a AFFIDAVIT OF DURESS: ILLEGAL TAX ENFORCEMENT BY DE FACTO OFFICERS FORM INSTRUCTIONS Last revised: 8-19-2010 PURPOSE OF THIS FORM TL This form is provided for those who have become the target of illegal tax enforcement by state or federal officers. 1.2, Occasions when the form may provide useful include the following: 1.2.1. Ifyou are deposed in a legal proceeding against the government involving taxation, either as the target of the proceeding or asa disinterested third party witness. Bring this as a mandatory attachment and enter it into evidence a the start ofthe proceeding and also state on the record that you are under duress. 1.22, Send in advance via certified mail to a revenue agent who has called you into his office for a summons or ‘examination. 1.2.3, Send as an attachment to your annual Corrected Information Return Letter as a reliance defense to prevent becoming the target of criminal tax enforcement. 1.24, Send via certified mail to the Commissioner or Internal Revenue and/or the IRS Chief Counsel and demand ‘that they take immediate action to remedy the wrongs indicated. PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS: 2.1. Ifyou haven't already, read our article below: Techniques for Building a Good Administrative Record, Form 409.008 hnupz/sedm ore/ltemInfo/Respl.trs/AdminRecord/AdminRecord him. 22..‘Sign ths form in section 9. 23, Download and complete the following form and attach behind the Enclosure (1) cover page. Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, and Tax Sian, Form H02.001 ] sedm.org/Forms/F Download and complete the following form and alach Behind the Enclosure (2) cover page. Tax Form Attachment, Form H04.201 inspu/sedm.ong/Forms/Formindex.hun (RESOUNGES FOR FURTHER STUD Who.are “taxpayers” and who needs a “Taxpayer Identification Number”, Form #05.013 ingp/sedn org/Forms/Formlndex.him 3.2. Federal Jurisdiciion, Form #05.018: Section 3 describes what happens ifyou don’t attach this form to standard government forms you submit, which is that you are falsely “presumed” to be a “taxpayer” and a “resident” of the federal zone. husp//sedm.org/Forms/Eomindex.him 33. Presumption: Chief Weapon for Unlavfully Enlarging Federal Jurisdiction, Form 405.017. Shows how the {government abuses presumption to prejudice and destroy your constitutional rights. Ths is done mostly using the ‘words of art that this form redefines in such a way that they benefit rather than hurt you. hupi/sedm.org/FormyFormindex.him 24, “Affidavit of Duress: Mlegal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers, Form Instructions Copyright Form 02.05, Rev, 91972010 exaar_ A Toft i Sovereigny Education and Defense Ministry, psn oisAFFIDAVIT OF DURESS: ILLEGAL TAX ENFORCEMENT BY DE FACTO OFFICERS Last revised: 8/19/10 er a Pana Cass Te as “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 70f 38 Copyright Sovereignty Education end Defense Ministry, btsedm ore Form 02005, Rew. 81192010 ExrUBIT,TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS. TABLE OF AUTHORITIES... 1. Requirement for consent of the governed... 2. Rebutted Government Objections to the Requirement for Consent of the Governed 3. De Facto Officers are TERRORISTS and they MUST be prosecuted. 4. Sovereignty of Affiant.. 5. Legal Implications of sovereignty of Affiant -.m 6. Sources of unlawful duress from the de facto government actors. 7. Official Criminal Complaint Relating to False and/or Fraudulent Information Returns 8. Petition to remove duress 9. Affirm: 11, ENCLOSURE 2: TAX FORM ATTACHMENT... ‘TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Constitutional Provisions Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8. Article 4, Section 4 Article Te Article [and IV Article ID Declaration of independence. Fourteenth Amendment. ‘Thirteenth Amendment. Statutes 1US.C. §204. I8USC. $9201, 208, I8USC. §1028G\7), IsUS.C.§112 I8USC.§1512 I8USC. §1389Q) 18 U.S.C. §1956. 18 U.S.C. §201 18US.C.§201, 108,210, 211, and 912. 