(7)    Tax Deposition Questions CD/DVD, enclosed.  (available from: http://www.sedm.org/cgi-bin/cp-app.cgi?&rrc=N&affl=&act=&aff=&pg=prod&ref=EvidenceCD&cat=Media&catstr=HOME:Media)

(8)     IRS form 56, Notice Concerning Fiduciary Relationship.

Subject:  Request for Refund Affidavit for Calendar Years ____ to ____

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

SECTION 1:  CONDITIONAL SELF-ASSESSMENT............... 2

SECTION 2:  CONTINGENCIES RELATED TO FTB EVASIVENESS TO ADDRESS ALL ISSUES IN THIS LETTER COMPLETELY AND IN THE SEQUENCE PRESENTED............... 14

SECTION 3. AFFIDAVIT OF RESCISSION OF PAST SIGNATURES............... 16

SECTION 4. REVOCATION OF 26 CFR 1.871-10 ELECTION:............... 18

SECTION 5. RENUNCIATION OF "U.S. CITIZEN" STATUS UNDER 8 U.S.C. 1401:............... 20

SECTION 6:  DURESS APPLIED............... 21

SECTION 7:  FINAL REQUESTS AND TIMEFRAME FOR RESPONSE............... 22

SECTION 8:  YOUR FIDUCIARY OBLIGATIONS AS A PUBLIC SERVANT HOLDING A PUBLIC TRUST POSITION WITH THE IRS............... 24

SECTION 9:  COPYRIGHT LICENSE AGREEMENT............... 24

SECTION 10:  PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES AND FUTURE RETURN FILINGS

SECTION 11:  CONCLUSIONS............... 25

Dear Sir(s),

This letter of explanation and clarification is submitted to accompany enclosures (1) through (6), including my amended tax returns for calendar years 20__ through ____ inclusive.  I believe the letter is necessary in view of the fact that my tax position is most likely very different from the vast majority of citizens (notice I didn’t say “taxpayers”) with whom you deal.  Consequently, I want to prevent any possibility up front that my tax position is misunderstood, misrepresented, or mishandled by your agency.  As a result, the attached Enclosure (1) shall be regarded as invalid and null and void without this letter and all the accompanying enclosures that are attached to it.

I apologize (and please forgive me) for the length of this letter, as I know how severe your workload is and how the staff of the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) has been cut over the last several years.  However, I feel strongly that this letter must be detailed and specific because of information I have about how your agency has treated other law-abiding citizens and friends of mine in the past, and because of the conclusions of the following Supreme Court case:

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error."
American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442. (1950)

The amount of refund requested for the current tax year of 20______ is $___________, which is the total amount of federal income taxes paid during that tax year.  The total amount of refund requested for the previous three tax years is: $_________ as identified in enclosures (1) through (5).

Throughout this letter, I will make several references to federal law even though this is a state personal income tax issue, because federal tax “liability” is a prerequisite to state tax liability in the case of personal income taxes under Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code.  This letter will also use important words of art like “income”, “gross income”, “employee”, “employer”, “tax”, “trade or business”, “United States”, “State”, etc. based on their common, ordinary definitions.  You are specifically directed not to attribute the meaning of these or any other terms used in this letter with those found in the Internal Revenue Code or the California Revenue and Taxation Code UNLESS the specific use of the word is surrounded by quotes and the specific code section within the Internal Revenue Code is cited alongside the word in parentheses.

SECTION 1:  CONDITIONAL SELF-ASSESSMENT

1. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the assessment and payment of income taxes is voluntary. 

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

2. The implications of the Flora ruling are that I, not you, determine the terms under which I choose to volunteer and if you attempt to penalize, influence, harass, or intimidate me into changing the terms under which I choose to volunteer, then it can no longer be said that that the payment or the assessment of the tax is voluntary.  If assessment or payment of the tax isn’t voluntary, then this Request for Refund is compelled and is inadmissible as evidence in a court of law per Weeks v. United States., 232 U.S. 383 (1914), whether the compulsion occurred either before or after the submission of this return.

3. I have been subjected to illegal duress in the past, when FTB agents attempted illegally to impose penalties against me, a natural person, in violation of the following laws:

3.1.      26 CFR 301.6671-1(b).

3.2.      Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits Bills of Attainder.

3.3.      Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which also prohibits Bills of Attainder.

This illegal duress has influenced me never again to submit anything but a conditional self-assessment of this kind in order to avoid future frivolous and unlawfully imposed penalties while at the same time ensure that I get all the monies back that were illegally paid to you by my employer, who was an accessory to extortion in sending portions of my paycheck to you in violation of my wishes and my property rights.

4. This return therefore constitutes a “conditional self-assessment”.  I am only indicating a nonzero “gross income” in order to procure a refund of all taxes paid over the period in question.  I do not, in fact, make any “gross income” as legally defined but am electing to say that I have “gross income” in order to compel you to process my “return” and provide a refund of all taxes paid.  In the past, I have filed “zero returns” and have found that they were ignored because I was not a “taxpayer” so that you had no jurisdiction to respond.  Now, I am claiming that I have only one cent of “taxable income” and “gross income” so that you can no longer ignore my return or claim you have no jurisdiction.

5. You are not authorized and I do not consent to allowing you to use this Request for Refund or any of the information on it for any purpose other than that of refunding all monies paid in taxes that are indicated during the period in question.  The extent to which this requirement is violated shall be the extent to which submission becomes involuntary and compelled because of the invasion of privacy that it represents, and in such a case, the facts and statements on it, with the exception of my name and signature, are no longer verified with my signature nor submitted under affidavit or penalty of perjury.  In all cases, however, I request that you keep this Request for Refund in your paper only records as proof that I filed “something” so that the statute of limitations clock starts for all criminal and civil issues.  The only thing that has to appear on the return is a signature under penalty of perjury, which it has, in order to be considered a valid filing according to the federal courts.

6. The attached tax return and any determinations by the FTB that are based on it is false, fraudulent, incorrect, and involuntarily submitted if anything on it is changed or altered in any way by either me or the FTB or if the FTB proposes or makes without my written, explicit voluntary consent, any change in the assessment appearing on the return or in their computer system.  That means you can’t alter the Individual Master File (IMF) to be inconsistent with what appears on my return or alter the return itself.  That is why my return is submitted in pen.  In effect, I am delegating VERY SPECIFIC authority to only process the return AS IS with NO CHANGES and no penalties or to withdraw the return from processing but not entry into my FTB administrative file.

7. The FTB does not have my permission or consent to do any of the following without my explicit written and notarized consent, and if it does, I withdraw my consent and my self assessment and change the value of “gross income” on the return to zero, and withdraw verification of anything on the return other than my name and signature with an affidavit or penalty of perjury statement.

7.1.      Propose an amended assessment or execute a “Substitute For Return” (SFR), which would be a violation of Internal Revenue Manual section 5.1.11.9.

7.2.      Correct anything appearing on this return.

7.3.      Enter anything appearing on this return into any kind of information system.

7.4.      Share any of the information provided to any agency, person, government organization, or private party who is outside of the FTB and not directly involved in processing this request for refund.

8. It is the height of hypocrisy and arrogance on your part for you to be on the one hand effectively illegally soliciting donations and bribery from me under the “color of law” to then either attempt to penalize me illegally in the process or make demands about any aspect of the conditions under which I choose or volunteer to “donate”.  I simply refuse to “donate” if you refuse to let me decide the terms under which I can or will donate.  Compelled charity in that case would not be charity at all, but slavery disguised as charity.  Slavery is illegal under the Thirteenth Amendment.

9. This request for refund constitutes a Petition for Redress of Grievances protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  The right to petition for redress CANNOT be penalized, taxed, controlled, or regulated in any way by the government because it is a right and not a privilege.  You cannot penalize me for exercising this constitutional right.

10.     You are therefore not authorized by law to penalize me for submitting this “conditional self-assessment” because:

10.1.   Of the constitutional constraint against Bills of Attainder found in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 and Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution

10.2.   The definition of the term “person” in the context of the penalty regulations found in 26 CFR 301.6671-1(b), which means only an employee of a corporation, and which I am not.  If you choose to try to illegally impose any penalties on this conditional assessment, then I demand evidence that I am an “employee of a corporation” as defined there.  If you penalize me in disregard of my due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, then you will be prosecuted under 26 U.S.C. §7433 for wrongful collection actions and also under the Constitution for violation of my inalienable Constitutional rights.  I shall pursue a writ of mandamus to have my property returned and have you FIRED for malfeasance, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty.

