to me, on all previously filed Internal Revenue Service, W-4 Forms (other than EXEMPT W-4’s), 1040 Forms (that are not part of Ref. (1)) and all State Income Tax Forms and all powers of attorneys, real and implied, connected thereto, on the grounds that my purported consent was not voluntarily and freely obtained, but was made through mistake, duress, fraud, and undue influence exercised by your agency and my employer.  Pursuant to Contract Law: “All 1040 (not part of Ref. (1)) and W-4 Forms (other than EXEMPT W-4’s) are, hereby, extinguished by this rescission.”.

Rescission: (Black’s 6^th Edition Law Dictionary) “To abrogate, annul, avoid, or cancel a contract; particularly, nullifying a contract by the act of a party.  The right of rescission is the right to cancel (rescind) a contract upon the occurrence of certain kinds of default by the contracting party.  To declare a contract void in its inception and to put an end to it as though it never were.  Russel v. Stephens, 191 Wash. 314, 71 P.2d 3031…A rescission amounts to the unmaking of a contract, or an undoing of it from the beginning.  It necessarily involves a repudiation of the contract and a refusal of the moving party to be bound by it…”

I was induced by fraud and duress to sign such forms and I was denied full disclosure of the voluntary nature of such forms.  I was mislead by those who knew, or should have known, into believing that filing such forms was mandatory and/or implied, were inconscionable and grossly unfair to me.  I was unduly influenced by the stronger bargaining power of my employer, the Internal Revenue Service and the State Tax agency, and acted under an implied threat and fear of losing my job and my property and out of fear of potential imprisonment for non-compliance.  Any alleged consent is null and void as it was given under duress, by mistake, and by fraud.  Notwithstanding any information which you may have to the contrary, any forms that have been filed, and any implied quasi contracts that you may feel you have with me, were filed illegally and unlawfully and are without force/and or effect.

I further revoke, rescind, and make void ab initio all powers of attorney pertaining to me for any and all governmental/quasi/colorable agencies and/or Departments created under the authority of Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 17, and/or Art. IV, Sec. 3, Cl. 2 of the Constitution of the United States.

I, hereby, voluntarily relinquish any presumptive 14^th Amendment citizenship status and any privileges and immunities granted therein.  I retain my natural born status of a Citizen of one of the several union States of America under the Constitution and law, and my Citizenship in these United States of America.  I preserve all my unalienable Rights that are inherent from my Creator, at all times.  I waive no rights at any time.  I do not, at any time, designate anyone to be a binding arbitrator in any disputes of my Rights or equity.  If your agency has a Constitutionally valid claim, you must adhere to Due Process of Law, and other protections according to the Constitution, and I will remain an Involuntary Litigant in any such action.

SECTION 5: NEXT STEPS:

I will pursue the following if you do not comply with the requests in this correspondence in a timely fashion and as required by your responsibilities and delegated authority:

1.       Filing of IRS form 911, which requests help from the Taxpayer Advocate’s office.

2.       Writing letters to my senators and congressmen.

3.       Adjudicatory/examination hearing.

4.       Filing a Referral and Request for “Technical Advice” under 26 C.F.R. § 601.105(b)(5)(iii) and IRM, 4.10.7.2.10.

5.       Posting all of your correspondence and my responses on the website located at http://famguardian.org in order that other concerned citizens may learn from and reuse the litigation tools developed dealing with you.

6.       Waiting at least six months from receipt of Ref. (1) and filing a Civil Action for Refund of Erroneously Withheld Private Earnings under 26 U.S.C. 7422 and 26 U.S.C. 6532.

7.       Prosecuting and holding you personally liable under the following Statutes:

7.1.       26 U.S.C. Sec. 7214

7.2.       42 U.S.C. 1983-Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights

7.3.       18 U.S.C. 241-Conspiracy against Rights of Citizens—Criminal Action

7.4.       26 U.S.C. §7433-Civil Damages for Certain Unauthorized Collection Actions

You are forewarned that all future interactions with you via telephone will be recorded and posted for public listening on the website at http://famguardian.org, and that any attempts to contact me either by phone or in person shall constitute consent by you to be electronically recorded.  These recordings will be used as evidence in the process of litigating my Civil Action for Request For Refund and Conspiracy against rights.

Should you wish to further investigate the claims contained in this letter or the research to back it up, you are encouraged to visit the website at http://famguardian.org and download the book called The Great IRS Hoax: Why We Don’t Owe Income Tax.  The book is free and very completely reveals and exposes the fraud of the income tax that most sovereign Citizens of the United States of America have been repeatedly and maliciously victimized by through ignorance and illegal activities of employees at your agency.

I thank you kindly for taking the time to diligently read and respond to this correspondence and to Ref. (1), and for acting in an ethical, respectful, and responsible way that honors the legal constraints imposed upon your position as a as an revenue officer acting under the color and authority of the laws of the United States government.  It is only by you observing the legal limitations imposed on your position that the IRS and the U.S. Government can ever hope to earn and keep the public trust and confidence that all Citizens living in the 50 states would like to have in your agency and in their government.

May God richly bless you and yours with a clear conscience and the blessings of liberty and freedom.

Very Respectfully,

 

  

<<NAME>>

All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice, UCC 1-207

Former SSN (no longer active) __________________

 

 

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 #:______________________________________