18 U.S.C. §208. 18 U.S.C. §210... 18 U.S.C. §21. IBUS.C. 233: 1BUSC.§3 18 US.C. §4...... 26 U.S.C. §6020(b) .. 26 U.S.C, $6041... 26 USC. §61036)0), 26USC. §6213(@X1).~ 26 U.S.C. $6671(b) 26 USC. 57208, TE earl “ffir of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcoment by De Facto Officers 20f 38 Copyright Sovereignyy Education and Defense Mins, olson A Form (2.005, Rev. 8192010 exuis_ AA26US.C. §7206. 26 US.C. §7343 26 US.C. §7408(d) 26US.C. S741 26 US. $7601. 26 USC. §7701(@)(30) 26 USC. §701(2)39).. 26 USC. §77010)().. 28 USC. §1332.. 28USC. 91332) 2BUSC. §1608 nn 28US.C. §1605(a}(2) 28 USC. §1746(1).. 28 US.C. §2201(@).. 28 USC. 1332(6) and (@).. 28 USC. 2018), 42 USC. $1983. 42 USC. $408(0)8).. SUS. §2108 5 U.S.C. §4502 through 4505. S0US.C. $841 sen BUSC. §1101@)@1) 8USC. §1101(2)22\B). 8USC $1401... 8US.C. 51408, Foreign Sovereign immunities Act of 1976 LR. Subtitle A through C.. LR.C. Subtitles A through C Internal Revenue Code mn Intemal Revenue Code Subiities A through C..--- Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. Chapter 21B.. UCC 1-207 en UCE 1-308... Rules ERCP. 17(6) ERGWP. 44.1. Fed R.Civ.P. 8(¢ Fed.Rul.Bv. 201 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(¢), Cases ‘American Banana Co. v. U.S, Fruit, 213 U.S. 347 a 357-358 z : 3 Bailey v. Alabama, 219 US. 219 (1911). Bailey v. Alabama, 219 U.S. 219, 238, et seq. 31 8. Ct. 145 Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co, v. Chambers, 73 Ohio St. 16; 76N-E. 91; 11 LRLA., NS., 1012 (1905). Bank of Augusta v Earle, 38 US. (13 Pat) 519, L.Ed, 274 (183).. Budd v. People of State of New York, 143 U.S. 517 (1892) Camden v. Allen, 2 Dutch 398 Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238, 56 S.Ct. 855 (1936). Chicago ex rel. Cohen v. Keane, 64 Ill 2d 559, 2 Ill Dec 285, 357 NE2d 452... Chicago Park Dist. v. Kenroy, Inc., 78 Ill 2d 555, 37 Il Dec 291, 402 NE2d 181 Chisholm v. Georgia, ? Dall. (U.S.) 419 (Dall) (1793). Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. (U.S.) 419, 454, | L.Ed, 440, 455 @DALL 1793 pp. 471-472... 20 “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 30736 Consright Sovereignty Education and Defense Mini, ip seim.o13 rm 22005 Rew 8192010 exer ACleveland Bed, of Ed. v. LaFleur (1974) 414 US 632, 639-640, 94 S.Ct. 1208, 121 Clyatt v. U'S,, 197 U.S. 207 (1905). Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S, at 392-393, n. Ex parte Blain, L. R. 12 Ch. Div. $22, 528 Fox v. Standard Oil Co. of N.J. 294 U.S. 87, 95-96 (1935). Frost v. Railroad Commission, 271 U.S. 583, 46 S.Ct. 605 (1926) Georgia Dep't of Human Resources v. Sistrunk, 249 Ga 543, 291 SE2d 524... Godesky v. Provo City Corp., Utah, 690 P.2d 541, 547... : Hiaumont v. Security State Bank, 220 Neb. 809, 374 N.W.2d2,6.... Head v. Gadsden Civil Service Bd., Ala.Civ.App., 389 So.2d 516, 519. Heiner v, Donnan, 285 U.S. 312 (1932) Indiana State Ethics Comm'n v. Nelson (Ind App) 656 NE24 1172 Jersey City v. Hague, 18 NJ 584, 115 A2d 8. Loan Association v. Topeka, 20 Wall. 655 (1874).. Long v. Rasmussen, 281 F. 236, 238 (1922) é Madlener v. Finley (ist Dist) 161 Ill App 34 796, 113 Il Dee 712, 515 NE2d 697. Manley v. Georgia, 279 U.S. 1 , 5-6, 49 S. Ct. 215mm Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 1 Cranch 137, 2 L.Ed 60 (1803) Matter of Mayor of N-Y., 11 Johns. 77. : Maxwell v. Dow, 176 USS. 381 (1900) Meese v. Keene, 481 U.S. 465, 484-485 (1987)... Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).. ‘New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)... ‘Nevwman-Green v. Alfonso Larrain, 490 U.S. 826 (1989)... Norther Liberties v St. John’s Church, 13 Pa. St, 104 People ex re. Atty. Gen. V. Naglee, 1 Cal. 234 (1850) People v. Meri, 2 Park. Crim. Rep. $90, 596. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 542 (1896) . Pray v. Norther Liberties, 31 Pa St, 69... Sharpless v. Mayor, supra; Hanson v. Vernon, 27 Ia.,47 State ex rol. Nagle ¥. Sullivan, 98 Mont 425, 40 P2d'995, 99 ALR 321 State v. Carter, 27 N. J. L499. State v. Haremza, 213 Kan, 201, 513 P.2d 1217, 1222... Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000) USS. Supreme Court in United States v. Will US. v. Butler, 297 US. | (1936).. US. v. Cooper, 312 U.S, 600, 604, 61 SCt 742 (194i). USS. V. United Mine Workers of Ameria, 330 U.S, 258, 67 SC1677 (1947) USS. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 US. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456; 42 L.Ed, 890 (1898). United States v. Boylan (CA1 Mass) 898 F2d 230, 29 Fed Rules Evid Serv United States v. Holzer (CAT If) 816 F24 304... Viandis v. Kline (1973) 412 US. 441, 449, 95 S.Ct 2230, 2235 on. ‘Westem Union Telegraph Co, v. Lenfoot, 323 U.S. 490, 502 (ass). Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667 (1979).. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356; 6 S.Ct. 1064 (1886) ‘Yu Cong Eng v. Trinidad, 271 U.S. 500 (1926). mM Be, 297 US. 1 (1 Other Authorities 2A. Singer, Sutherand on Stats and SatstoryConsucton § 47.07 p52, and, 10 (Sh. 1992) 10 63C Am.tur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §24 ‘American Bar Association (ABA). ‘American Jurisprudence 2d, Duress, Section 21 Black’s Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, p. 1693 . Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition p. 1190. Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1498, ‘Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers (Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Mini, iisedm.oxs Farm (2.05, Rev. 81192010, EMuUBITBlack's Law Dictionary, Chief White Haw Confucius, $00 B.C. a. Congressman Trafican CCorporatizaion and Privatization ofthe Government, Form #05.024 De Facto Government Seam, Form #05.043, - Department of Homeland Security. Enclosure (1): Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, and Tax Status. Enclosure 2): Tax Form Attachment nn Enclosures (I) and @) Federal Jurisdiction, Form #05 018 Federal Reserv Flawed Tax Arguments o Avoid, Form #08.004...... Government Insttuted Slavery Using Franchises, Form #05. Internal Revenue Manual... IRS forms W-2, 1098, 1089, 1042-8, Legal Notice of Change in Dom ixth Edition, p. 504. Legal Requirement to File Mark Twain. Meaning of the Word “Frivolous”, Form #95.027 Meaning ofthe words “includes” and “including”, Form #05.014 ‘Montesquieu... Origins and Authority ofthe Intemal Revenue Service, Form 405.005. Political Jurisdiction, Form 405.004 Presumption: Chief Weapon for Uniawfully Enlarging Federal Jurisdiction, Form #05.017 . Reasonable Belief About Income Tax Liability, Form #05.007 i Rebuted Version of Congressional Research Service Report 97-58A: Frequently Asked Questions Conceming the Federal Income Tax, Form #08,006... Rebutted Version ofthe IRS “The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments”, Form #08.005, Requirement for Consent, Form #05.003. : Requirement for Consent, Form #05,003, Sections 10 through 13.7 Requirement for Consent, Form #05,003, Sections 10.10.5 Requirement for Consent, Form #05.003, Sections 13 through 13.7 on. Rules of Presumption and Statutory Interpretation, Litigation Tool #01.006 Rules of Statutory Presumption and Interpretation, Form #01.006. Rutter Group Practice Guide-Federal Civil Trials and Evidence, paragraph 8:4993, page BK-34.. ‘Senator Sam Ervin, during Watergate hearing - Socialism: The New American Civil Religion, Form #05.016. Spirit of Laws, Charles de Montesquieu ‘The “Trade or Business” Scam, Form #05.001 nn ‘The Great IRS Hoax, Form #1 1,302 son nennan ‘The Money Seam, Form #05.042.. ‘The REAL Matrix... ‘The Spirit of Laws.. : ‘Thomas Jefferson to Franeis Gilmer, ‘Temas feos: Yt Deeg AGT. BS 3:0. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, 1983, ISBN 0-87779-509-6, p. 1218 Why Domicile and Becoming a “Taxpayer” Require Your Consent, Form #05.002... Why Penalties are Illegal for Anything but Government Franchisees, Employees, ‘Wy the Government Cant Lawfly Asses Human Beings With an Income Tax Lishiliy Without Tht ‘Consent, Form +#05.011.. ‘Your Exclusive Right to Declare or Establish Your Civil Status, Form #13.008.. 