10.3.   You would be compelling me under unlawful duress to commit fraud and make false statements on future filings in order to appease your illegal, irrational, and extortionary demands.

SECTION 2:  CONTINGENCIES RELATED TO FTB EVASIVENESS TO ADDRESS ALL ISSUES IN THIS LETTER COMPLETELY AND IN THE SEQUENCE PRESENTED

Certainly, I am not the first citizen (of the USA, not the U.S.) to raise these significant legal issues.  If the Franchise Tax Board and its employees had any sense of morality, accountability, decency, integrity, or honesty, it would have clearly and conspicuously clarified and explained the rather obvious (to a pro se litigant and paralegal such as myself) issues and legal considerations explained in this correspondence long ago in every one of it’s regulations, publications, forms, training materials, and correspondence in order to avoid the need for expensive or extended litigation by “victims” of such abuse like myself.  Since this has not yet happened to my knowledge, your organization has thereby provided prima facie evidence supporting the conclusion that a “conspiracy of massive proportions” to uphold illegal direct income taxes on U.S. Citizens living and working in the 50 states has been maintained successfully and clandestinely since the 16th Amendment was fraudulently declared as having been ratified by Philander Knox in 1913.  This situation is documented extensively in enclosure (5) to study for yourself, and shall form the basis for any civil or criminal damages that might be directed personally against you or against your collective agency in my case.

 I would like to respectfully inform you that if a refund is not issued promptly and in full for all state income taxes paid over the period requested, that I am fully prepared to pursue extended litigation in the California Courts, as it is my wish to diligently and aggressively prosecute in defense of my Fifth Amendment rights to not be deprived of my property without my consent or due process of law.  It is also my intention that the California State Government will be expected to compensate me for any legal expenses necessary to enforce these statutory and constitutional rights and constraints on the actions and authority of you and your agency.  You should know that I am fully aware of my rights and quite informed about your internal rules, regulations, and procedures (as documented throughout enclosure (5)) and will exploit every opportunity and resource available to gain a legal and moral advantage in my good-faith dealings with your agency.  It is my hope that your agency will responsibly follow its own rules and procedures, and will operate with the highest good faith, honesty, and integrity in dealing with my case and providing the refund requested.  It is also my hope that you will have the decency to respect my Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to not be deprived of any of my property or money without due process of law or through illegal levies or otherwise, and that you will not use your authority, the court or legal system to harass me for exercising my right to not pay state income taxes that I am clearly not liable for.

You will note that this letter represents a departure from times past in which I faithfully submitted 540 state income tax returns and paid in full income taxes that I wrongfully assumed that I was liable for.  This pattern of behavior was more the product of ignorant and blind obedience to misleading and downright false FTB and IRS publications than it was a product of a well-informed and realistic application of the California Codes, the U.S. Codes, the CFR’s, and the U.S. Constitution.  I apologize for the ignorant and naïve approach I have taken in the past which may have mislead you into believing that I was indeed a person who may have been liable for the payment of state or federal income taxes under the U.S. Code.  This ignorance was more a product of an inadequate and incomplete public education and a vacuum of complete or accurate legal information about any tax liability  than it was a deliberate result of my own doing.    This ignorance was also fostered and encouraged deliberately by your agency and the arrogant and downright hostile personnel at your 800 number who refused to answer any of my questions about their legal authority to assess income taxes directly on citizens.

Your service can rely on the fact that all future correspondence with me will reflect an enlightened understanding of the law which has completely changed and transformed my outlook, my understanding, and (drastically decreased) the level of trust and confidence I am now willing to place in the U.S. Government, the state of California, and your agency.

If you disagree with the legal conclusions in this Request for Refund Affidavit or any of the evidence presented, I make respectful demand that you produce, and send to me, all correspondence and hard copy documents that fully detail and describe your understanding of my situation and the law in a way that refutes each and every conclusion of law in this letter and enclosure (5) with at least the following documents:

1.  All documents on which you base your position that a person of my specific circumstance (a sovereign citizen of the united States of America) has an obligation or liability to submit a "Form 540 – California INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX RETURN" for the tax period ending _______.

2.  All documents that specifically identify all laws, statutes, regulations, and case cites that impose an obligation upon me to submit a "Form 540 - tax return" for the period covered by this request.

3.  All contractual or waiver documents that I signed or any judicial decisions that obligated me in any way to the FTB, the IRS, or to any specific performance contrary to the requests in this document.

4.  Copies of all determinations made by anyone in the FTB or IRS that concluded that any obligation was imposed upon me, and which specifically determined the extent of that obligation.

5.  Copies of the specific "Notice" documents, sent or served upon me, prior to the making of any of the above determinations.

6.  Copies of all delegation of authority orders applicable to you to make any determinations in reference to me.

7.  The documents that describe the format for making a request for correction or for making a request for specific documents describing any obligation upon me and your specific authority to determine, impose and enforce any such obligation, if this present format is insufficient to meet your internal procedure.

My authority for making the above respectful demand, if you disagree, is made as a matter of right and supported by the following Supreme Court decision:

"Whatever the form in which the Government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the Government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority...and this is so even though as here the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority."

Federal Crop Insurance v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, 384 (1947)

I recognize that you might be tempted to identify this tax return as “frivolous”, as I understand that this approach is a commonplace scare (FUD-Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) tactic used by your agency to perpetuate what is called the “Great Deception” documented in chapter 5 of enclosure (5).  Because each and every assertion made in this correspondence is founded in law and backed up by extensive legal research, however, that sort of label would be entirely inappropriate, “frivolous”, and would unnecessarily aggravate and frustrate the effectiveness of any administrative dealings we might have with each other in the future.  For these reasons, I insist that all such communication initiated by you and intended for me be in writing, and that they be sent only to my address above.  Such aggravation on your part (as indicated above) of the good faith dealings I am trying to establish with you would only add to the legal fees and civil damages I might be likely to ask for later in the event there was a need to litigate to protect my property rights under the 5^th and 14^th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.  I’d have to say that it would be equally “frivolous” and negligent on your part to implement any of the following unscrupulous FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt-scare) tactics:

·  Referring to the FTB or IRS Publications in your response, which as I have said are completely irrelevant, as a justification for any of your conclusions or findings, rather than relying entirely and only on the California Codes, the U.S. Codes, or CFR’s as requested.

·  Not responding to, or trying to stonewall this correspondence or the legal conclusions contained in it (which I am told frequently happens), which is why it has been sent certified mail with a legal “Proof of Service”.

·  Saying “the courts have repeatedly ruled against this or that argument” without referring explicitly to the state, federal, or supreme court case number and matter name that proves your point, and explaining your legal analysis of that case conclusively and completely.

·  Arbitrarily refusing a refund without explanation or legal justification (a violation of the 5^th Amendment and 26 U.S.C. §7214).

·  Intimidation or threats or other types of “political posturing” you or the FTB  might feel compelled to implement in my case (not unlike that documented on page 11A of the USA Today Newspaper dated March 2, 2001).

·  Not addressing the legal issues raised here directly in the event that your agency cannot refute them.

Such an approach of “plausible deniability” or irresponsibility (documented in section 7.4.2 of enclosure (5)) will only reinforce the contentions made in enclosure (5) of the public perception of the FTB as a “Gestapo” organization  rather than the public servant you are obligated to be under law and California Codes.  The reinforcement of this negative perception will result from the fact that every aspect of this case, all correspondence, and all litigation papers on both sides will be posted and publicized for thousands of people to learn about and read in real time on the website located at http://famguardian.org, not unlike what is found at http://www.taxableincome.net/.  Similarly, it would be dishonorable and unethical of you, should you NOT be able to legally refute the entire contents of this Request for Refund, to NOT:

·  Modify your Publications and regulations to completely reflect the issues addressed in this Request for Refund, in order to avoid deceiving sovereign citizens in the future that they are indeed “taxpayers” liable for state income taxes

·  Modify your business processes to reflect the new understandings found in this letter.

·  Train and inform all employees of the FTB fully and completely of the legal ramifications of all of the issues addressed in this correspondence in order to provide better service to the many people in the future who will imitate my approach.  Such an ongoing training program will also serve to eliminate litigation risks for your agency and the use of the defense of “plausible deniability” in the event that you or members of your agency are prosecuted for malfeasance.