7" “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 50f 38 pie Sree con and ese Wty, te Falmdnons ov 892010 exon AScriptures 1 Sam, 12:12, 19. Ezekial 20:10-20 Gal. 5:18. Isaiah 33:22. Isaiah 58:6... James 1:27. James 4:4... = Laws ofthe Bible, Form #13.001 Mark ‘Matt. 10:42-45. Matt. 8:19-20, Revelation 19:19... . Revelation chapters 17 t0 19... Rom, 74-6. ‘Ten Commandments... “Affidavit of Duress: Tegal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 6 of 8 Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Mints, hsp semre Form 02.008, Rex 1192010 exuer__Lf.The purpose of this affidavit to develop legally admissible evidence upon which a court may and should rely in establishing evidence supporting a reasonable belief that: 1 2 All of the facts stated in ‘The Opposing party is unlawfully enforcing against the A.fiant, resulting ina constitutional tort, Afiant is under illegal duress from actors and persons that renders any and all testimony on every government tax form suspect and even involuntarily fraudulent. Aliant pleads duress under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(¢ . Any court officiating over this dispute has a duty to eliminate ail forms of duress in the context of this proceeding that are within its jurisdiction inthe interests of justice. Aliant solicits assistance and protection from law enforcement personnel in removing all identified sources of illegal duress in order thatthe eredibility of all evidence gathered may be maintained, Icis inappropriate to request, rely upon, or grant testimony of or discovery against the Affiant unless and until those engaging in enforcement against the affiant or the court exercises all powers available to it in eliminating said duress. ‘Meeting this requirement is important because the existence of said duress renders all statements and actions relating to ‘Affiant in the context ofthis proceeding, other than this affidavit, as inadmissible as evidence. ‘Affiant is a foreign sovercign not subject to the jurisdiction of the taxing agency, and therefore not bound to honor its requests except through comity and/or voluntary cooperation. 7.1. Hissher domicile is the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. ‘The Bible says that the Earth belongs to God and NOT to any man, Therefore, Affiant has no domicile within the jurisdiction of any man-made court or government. 7.2. Affiant is a “Stateless person” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. §1332 because he does not live within any of the “States” defined in 28 U.S.C. §1332(@). See Newman-Green v. Alfonso Larrain, 490 U.S, $26 (1989). 73. Affiant’s status is protected by the CONSTITUTIONAL Diversity of Citizenship described in the Constitution, Article IIl, Section 2. He is NOT protected by the STATUTORY Diversity of Citizenship described in 28 U.S.C. {§1332 because the “State” described in 28 U.S.C. §1332(¢) does not include states of the Union, which are “foreign states” with respect to nearly all federal subject matters, including income taxation. 7.4, Affiant is minister ofa foreign state with diplomatic immunity, which foreign state is the Kingdom of Heaven. 7/5. Any court entertaining this matter would be involving themselves in “political questions” in order to change either the declared citizenship or domicile or franchise status of the Affiant as described herein, because these are “political questions” not subject to involuntary change by the court without criminal consequences. See: Political Jurisdiction, Form #05.004 //sedm.ore/Forms/Formindex. htm 76. ‘The Affiant’s voluntary choice of domicile and citizenship and franchise status to date have not been challenged ‘with anything but false and unconstitutional “presumption” by the de facto officers instituting illegal