Likewise, please do not expect to call me in for an audit or tax examination or deposition without completely addressing all the issues and legal conclusions asserted in this letter, as I will not be able to respond to such a request unless and until you fulfill your legal and due process obligations to respond to and/or rebut each and every assertion and legal conclusion in this correspondence and in enclosure (5) that you disagree with.  This is the only way you will be able to uphold a perception that you are operating in “good faith”, integrity, and honesty with respect to this request and honoring my Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due-process rights.  I will expect your response to rely ONLY upon carefully-researched and documented legal conclusions.  I will accept NO references whatsoever to any FTB or IRS publications in your response, and will treat them as “frivolous”, since these publications, as both I and the courts have said before, are completely irrelevant to the resolution of this matter of law.  In your response, please notify me of the full name, the email address, direct phone number, and mailing of address of the agent(s) or attorney(s) in the FTB and/or the Department of Justice (DOJ) who has/have been assigned to process or handle this Request for Refund, so that I may know specifically who to effect service of process on in the event that litigation becomes necessary.

SECTION 3:  AFFIDAVIT OF RESCISSION OF PAST SIGNATURES

I, _________________________ , Citizen of California (not “the State of California” defined in R&TC Sections 6017 and 17018, which are synonymous) and domiciled in San Diego County, California, one of the American union States and “without” the United States defined in 26 U.S.C. section 7701, do 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 California 540 Income Tax Forms and all powers of attorneys, real and implied, connected thereto and over the period 1978 to 1999, 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. 

Duress:  (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6^th Edition, page 504) “Any unlawful threat or coercion used by a person to induce another to act (or to refrain from acting) in a manner he or she otherwise would not (or would).  Subjecting person to improper pressure which overcomes his will and coerces him to comply with demand to which he would not yield if acting as free agent.  Head v. Gadsden Civil Service Bd., Ala.Civ.App., 389 So.2d 516, 519.  Application of such pressure or constraint as compels man to go against his will, and takes away his free agency, destroying power of refusing to comply with unjust demands of another.  Haumont v. Security State Bank, 220 Neb. 809, 374 N.W.2d 2,6.

Duress may be a defense to a criminal act, breach of contract, or tort because an act to be criminal or one which constitutes a breach of contract or a tort must be voluntary to create liability or responsibility

A contract entered into under duress by physical compulsion is void.  Also, if  a party’s manifestation of assent to a contract is induced by an improper threat by the other party that leaves the victim no reasonable alternative, the contract is voidable by the victim.  Restatement, Second, Contracts §§174, 175.

As a defense to a civil action, it must be pleaded affirmatively.  Fed.R.Civil P. 8(c ).

As an affirmative defense in criminal law, one who, under the pressure of an unlawful threat from another human being to harm him (or to harm a third person), commits what would otherwise be a crime may, under some circumstances, be justified in doing what he did and thus not be guilty of the crime in question.  See Model Penal Code §2.09.  See also Coercion; Economic duress; Extortion; Undue influence.”

Below is a list of the types of compulsion and duress applied by you and the IRS which have restricted the free exercise of my Fifth Amendment rights and has caused me in the past to file 540 and 1040 forms involuntarily and under duress:

·  Your past threatening correspondence, in which you threatened $1,000 in fines for allegedly frivolous returns, a 25% penalty for failure to file a return by the due date, even though I provided a  return that I still say is accurate in Ref. (2).  A $69 enforcement fee.  This kind of disrespectful, threatening, and harassing correspondence does not permit me to sign anything voluntarily that I might send to you.

·  Penalties under sections 19131-19132 and 19177 through 19179 of the California R&TC:

o 19131 Failure to file

o 19132 Penalties

o 19177 Abusive tax shelters

o 19178 Aiding or abetting understatement of tax liability

o 19179 Frivolous returns

·  Scare stories from my coworkers and friends about mistreatment by the Franchise Tax Board and the Internal Revenue Service, including strong-arm tactics like your Ref. (1), levies, liens, and seizures.

·  26 U.S.C. Sec, 7201:  Attempt to evade or defeat tax (up to $100,000 fine or imprisonment not more than 5 years along with attorney fees).

·  26 U.S.C. Sec, 7203:  Willful Failure to File (fine up to $25,000 or imprisonment for one year or both)

·  Hundreds of different penalties for late filing or underpayment, as documented in Part 20 of the Internal Revenue Manual, available at: http://www.irs.gov/prod/bus_info/tax_pro/irm-part/part20.html

·  IRS Liens and levies being imposed for nonpayment of taxes.

·  Receipt of threatening mail communications from the IRS (e.g. CP-515 “Notice of Deficiency” and subsequent Notice of Lien and Levy”).

·  Constant anxiety from and harassment by IRS agents (by telephone and otherwise).

I would be committing perjury to submit another state income tax return and state that it was “voluntary”, or without putting “duress” or “distraint” near my signature.  Let’s define the word “voluntary” for the record to remove all doubt:

voluntary:  (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6^th Edition, page 1575)  “Unconstrained by interference; unimpelled by another’s influence; spontaneous; acting of oneself.  Coker v. State, 199 Ga. 20, 33 S.E.2d 171, 174.  Done by design or intention.  Proceeding from the free and unrestrained will of the person.  Produced in or by an act of choice.  Resulting from free choice, without compulsion or solicitation.  The word, especially in statutes, often implies knowledge of essential facts.  Without valuable consideration; gratuitous, as a voluntary conveyance.  Also, having a merely nominal consideration; as, a voluntary deed.”

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.

It is (and always has been) my desire that any elections I might make relative to federal income taxes not be allowed to impact any of my state returns, including any alleged elections described in 26 CFR 1.871-10 that might have been made to treat my income as “effectively connected with a trade or business in the United States”.  I am sorry if I did not communicate this to you sooner or if you may have missed such an intent earlier expressed.

SECTION 4:  REVOCATION OF 26 CFR 1.871-10 ELECTION:

In accordance with 26 CFR 1.871-10(d)(2)(iii), this Legal Notice has been submitted to the IRS in pursuit of a Revocation of Election to treat any or all of my income from real property as a federal nonresident alien from being considered by the IRS as “effectively connected with a trade or business in the ‘United States’”, as defined in 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7701.  It is provided to you as well for your information, in the event that it impacts my state income tax liability.  Information about myself in fulfillment with the above CFR is as follows:

1. Name:  ____________________

2. Address:  ________________________

3. SSN:  ______________________

4. Applicable taxable year(s):__Current and all prior tax years__

5. Grounds for the request:  My constitutional right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, privacy, respect, the fruits of my common right labors under common law, and the right to own and control property (including labor and the fruits of my labor) without any interference from government.

This Legal Notice is by no means an admission in any way that I ever made a Election to treat any of my income or assets as “effectively connected with a trade or business in the United States”, but instead is submitted to ensure that my status is properly reflected in your records and that you do indeed concur with and respect this notification.  I do not now nor have I ever lived in the ‘United States’ as defined in 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7701, nor do I have any intentions of doing so in the future.  I am sorry if I ever gave you the idea that I did by, for instance, mistakenly filing an IRS form 1040 in the past, which was the incorrect form. 

Please note that I already have an IRS form W-8 on file with my employer and have accurately declared myself to be a Nonresident Alien.  I reside outside the foreign jurisdiction to which the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) operates, which is the District of Columbia and federal territories:

“The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.”

N.Y. re: Merriam, 36 N.E. 505, 141 N.Y. 479, Affirmed 16 S.Ct. 1973, 41 L.Ed. 287

"The exclusive jurisdiction which the United States have in forts and dock-yards ceded to them, is derived from the express assent of the states by whom the cessions are made. It could be derived in no other manner; because without it, the authority of the state would be supreme and exclusive therein," 3 Wheat., at 350, 351. Bevans v. United States, 16 U.S. 336 (1818).

“State: The term ''State'' shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.”  26 U.S.C. Sec. 7701

“United States: The term ''United States'' when used in a geographical sense includes [is limited to] only the States [the District of Columbia and other federal territories within the borders of the states] and the District of Columbia.” 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7701

“A canon of construction which teaches that of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.” U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222 (1949)

“The term 'United States' may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States ex- [324 U.S. 652, 672]   tends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution.”  Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652, 1945.

Foreign government:  “The government of the United States of America, as distinguished from the government of the several states.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5^th Edition)

Foreign Laws:  “The laws of a foreign country or sister state.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6^th Edition)

Foreign States:  “Nations outside of the United States…Term may also refer to another state; i.e. a sister state.  The term ‘foreign nations’, …should be construed to mean all nations and states other than that in which the action is brought; and hence, one state of the Union is foreign to another, in that sense.”  (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6^th Edition)

Treasury Decision 3980, Vol. 29, January-December, 1927, pgs. 64 and 65 defines the words includes and including as: “(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 performs that office by introducing the specific elements constituting the 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, comprising; comprehending; embracing.”

“Includes is a word of limitation.  Where a general term in Statute is followed by the word, ‘including’ the primary import of the specific words following the quoted words is to indicate restriction rather than enlargement.  Powers ex re. Covon v. Charron R.I., 135 A. 2^nd 829, 832 Definitions-Words and Phrases pages 156-156, Words and Phrases under ‘limitations’.”

“In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes, it is the established rule not to extend their provisions by implication beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out.  In case of doubt they are construed most strongly against the government and in favor of the citizen.”  Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151, at 153.

Thank you for your prompt and expeditious processing of this Revocation of Election.  Please forward your certification and response to my address above.  I respectfully request that you give a detailed explanation and legal justification of any determination or basis you might make regarding the disposition of this notification. This includes citing any authority you are exercising and the regulation or statute from which it derives, as well as any court cites, Treasury Decisions, etc that may be relevant to the foundation of your delegated authority for making a determination of disposition.  This letter shall serve as formal legal notice that if you DO NOT respond within 45 days, then by your default and silence, the Revocation of Election is granted and there is no need to further contact us.

I affirm, under penalty of perjury, under the Common Law of America, without the "United States", that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my current information, knowledge, and belief, per 28 U.S.C. 1746(1); and

SECTION 5:  RENUNCIATION OF "U.S. CITIZEN" STATUS UNDER 8 U.S.C. 1401:

Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §1481(a)(6), the purpose of this affidavit is to change the status of my citizenship in your records from that of “U.S. citizen” under 8 U.S.C. §1401 to “U.S. national” under 8 U.S.C. §1408(2).  I do hereby as well as retroactively from my date of birth renounce any citizenship connected with the 8 U.S.C. §1401 and forefeit any and all privileges and immunities arising from said citizenship.  This is my Right, confirmed by 15 Statutes at Large, Chapter CCXLIX, Sections One through Three, passed by the United States Congress on July 27, 1868.  It has come to my attention that the U.S. government, including the Social Security Administration (SSA), and the IRS, have been defining the term “U.S. citizen” contrary to my correct/real citizenship status and contrary to what I had believed it meant before I recently became aware of the true meaning of this term.  For the purposes of my federal citizenship status, I am and always have been from birth, a “national of the United States of America” under the following statutes:

·  8 U.S.C. §1408(2)

·  8 U.S.C. §1452

·  8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(21) through 8 U.S.C.. §1101(a)(22)

My citizenship status as a “national of the United States of America” arises out of the fact that I was born on nonfederal land in one of the sovereign 50 states and outside of the “United States” (the federal territories and possessions and the District of Columbia) to parents who were also “nationals of the United States” but who were misinformed about their true status and therefore incorrectly claimed that both they as well as I (on their tax returns) were “U.S. citizens”.  Your office, the IRS, and the SSA have incorrectly indicated that the definition of the term ‘U.S. citizen’ [as also stated in 8 USC 1401 Sec.301] means “Any individual born in one of the 50 States or the District of Columbia and who was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at birth.” 

My correct citizenship status is that of an “American Citizen.” and not a “U.S. citizen”.  An American Citizen is:

“a sovereign human being [natural person], not to be confused with the term ‘person’ as used anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code, who under the Constitution and the laws of the united States or of a particular state, is entitled to the enjoyment of full civil rights.  The rights are those as enumerated in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution for the united States of America and because of these rights this man is not subject to the exclusive or sovereign jurisdiction of the U.S.  government at birth under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution.”

The rights guaranteed by the Constitution are absolute and natural right derived from birth, and they cannot and should not, by operation of law, be turned into a taxable government privilege by coercing me into becoming a type of citizen that I do not choose to be or by coercing me to participate in an illegal and unethical state or federal income tax system, in clear violation of my God-given inalienable rights found in the Declaration of Independence, which reads in pertinent part:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—

Notice it didn’t say “by their government” or “by their citizenship”, or “by operation of law” but rather “by their Creator”?  Here is what the author of the above, Thomas Jefferson, said privately about this subject:

 "A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate." --Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774. ME 1:209, Papers 1:134

"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?" --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVIII, 1782. ME 2:227

My authority for this change in your documentation of my citizenship status derives not only from 8 U.S.C. §1481(a)(6), but also from the following:

“Almost a century ago, Congress declared that "the right of expatriation [including expatriation from the District of Columbia or “U.S. Inc”, the corporation] is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and decreed that "any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government." 15 Stat. 223-224 (1868), R.S. § 1999, 8 U.S.C. § 800 (1940).[1] Although designed to apply especially to the rights of immigrants to shed their foreign nationalities, that Act of Congress "is also broad enough to cover, and does cover, the corresponding natural and inherent right of American citizens to expatriate themselves." Savorgnan v. United States, 1950, 338 U.S. 491, 498 note 11, 70 S. Ct. 292, 296, 94 L. Ed. 287.[2] The Supreme Court has held that the Citizenship Act of 1907 and the Nationality Act of 1940 "are to be read in the light of the declaration of policy favoring freedom of expatriation which stands unrepealed." Id., 338 U.S. at pages 498-499, 70 S. Ct. at page 296.That same light, I think, illuminates 22 U.S.C.A. § 211a and 8 U.S.C.A.§ 1185.”  Walter Briehl v. John Foster Dulles, 284 F2d 561, 583 (1957).

Additional authority for this change in your records of my citizenship status derives in part from 26 CFR 301.6109-1(g):

(g) Special rules for taxpayer identifying numbers issued to foreign persons--(1) General rule--(i) Social security number. A social security number is generally identified in the records and database of the Internal Revenue Service as a number belonging to a U.S. citizen or resident alien individual. A person may establish a different status for the number by providing proof of foreign status with the Internal Revenue Service under such procedures as the Internal Revenue Service shall prescribe, including the use of a form as the Internal Revenue Service may specify. Upon accepting an individual as a nonresident alien individual, the Internal Revenue Service will assign this status to the individual's social security number.

The U.S. supreme Court has declared in the case of Hooven and Allison v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652, 1945 that:

The term 'United States' may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely

[1] the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations [hereafter referred to as  “U.S.*”].

[2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends [324 U.S. 652, 672] , [hereafter referred to as “U.S.**”] or

[3] it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. [hereafter referred to as “U.S.***”]

Be advised that I am not renouncing citizenship in “United States*” the country (the first and third definition), but simply the municipal corporation (U.S.**) located in District of Columbia and federal territories only, which is the second definition identified above.  The U.S. Supreme Court has clearly defined the meaning of the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in Elk v. Wilkins, 112 US 94 (1884):

"The persons declared to be citizens are ALL PERSONS BORN OR NATURALIZED IN THE UNITED STATES AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF. The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but COMPLETELY SUBJECT [e.g., under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution] to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.  And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other.  Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards, except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts; or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired. Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of, and owing immediate allegiance to, one of the Indiana tribes, (an alien though dependent power,) although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more 'born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' within the meaning of the first section of the fourteenth amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States, of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations. ."  

Being “COMPLETELY SUBJECT to the jurisdiction” at the time of birth means being born in a federal enclave, territory, or possession of the United States subject to the sovereignty of the United States and outside the territorial jurisdiction of any state under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution.  Quite clearly then, I never was a “U.S. citizen”, but a “U.S. national”.  I was born at the _______________________(hospital name) on nonfederal land in _______________(city name), ____________(statename) on ______________(date of birth).  If you have any evidence to the contrary, I respectfully request that you provide said evidence within the next ten days under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. §552, and the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. §552a or permanently forfeit any and all claims to the contrary on behalf of the U.S. government.