enforcement or by any court entertaining this matter. The court cannot participate in any such prejudicial presumption without violating the oath of its PUBLIC officers to support and defend the Constitution and breaching the solemn fiduciary duty they owe tothe “public”, of which the AGfiant is a member, “The pero crete presumptions naa means ofeap fom constants” b 20S. 984 (1964) {fidavit are based on personal knowledge of the Affiant. Affiant has personally read and researched all of the authorities cited and has a firm belief about their accuracy and authority. Affiant is also willing to testify to al ofthe facts stated herein under oath. 1 juirement the governed ‘There are only two types of governments: Government by consent: This type of government serves the people from below. Pu acl am et ons oem Xa Rm thse wh ae ome mes uh {ie ransom for mane.” (Mat 1032-45, Bible, NIV] “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 7 of 38 ‘Cone Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, lsc csn Form (2.08 Rev 8192010 enue A1 2, Terrorist government: This type of government rules from above by force or fraud or both and always results in 2 idolatry toward government. This type of govemment is described as “the Beast” in Rev. 19:19, 2 ‘Than all the elders of lraet gathered together and came to Sema a Rnnah, ane sal to him, “Lok, you are old and your sons do not wali your wa. Now make us a Kine to judge ws the all dhe nations Jord be OVER then” uth hing doles Samael when hey sa, “Ge wa od ws.” So Sel pred oe Lord mn ‘MelGodh that should not reign over them According 1o alte works which ey haw dove Since he dey that Treg them pout of Eye, even this dy ts Kings in this corel the are doing te vow ata [gverament becoming idlary]. Now therefore, heed ter voice, However rou shal slants foravarn then and show them he behavior ofthe Rng whe vilecgn ver dem" 8 So Same ol all he words ofthe LORD tothe people who asked him fora king, And he said, "Ths wil be u ‘over pou He ell, ” nest ooung men, and your donkeys, and put them to his work Lax SLAVES], He wil take [STEALL a teach = ‘vou sheet, And vou wil be his scrvants. And you wil crv out in that day because of our kine whom you = ‘han chosen for ourseves ond he LORD wil not hear you a tha day. ™ Nevertheless the people refed obey the voice of Samuel: andthe sai °No, bul we wil awe a ing oer = tu; that we azo may be like al the mations and dat cur King mey jade us ae go out bafore us and fight our = atten” ” {1 Sam, 84-20, Bb, NOV x In the American republican form of government mandate by Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution, the requirement for » consent in all human interactions is the essence and the foundation of all of our sovereignty as individuals. This ye requirement is also the foundation for our system of law, starting with the Declaration of Independence and going down x» from there, It is an undisputed fact that the Declaration of Independence states that all government authority derives from x the “consent of the governed”: a ‘That secure these rights, goverment are nue among men deriving ther jus powers frm the consent * ofthe governed.” % (Declaration of independence} x Therefore, any authority or “force of law” asserted by government in a civil matter which does not demonstrably proceed directly from the consent of the governed is unjust by implication. “A State doesnot cme its origin tothe Goverment ofthe Unie Sates, in the highest rin any oft branches. Iwas in existence Before Ue dere ie cathriy rom the sume pure ae sored sous sell The ° soltary and deliberate chole ofthe people States aiogther exempt from the jarsdiction ofthe Courts u (ofthe Unie Stoes, oreo amy other exteriar author, unless m the special tmaances when te general ® Government has power dered foo the Constitution itself © [Chiholm Georgia 2 Dall (1S) 419 (Dal) (1703) ‘4 It is an undisputed fact that all civil law derives from consent of the governed and that See: for tax is a CIVIL liability Why: Domicile and Becoming a “Taxpaver” Require Your Consent, Form #05 002 [ http:/sedm,orw/Forms/Formindex.htm 4 Byen the so-called criminal provisions of the LR.C. are PENAL and contractual rather than criminal in a common law ‘sense. They are, in fact, incidents of a civil franchise administered pursuant to Article I of the Constitution rather than Article III of the Constitution on ONLY federal territory. Since I never expressly consented to the civil franchise in the ‘» manner that ONLY I prescribe, even the criminal provisions do not apply to me. See: “Tffidavt of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers $0f38 ‘Conn Soveregny Education and Defense Ministry ism rt Form (00s ev 8192010 een _AA__we seu Aeuseuvesy ing Franchises, Form #05.030, Sections 12 through 12.3 {/sedm.org/F orms/Formindex. him Its also an undisputed fact that criminal law does not require consent of the governed because it involves police powers ‘and public protection from harm, and if criminals had to consent, we couldn't prevent any harm to the public. “No man has a natural righ to commit agaression onthe equal rights of another and this i al fend ONLY fram hich the laws ugh to etal ha" ‘Thomas Jefrson fo Francis Ger 1916. ME 15:24 ‘SOURCE: hp amr ore Subecte Polit Dhomasferson ef} “Wh al fur] blessings what more is necesar to make us « happy and a prosperous people? Stil one thing ‘mare fll ci ‘hal iave them aterse feet repute tel on pursuts of industry ad prover esl nt ake From the mouth of labor the bread thas eared. This isthe sum of good goverment and si necessary to lose the ciel of ou oites" ‘Tomas Jeferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801, ME 3:320] Since this isa civil and not a criminal proceeding, then it must proceed entirely upon voluntary consent of both partes in some form. The opposing party has been provided with absolutely no evidence of consent to date. That consent must be expressed IN WRITING as prescribed by the following document you were sent. It MAY NOT be implied or assumed. Notice “Tizens fe i Form 10.001, Sections # through 44 Hntpy/sedmorg/Forms/Formindex htm Consequently, Affiant: 1, Has not surrendered any sovereign immunity by virtue of any act of consent in any form in this case and has not given the opposing party any kind of consent to enforce or proceed on any issue. 2. Maintains his status as a foreign sovereign, nonresident, and transient foreign in relati 3. May approach the United States govemment only in equity, and not under the provisions of any civil law or franchise. ‘Therefore, those enforcing any civil obligation are, in fact, engaging in an act of terrorism and fraud, if they claim to be a “government” operating in a foreign jurisdiction or upon those situated in a legislatively foreign jurisdiction such as a constitutional but not statutory State. 2, Rebutted Government Objections to the Requirement for Consent of the Governed ‘No doubt, government tax collectors may be inclined to say that payment of “taxes” is not voluntary or consensual. This is subterfuge and FRAUD. In fact: 1. Yes, income taxes under LR.C. Subtitle A through C are NOT voluntary for statutory “taxpayers” under 26 U.S.C. §770\(aX(14), BUT 1.1. Not everyone is statutory “taxpayer”. 12. You have to VOLUNTEER to become one. 13. You can't be one without FIRST occupying a public office in the U.S. government BEFORE it may be enforced. The intemal Revenue Code does NOT create any new public offices, but simply texes and regulates EXISTING public offices within the national goverment but not any state government. 