Be advised that in all future interaction with the government, if the term “U.S. CITIZEN” appears in all capitals on any form or application, including voter registration, driver’s license, etc, then the meaning attributed to such ambiguity (given the three definitions of “United States” above) by me and by implication also you, shall be NOT that of an 8 U.S.C. §1401 citizen, but a “U.S.* Citizen” or “U.S.*** Citizen” until or unless a contrary intent is clearly expressed by the government to remove all ambiguity created by the use of all capital letters.  This also applies retroactively to any government forms I may have completed in the past.  Thus, I will not be jeopardizing the citizenship status established in this document by any interaction with the government either in the past or in the future.  The government is chargeable with a full knowledge of this reality in all its dealings with me as an American Citizen.  Such a play on words is not unlike the chicanery found throughout the Internal Revenue Code, which is rife with deceit and should have been declared “void for vagueness” a long time ago.

I Declare all previous Declarations, Affidavits, etc., either made by me or in my name by another, concerning my Citizenship Status, to be null and void.

I Declare that I pledge my complete allegiance to Christ Jesus, my King, and I am an Ambassador for Christ as per 2nd Corinthians 5:20 of the Holy Scriptures.  Hence, I have entered into the jurisdiction of the Lord's Kingdom as a Citizen thereof in fulfillment of the following scriptures:

“It is better to trust in the Lord

Than to put confidence in man

It is better to trust in the Lord

Than to put confidence in princes [or government, or bureaucrats, or judges, or lawyers].”

Bible, Psalms 118:8 through 9:

“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.  You shall have no other gods [or a government or materialism or love of money or earthly] before Me.  You shall not make for yourself a carved image…you shall not bow down to them nor serve them [including your government, because you are the sovereign, not the government].  For I, the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children of the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands to those who love me and keep my commandments.” 

 Bible, Exodus 20:2 through 20:6

I also Declare that I pledge my secondary allegiance (below that of God but above that of any other ephemeral nation or state) to the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC [based on individual rights and freedom], for which is stands one nation, under GOD, indivisible, with liberty, and justice and freedom for all.  God bless America!

Please notify all appropriate government agencies within your jurisdiction of this change in my Lawful Status.

SECTION 6:  DURESS APPLIED

In accordance with the U.S. Supreme Court Case of Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648, this tax return is submitted under duress and coercion and constitutes the “compelled testimony of a witness”.  Therefore, by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it is inadmissible as evidence in a court of law because it violates my right of non-self-incrimination and was therefore obtained illegally as per the supreme Court case of Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383.  See the following of enclosure (5) for the legal research and justification behind this assertion, which you have an obligation to refute if you believe inaccurate or untrue. 

·  Section 3.10.8.3.4 Self-Incrimination Privilege Defined

·  Section 3.12.1:  18 U.S.C. 6002-6003.

·  Section 3.16.7: 1906: Hale v. Henkel (201 U.S. 43)

·  Section 3.16.29: 1985: U.S. v. Doe (465 U.S. 605)

·  Section 5.6: The Laws that Say We Aren’t Liable to File Tax Returns

·  Section 7.9.1: What to Do When the IRS Comes Knocking

·  Section 10.1.3: Compulsory Production of Documents

Below is a not all-inclusive list of some of the types of illegal compulsion and duress being applied which restrict the free exercise of my Fifth Amendment rights and make this tax return into compelled testimony submitted under duress.  It is illegal because although deriving from the “color of law”, they cannot be applied since I am domiciled outside of federal territorial or subject matter jurisdiction, and keep in mind that I DO have constitutional rights since I am not a U.S.** citizen but a state citizen, and absent proof of jurisdiction by the government to act in an equity law basis, my rights cannot be abrogated or undermined by any court or the IRS:

1. 26 U.S.C. §7201:  Attempt to evade or defeat tax (up to $100,000 fine or imprisonment not more than 5 years along with attorney fees).

2. 26 U.S.C. §7203:  Willful Failure to File (fine up to $25,000 or imprisonment for one year or both)

3. Hundreds of different penalties for late filing or underpayment, as documented in Part 20 of the Internal Revenue Manual, available at: http://www.irs.gov/prod/bus_info/tax_pro/irm-part/part20.html

4. IRS Liens and levies being imposed for nonpayment of taxes.

5. Receipt of threatening mail communications from the IRS (e.g. CP-515 “Notice of Deficiency” and subsequent Notice of Lien and Levy”).

6. Constant anxiety from and harassment by IRS agents (by telephone and otherwise).

Remember that the essential aspect of being a “right” is that the free exercise of rights CANNOT be penalized, taxed, or regulated in any way by the government.  The above regulations, however, indeed do precisely that and I therefore regard them as being unconstitutional, illegal, null, and void as far as I am concerned and they should immediately be declared as such by all federal courts.  The below supreme court case emphasizes constraints on your treatment of my rights in Harman v. Forssenius, 380 U.S 528 at 540, 85 S.Ct. 1177, 1185 (1965):

"It has long been established that a State may not impose a penalty upon those who exercise a right guaranteed by the Constitution." Frost & Frost  Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of California, 271 U.S. 583. "Constitutional rights would be of little value if they could be indirectly denied,' Smith v. Allwriqht, 321 US. 649, 644, or manipulated out of existence,' Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S.  339, 345."

I have already enumerated the compulsion and duress being applied above in item 42.

The only way to overcome Fifth Amendment restrictions documented above absent my waiver of rights is for you to sign an “Immunity from Prosecution Letter” under 26 U.S.C. 6002-6003.  In the event an authorized agent of the state of California is willing to sign such an agreement for ALL future income tax returns having to do with me, then I will gladly submit more complete returns.  If there is some other way to avoid waiving my rights without fear of criminal prosecution that is not documented here, then I request your help in showing me what that method is.

According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the existence of duress vitiates any and all contracts resulting from that duress:

duress:  (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6^th Edition, page 504) “Any unlawful threat or coercion used by a person to induce another to act (or to refrain from acting) in a manner he or she otherwise would not (or would).  Subjecting person to improper pressure which overcomes his will and coerces him to comply with demand to which he would not yield if acting as free agent.  Head v. Gadsden Civil Service Bd., Ala.Civ.App., 389 So.2d 516, 519.  Application of such pressure or constraint as compels man to go against his will, and takes away his free agency, destroying power of refusing to comply with unjust demands of another.  Haumont v. Security State Bank, 220 Neb. 809, 374 N.W.2d 2,6.

…

A contract entered into under duress by physical compulsion is void.  Also, if  a party’s manifestation of assent to a contract is induced by an improper threat by the other party that leaves the victim no reasonable alternative, the contract is voidable by the victim.  Restatement, Second, Contracts §§174, 175.

As a defense to a civil action, it must be pleaded affirmatively.  Fed.R.Civil P. 8(c ).

As an affirmative defense in criminal law, one who, under the pressure of an unlawful threat from another human being to harm him (or to harm a third person), commits what would otherwise be a crime may, under some circumstances, be justified in doing what he did and thus not be guilty of the crime in question.  See Model Penal Code §2.09.  See also Coercion; Economic duress; Extortion; Undue influence.”

Therefore, it should be noted that all previous tax returns other than those for complete refunds submitted with full knowledge of the law for the year 2000 and beyond were submitted under duress.  Furthermore, any future tax returns submitted by me for anything other than a full refund now and indefinitely into the future shall be presumed to be submitted under duress in which case the information indicated on their face cannot and should not be interpreted as being factual or trustworthy in any way, and any criminal charges resulting from their lack of factual basis (including frivolous return penalties, tax evasion, jurat, etc) cannot be enforced.  When and if I receive an immunity from prosecution letter from the IRS signed by competent authority for all matters related to income taxes, then this provision shall continue to be in effect and future returns not asking for a refund in full shall be null and void and fraudulent as caused by coercion instituted against me by the IRS of the kind described above.

I ask that you not apply distraint or duress to get me to illegally surrender my constitutional rights in responding to your strong-arm tactics and demands by:

1. Forcing me to communicate with my government on a tax return, which violates my First Amendment right of free expression.

2. Forcing me to violate my own privacy by involuntarily revealing intimate details about my private financial affairs to third parties, which violates my Fourth Amendment right of privacy. (see Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383  (1914)  for information about excluding illegally obtained evidence).  I WILL NOT reveal the existence of any records you might want to subpoena, so don’t bother harassing me or deposing me because you will get NOTHING.

3. Incriminate myself under duress from you as indicated in section 4 below, in violation of my Fifth Amendment right.  Incidentally, the fifth Amendment right of non-self-incrimination includes civil matters as well as criminal matters according to Barron’s Legal Dictionary:[1]

SELF-INCRIMINATION, PRIVILEGE AGAINST:

the constitutional right of a person [in this case they mean a natural born person, instead of a “corporation”, which is also a “person” from the perspective of the tax code]  to refuse to answer questions or otherwise give testimony against himself or herself which will subject him or her to an incrimination.  This right under the Fifth Amendment (often called simply PLEADING THE FIFTH AMENDMENT) is now applicable to the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, 378 U.S. 1, 8, and is applicable in any situation, civil or criminal, where the state attempts to compel incriminating testimony.  See 378 U.S. 52, 94.  The right may be waived where the defendant testifies , 356 U.S. 148, 157, and the privilege does not preclude the use of voluntary confessions, provided that the requirements of the Miranda rule have been complied with.  384 U.S. 436, 478.

The requisite compulsion will include any threat calculated to interfere with the unfettered free will of the suspect.  Thus, the privilege has been held to bar the dismissal of a police officer for refusal to testify regarding matters that might incriminate him or her and for refusal to waive immunity from prosecution if forced to testify.  392 U.S. 273.  The testimony could not validly be used, as "the protection of the individual under the Fourteenth Amendment against coerced statements prohibits use in subsequent criminal proceedings of statements obtained under threat of removal from office, and that extends to all, whether they are policemen or members of our body politic.  385 U.S. 493, 500.

In general, only criminal sanctions are within privilege and testimony can be compelled despite the personal, social, or economic costs to the witness.  For example, a mother having no statutory evidentiary privilege could be compelled to testify against her child and would not be able to plead the privilege against self-incrimination unless she too feared a personal criminal sanction.  If she persisted in her refusal to testify, she could be found in contempt

[...skipped irrelevant sections...]

The privilege can be displaced by a grant of TESTIMONIAL [USE} IMMUNITY which guarantees that neither the compelled testimony nor any fruits will be used against the witness.  Given such immunity, the witness can no longer fear incrimination and thus cannot plead the privilege against self-incrimination, 406 U.S. 441; 406 U.S. 472.  Some states give such witnesses a broader form of TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY which protects them not merely from use of their testimony but from any prosecution brought about relating to transactions about which relevant testimony was elicited.  see, e.g. N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §50.10 (McKinney).  Transactional immunity was previously the federal standard, 18 U.S.C. §2514, but was replaced in 1970 by testimonial immunity, 18 U.S.C. §6002.  Immunity from federal prosecution may only be given by a federal prosecutor, not a judge.  As such, a witness may invoke a broad self-incrimination privilege in a civil suit, in which the federal prosecutor is not involved.  See 103 S. Ct. 608. Once granted immunity, a witness who refuses to testify can be punished for contempt.  The privilege against self-incrimination, like all constitutional rights, may be waived.  Miranda warnings are generally necessary before such a waiver will be found to qualify a confession as admissible evidence for a criminal trial.

The rule does not extend to nontestimonial compulsion.  Thus, blood tests may be compelled from the accused because they are "noncommunicative," i.e., the evidence is considered physical or real and not testimonial so as to invoke the protection of the privilege.  On the same reasoning, the Court has permitted compelled line-ups,  388 U.S. 218, 221, and handwritten exemplars. 388 U.S. 263, 266.

Please keep a copy of this correspondence for the future in my administrative record, because I have stopped my state income tax withholding and will not be paying any more state income tax in the future but I will be filing zero returns or refunds to avoid willful failure to file charges, and these returns will be sent to a remailer service to protect my privacy.  This is your last opportunity to refute the positions advocated in this letter, or else the allegations and claims contained in it shall constitute admitted facts on your part in accordance with the protocols established in the opening paragraph of this letter and UCC 1.205.  I ask that you resist the temptation to harass, threaten, stalk, or mail threatening communications (and especially anonymous threatening communications) to me in the future about failure to file state income tax returns when you have failed to establish my liability and the concept of me having any liability is clearly in conflict with the content of your own California FTB form 590 as a resident of California.

[1] Law Dictionary, Barron's, Copyright 1996, ISBN 0-8120-3096-6, pp. 464-465.

SECTION 7:  FINAL REQUESTS AND TIMEFRAME FOR RESPONSE

This correspondence shall also serve as a formal Notice and Demand under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 USC 552 and under California law, for a complete hard-copy version of the following:

1. My complete administrative record (both written and electronic) for the period covered by this Request for Refund, which is tax years ____ through ____, excluding the content of this correspondence and the attachments.

2. My electronic records (taxpayer files) for the tax years ____ through ____.

I promise to promptly pay in full (upon sufficient notice from you) the cost of locating and duplicating the items identified.  I declare under penalty of perjury that I am a category E requester under the FOIA.  PLEASE EXPEDITE THIS REQUEST.

Should you have any further questions about the content of this correspondence, you are invited to visit the website below before contacting me, to answer any questions I cannot answer personally:

This website provides extensive and exhaustive documentation for all of the legal conclusions contained in this correspondence. You are invited to visit it and critique it. The author of the site has indicated that he is quite receptive to correcting any errors or misinformation that might exist within the information posted both on the website or in enclosure (5).  That website will also be updated routinely with the complete history of this and all future and previous Request for Refunds, as a way to educate and inform other patriotic, educated, and interested American citizens on how they too can reduce their state and federal tax liability. 

I will expect your response to my Request for Refund, the FOIA response, and my respectful demand for the documents and legal rebuttals requested, within 45 days of your receipt of this letter, which has been sent certified mail.  If you need additional time, please make your request in writing, stating the amount of time needed, and I will consider it but not extend the deadline for receiving refund beyond three months of receipt of this request.  If I do not hear from you within that time, your lack of response (and default under UCC 1-205) to this Notice will establish prima facie evidence (a factual presumption) in support of the following and shall be a basis for immediately litigating this case:

1. The legal conclusions in this correspondence are incontrovertible and sound.

2. That you do not have any evidence or legal citations that would rebut any of these presumptions or conclusions of law.

3. That the burden of proof has shifted to the government in making the case that I (as a citizen, rather than an alleged “taxpayer”) have any state or federal income tax liability whatsoever for the past four years.

4. That I indeed do not have sufficient state income tax liability based on my current employment to even meet the requirements to file a 540 tax return in the future.

5. That I do not meet the definition of being a “taxpayer” (a person liable for the payment of state income taxes absent his consent to do so) within the meaning of 26 U.S. Code or California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 17071 through 17073for t he past four taxable years.

6. That, absent any documented state income tax liability for the past four years, it is likely that there will similarly be no need to file 540 tax returns as a citizen of the state of California in the future if my employment situation were not to change.

7. That you do not have any documents responsive to my request that would rebut the presumptions or conclusions in this correspondence.

8. That you do not have any documents or legal citations authenticating or verifying your authority under law to support or make any claim of any state income tax obligation upon me other than what is described in this document.

 Please keep a copy of this correspondence for the future in my administrative record, because I have stopped my state income tax withholding and will not be paying any more state income tax in the future but I will be filing zero returns or refunds to avoid willful failure to file charges, and these returns will be sent to a remailer service to protect my privacy.  This is your last opportunity to refute the positions advocated in this letter, or else the allegations and claims contained in it shall constitute admitted facts on your part in accordance with the protocols established in the opening paragraph of this letter and UCC 1.205.  I ask that you resist the temptation to harass, threaten, stalk, or mail threatening communications (and especially anonymous threatening communications) to me in the future about failure to file state income tax returns when you have failed to establish my liability and the concept of me having any liability is clearly in conflict with the content of your own California FTB form 590 as a resident of California.

SECTION 8:  YOUR FIDUCIARY OBLIGATIONS AS A PUBLIC SERVANT HOLDING A PUBLIC TRUST POSITION WITH THE FTB

I’d like to remind you that in executing your duties as an IRS employee that the relationship between us is a fiduciary relationship in which you have an obligation to maintain the highest ethical and moral standards in all you dealings with me as a “public servant”:

Fiduciary duty:  (Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 625) A duty to act for someone else’s benefit, while subordinating one’s personal interests to that of the other person.  It is the highest standard of duty implied by law (e.g. trustee, guardian).

Fiduciary or confidential relation:  (Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 625) A very broad term embracing both technical and fiduciary relations and those informal relations which exist wherever one person trusts in or relies upon another.  One founded on trust or confidence reposed by one person in the integrity and fidelity of another.  Such relationship arises whenever confidence is reposed on one side, and domination and influence result on the other; the relation can be legal, social, domestic, or merely personal.  Heilman’s Estate, Matter of, 37 Ill.App.3d 390, 345 N.E.2d 536, 540.

A relation subsisting between two persons in regard to a business, contract, or piece of property, or in regard to the general business or estate of one of them, of such a character that each must repose trust and confidence in the other and must exercise a corresponding degree of fairness and good faith.  Out of such a relation, the law raises the rule that neither party may exert influence or pressure upon the other, take selfish advantage of his trust, or deal with the subject-matter of the trust in such a way as to benefit himself or prejudice the other except in the exercise of the utmost good faith and with the full knowledge and consent of that other, business shrewdness, hard bargaining, and astuteness to take advantage of the forgetfulness or negligence of another being totally prohibited as between persons standing in such a relation to each other.  Examples of fiduciary relations are those existing between attorney and client, guardian and ward, principal and agent, executor and heir, trustee and cestui que trust, landlord and tenant, etc.

The misinformation promoted by the FTB telephone support people as follows constitutes a Constructive Fraud upon the sovereign Natural Born Citizens of California (but not “the State of California” or “this State”) that is unconscionable and pathetic and requires an immediate remedy by your agency.  The fraud is perpetuated by:

1. Avoidance of talking about the legal foundations for their beliefs

2. Overdependence on incomplete and inaccurate FTB publications which do not have the force of law

3. Unwillingness to explain or clarification the legal in your publications (including the 540 booklet) about the issues raised in this letter.

This fraud and extortion also makes you personally liable if you allow it to continue or don’t expose it, as your avoidance of exposing it constitutes a “conspiracy to commit fraud and extortion under the color of office”, which is punishable under the following codes (see http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html to read them for yourself):

·     18 U.S.C.S. §241 Conspiracy Against Rights of Citizens

·     Penal code §646.9(a):  Stalking

·     Penal code §182:  Criminal Conspiracy; Acts Constituting; Punishment; Venue

·     Penal code §§518-527: Extortion

·     Penal code §523:  Punishment for mailing threatening communications to effect extortion

·     Penal code §§186.9-186.11: Money laundering, fraud, and embezzlement

·     Civil Code §§3439-3439.12: Fraudulent Instruments and Transfers

·     26 U.S.C. Sec, 7201:  Attempt to evade or defeat tax (up to $100,000 fine or imprisonment not more than 5 years along with attorney fees).

·     26 U.S.C. Sec, 7203:  Willful Failure to File (fine up to $25,000 or imprisonment for one year or both)

·     Hundreds of different penalties for late filing or underpayment, as documented in Part 20 of the Internal Revenue Manual, available at: http://www.irs.gov/prod/bus_info/tax_pro/irm-part/part20.html IRS Liens and levies being imposed for nonpayment of taxes.

·     Receipt of threatening mail communications from the IRS (e.g. CP-515 “Notice of Deficiency” and subsequent “Notice of Lien and Levy”).

·     Constant anxiety from and harassment by IRS agents (by telephone and otherwise).

I will have the benefit of the wisdom of 24,000 people who have read my writings at http://famguardian.org in prosecuting you as well.  In addition, such a “lawless” violation of due process will earn you and everyone at the FTB who practices it a place in HELL!  In Jesus’ (God’s) own words in Matthew 13:41-43 (and let’s not forget that Matthew was the ONLY Apostle of Jesus who had been a tax collector and reformed his ways!):

“The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire.  There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.  Then the righteous will shine forth as the un in the kingdom of their Father.  He who has ears, let him hear!”

There’s clearly a warm spot waiting for you in HELL in a few years if you don’t heed what is in this letter, and perhaps the end will come sooner than you think through God’s influence or your own arrogance and evil (this is NOT a threat, but a good possibility and a reward for your deeds while employed with the FTB).

It would be an obvious violation of ethics, morality, good sense, Christian (and most other religious) virtues and teachings, and integrity on your part, having learned and been exposed to the truths in this letter and not being able to refute them, to not remind residents of California who have source addresses on their tax returns that are not in federal areas within California that they are NOT liable for the payment of state income taxes and can keep all their money. 

Finally, as you consider how to respond to this Request for Refund, I’d like to remind you of your moral and ethical obligations, which are clearly stated in the Code of Ethics for Government Service, which is prominently displayed in every Government workplace.  I assume as a representative of the FTB that you are an agent or employee of the California Government, and therefore, these rules also apply fully to you as well:

In particular, the fraud that is being perpetrated by the IRS and the FTB that U.S. citizens owe tax on income from sources in the United States is a violation of rules I, II, V, VII, IX, and X.  As a government servant, this letter is also my way of fulfilling rule IX above.  Asking you to put enclosure (5) into my official Administrative record is my way to make sure that other government servants who happen to stumble onto my files will also learn the truth and have the corruption exposed to them.  It would be unconscionable for you to prosecute me or punish me in any way for performing my duties above as a government servant.  Like me, the FTB as an agency and you as an individual need to work hard to deserve the public trust, which means you should stand up for what is right, even over the objections and misinformation of your supervisors if need be and over your own personal financial interests and job security.  That means you should remind everyone you know and income tax filers you are processing who you know are citizens with W-2’s coming from addresses within the U.S.*** that they aren’t constitutionally or statutorily obligated to pay federal income tax.  You, the California  Congress, and your employer (the FTB) all need to “come clean” as we clearly describe in section 8.9 of enclosure (5).

If you and your coworkers at the FTB won’t or can’t live up to these ethics rules and come clean, then quite frankly, there is no other way to look at the job you do than to say that you are an extortionist who is a member of an “organized crime ring”, and involved in “fraud” in the operation of a “continuing financial crimes enterprise”, which is criminally punishable under the many statutes clearly identified in section 10.7.1 of enclosure (5).  In fulfillment of my ethical obligations as a government servant as indicated above, I will pursue criminal prosecution of you under this section if you refuse or  impede responding to the legal concerns raised here,  or force me to litigate to fulfill what I am asking for in this Request for Refund.  Furthermore, sooner or later, you will have to respond to my concerns, because from now on, I will be filing (and litigating) in a similar manner EVERY YEAR.

SECTION 9:  COPYRIGHT LICENSE AGREEMENT

The information about me appearing on this correspondence and all attachments is considered copyrighted.  You do NOT have my permission to share any part of this correspondence or any of the attachments or any of the information about me already appearing in your computer systems with parties outside of the the Internal Revenue Service, absent a signed court order permitting discovery.  This would clearly violate my wishes and the COPYRIGHT that applies to this document.  The penalty you agree to personally pay out of your own personal pay and benefits for violating this provision is one million dollars for each instance.  You are directed to immediately remove all information about me from your computer system so that I do not continue to receive inappropriate, threatening, unlawful, and harassing notices that clearly violate my Constitutional rights.  Furthermore, if you abuse personal information about me to continue to send me harassing or threatening notices, then you are advised that each notice creates a one million dollar personal liability on your part for violation of the copyright.  This notice also covers any information submitted through third parties that originated with me, including but not limited to any tax form.

I insist under the authority of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and the First Amendment, that all identifying numbers, including SSN or TIN, that are related to me are COPYRIGHTED by me and are subject to disclosure ONLY under terms that I designate IN WRITING and IN ADVANCE for each specific instance of disclosure.

I insist that all identifying numbers relating to me be erased and completely eliminated and destroyed from the records of the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. government in their entirety.  If this is not done, the penalty for violating the copyright shall be one million dollars.  Acceptance of this application constitutes consent and asset to the terms of this license agreement.

Lastly, the use of the information appearing here on the part of the government in any legal proceeding is subject to the following copyright constraints, which the user must assent to or be found in violation of the copyright.  The grantor of this license reserves the right to waive any of these requirements in his own personal case:

1. If any part of the information is admitted into evidence in any court trial or hearing, then the WHOLE document, all enclosures, and all references must simultaneously be admitted into evidence.

2. None of the jurists or judges or attorneys may be in receipt of government benefits derived from income taxes in order to prevent conflict of interest in violation of 28 U.S.C. §144, 28 U.S.C. §455, and 18 U.S.C. §597.

3. No attorney may be licensed by the state or “admitted to practice” in order to prevent a conflict of interest.

SECTION 10:  PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES AND FUTURE RETURN FILINGS

This Tax Statement constitutes a Petition for Redress of Grievances protected under the First Amendment Petition Clause.  As such, it’s submission may not be penalized in any way or identified as “frivolous” by the recipient and subject to frivolous penalties.  The IRS and/or the government are specifically asked to rebut the overwhelming evidence presented here of the illegal enforcement of our country’s tax laws by the IRS.  Unless the Test for Tax Professionals included as Encl. (4) is answered truthfully, under oath, as a sworn affidavit by a person with delegated authority (demonstrated with evidence) to do so and the results are provided to me as a certified government document, then the IRS by their silence and inaction:

1. Is in violation of it’s own mission statement found in IRM 1.1.1.1 to help Americans understand their tax obligations with integrity and fairness to all.

2. Agrees entirely and completely with the position advocated in this document.

3. Should continue to use this return to satisfy all future filing requirements every time they want to assert that a filing requirement exists.

4. Is assured that it will not voluntarily receive any funds from me in satisfaction of any imputed tax debt, because no proof of a legitimate debt or liability has been provided.

5. Is in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692g, which requires that any person, including the IRS, who attempts to collect any debt, including tax debts, must provide original, admissible, certified evidence of a liability.  The IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, 112 Stat. 685, in section 3466 makes the IRS subject to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.  Therefore, the IRS is obligated to provide legal evidence of debt by providing a signed 23C Assessment Certificate AND producing a statute and implementing regulation that creates a legal liability and to perform collection and enforcement actions against a “nontaxpayer” such as myself.

As far as the statute of limitations for assessment and collection of all future revenues under Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code against this “nontaxpayer”, the IRS shall, from this point forward be required, as a condition of the copyright on this document, to start the Statute of Limitation Clock for Assessment and Collection of all future tax years now.  Starting of the clock now may only be averted if or when the IRS rebuts Encl (6) and Encl. (7) with an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury by a person with demonstrated delegated authority to do so and who works for that organization.

Unless and until the government fully satisfies the burden of proof imposed upon it as the moving party as described above, and thereby honors my due process rights under the Fourth And Fifth Amendments, it is without moral or legal authority to collect any monies from me under the guise of a “tax”.  It is estopped from any and all collection or enforcement actions:

“Estoppel in pais.  The doctrine by which a person may be precluded by his act or conduct, or silence when it is his duty to speak, from asserting a right which he otherwise would have had.  Mitchell v. McIntee, 15 Or.App. 85, 514 P.2d 1357, 1359.  The doctrine rests upon principle that when a person by his acts causes another to change his condition to his detriment, a person performing such acts is precluded from asserting a right which he otherwise might have had.  Peplinski v. Campbell, 37 Wash.2d 857, 226 P.2d 211, 213.  See also Equitable estoppel”

[Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 551]

The organic law upon which our country was founded says that I have a right to withhold payment of all taxes imputed to be due unless and until my Petition for Redress for illegal enforcement of the income tax laws is completely and fully answered.

"If money is wanted by Rulers who have in any manner oppressed the People, [the People] may retain [their money] until their grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief, without trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility." [see Journals of the Continental Congress, Wednesday, October 26, 1774]

SECTION 11:  CONCLUSIONS:

As I said earlier, if you can’t show me the law that creates a liability or you refuse to discuss the law, then you are a communist as Congress, your employer, defines it.  I am only asking that you satisfy the above requirement by demonstrating the laws that make me liable, and the source of your jurisdiction to impose this tax on a person such as myself who does not reside or live in the “United States”, who is not a “U.S. citizen” under 8 U.S.C. §1401, and who earns no “wages” or “income” as constitutionally defined.  All of my concerns about your lack of authority can quickly be addressed and we can move forward with me paying the tax that the law, not you, says that I owe, by you showing me the laws in this case that contradict my extensive research as found in Enclosure (6), the Test for Tax Professionals.  Upon receipt of answers by you in affidavit form, a showing of your delegated authority to provide such answers, and your authority to act as an enforcement officer with an enforcement pocket commission, then I will gladly and enthusiastically comply with the law, as any law abiding American would do.  If you do not provide your response as an affidavit like this one, then the return is not properly verified as required by 26 U.S.C. §6065 and your response does not meet the rules of evidence required for returns.  Your failure to timely respond to my concerns and to the requirements imposed upon you by the Internal Revenue Manual shall constitute a default judgment in my favor, and you will be served with a Notice of Default by a notary public, which will quickly convert to a judgment against you in any court of law  if you proceed against me.

"Silence is a species of conduct, and constitutes an implied representation of the existence of facts in question.  When silence is of such character and under such circumstances that it would become a fraud, it will operate as an Estoppel."  [Carmine v. Bowen, 64 AT. 932]

I thank you kindly in advance for your timely cooperation in being responsive to this Request for Refund.  I look forward to working closely with you in resolving any questions or disputes you might have at the lowest administrative level in order to avoid litigating this matter.  We both have the same objective of conserving hard-earned taxpayer (of which I am not) dollars so that these monies may be productively used elsewhere in the support of more legitimate and important state government functions such as public education, roads, prisons, courts, and the regulation and promotion of trade and commerce.    However, I have no reservations whatsoever about litigating this matter all the way up to the federal AND state appellate level, if you force me to, in order to get you to comply with your own laws, including 26 U.S.C., 26 CFR, the California Revenue and Taxation Code, and the Constitution of the United States.

I certify, under penalty of perjury within the laws of the state of California, that the facts, assertions, and evidence presented by me in this correspondence are true, correct, and complete to the best of my ability and can be relied upon for all determinations of fact in the adjudication of this Request for Refund.  I also certify under penalty of perjury that the extensive legal research that I have done on federal and state income taxes allows me to say with certainty that I would be committing fraud and perjury if I were to complete or submit a state or federal income tax return which identified anything other than a zero income tax liability for this year or any previous year for which I have erroneously paid these income taxes.

Lastly, I do not wish to have my First Amendment right to NOT communicate with my government infringed or my right to privacy and the security of my personal papers guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment infringed by being forced to submit a tax return with more information than what appears on this Request for Refund.    In all future correspondence, please write my name and address with other than all upper case letters, as I do not wish for our interactions to fall within the ambit of the Uniform Commercial Code.

“When the government fears the people, you have liberty.  When the people fear the government [or the IRS, for that matter], you have tyranny.”
(Thomas Jefferson, author of the Constitution of the United States)

“Better is a little with righteousness.
Than vast revenues without justice.”
(Bible, Prov. 16:8-9)

Very Respectfully,

/signature/

<<NAME>>

All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice, UCC 1-207

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE AND JURAT

STATE OF __________________ )

COUNTY OF ________________ )

I, _________________________, the undersigned mailer/server, being of sound mind and under no duress, do hereby certify, attest and affirm that the following facts are true and correct, to wit:

1.  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.

2. That, at the city of __________, County of __________and the State of ______________, on the _______________, 200__, that, on behalf of (name)_________________, a natural person, the undersigned personally deposited  the following documents (listed below) inside the envelope, sealed them and mailed them via U.S. Certified Mail, to wit: 

Total of ____ (  ) documents with combined total of __________ (___) pages.

3. That I personally mailed in the United States Postal Office, by Certified Mail # ____ ____ ____ ____ ____, Return Receipt Requested, at said City and State, one (1) complete set of ORIGINAL documents, as described in item 2 above, properly enveloped and addressed to: 

4. That I am at least 18 years of age;

5.  That I am not related to _______________ by blood, marriage, adoption, or employment, but serve as a “disinterested third party” (herein “Server”); and further,

6. That I am in no way connected to, or involved in or with, the person and/or matter at issue in this instant action.

I now affix my signature to these affirmations.

(Signature): _______________________________________________________, Mailer/Server

(Printed name): ____________________________________________________

Witness my hand and official seal.

Signature of Notary:_______________________________________

[1] Law Dictionary, Barron's, Copyright 1996, ISBN 0-8120-3096-6, pp. 464-465.