1.4. Rights of those protected by the Constitution and domiciled within a constitutional but not statutory state ofthe Union are “unalienable” per the Declaration of Independence, which the House of Representatives website identifies “organic law”. Hence, even if they wanted to, they could not conspire or consent with anyone in the national government to contract away or give away rights, because those rights are unalienable. It isa breach of the Constitution, which is a trust indenture, and a violation of fiduciary duty for a public officer to make a ‘business out of alienating, taxing, and regulating PRIVATE rights, the protection of which i the SOLE purpose for establishing government to begin wih, infact. “Unalenabe. inalienable: incapable of being alemed thats, sold and wansfrred." [Black's Law Diconary, Fourth Eaton, p. 1693] ‘Affidavit of Duress: Mlegal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 9 of 38 (Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Minky, hip sedmorn, Form 02005, Rew. 8192010 ae2. The Internal Revenue Code is prima facie evidence, according to 1 U.S.C. §204, which means it is nothing but a big statutory presumption if that presumption adversely affects any constitutional right. "The power to crete presumptions i not a mca of scape from constiatonal restrictions” (Bien York Times v Sallam, 376US. 254 (1063) "Hs apparent that a cantnutona proton cannot be transgressed indirectly hy the creation of a stantory resumption any more than it canbe violated by direct enactment. The power to create presumptions 18 not & Imeans of escape fram consitusional rections. * (Baie v Alabama, 219 US 219 (1911)] ‘The LR.C. therefore cannot and does not acquire the “force of law” unless and until I am a “public officer” AND after I ‘acquire that status, to consent fo become a statutory “taxpayer”. I CANNOT, however, simply CREATE a public office by consenting to participate and if I do, I have committed the crime found in 18 U.S.C. §912. See: ‘Requirement for Consent, Form #05.003, Sections 13 through 13.7 1//sedm.org/Forms/Formindex him 3. The entire Intemal Revenue Code Subtitles A through C codily a voluntary excise taxable franchise called a “trade or business”, which is defined as “the functions of a publie office” in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(26). Those who consent to the franchise call themselves statutory “taxpayers” per 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(14). Those who don't call themselves nonresidents not engaged in a “trade or business” and “nontaxpayers”. "Thereven as area cade o system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to expaers aud. nota nonaxpavers The later are hou! thet scape. No procedure is presrbed for nontapayers ad Imo attemp is made faa ay oftheir rights and romediesin duc cours of law. With dem Congres des not (sume dea, an they are ner af te subject nor ofthe obec af the reveme ave.” “The sinc between persone ond things within the scope ofthe revense Les and those witht is vial" (ang v Rasmussen, 281 F. 236, 238 (1922)) 4. It isa violation of due process of law, THEFT, and TREASON for anyone in the government to: 4.1, Add anything to the definitions found in enacted law. It represents an attempt to break down the separation of ‘powers between the states and the national government that is the foundation of the Constitution, in fact. "When stone includes on expici, definition, we must follow that definition, even iC it varies from that ets ordinary meaning. Mosse +. Keere, 481 US. 463, 44-485 (1987) (1 i asiomatic Tat the ttt ‘efit of he frm exces unstated meanings of that term’): Colautv. Frankin, 439 US. af 392-393, n 410 (Asa rae, "a definition which declares what aterm "means"... excludes ary meding thi i ot tated"), ‘Wesiem Untan Telegraph Ca. Lenroot, 323 US. 4B, 302 (1943); Fax, Standard OH! Co. of Wl, 294 US. 87, 95-96 (1935) Cardozo J): see also 24 N. Singer. Suerlad on States and Statuary Conirction § 7.07, p. 152, and n 10 (th ed 1992) collecting case). Tat I oS, the slate read asa whe,” po a 998 (330 US. 943} (THOMAS. dissenting, leads the rade to a defition. Tha nition ds ot icide the Autorney General's rosiction ~ "the child wp tothe head” lis words, “subsianal portion,” indicate the contrary. (Sienbore ». Carhart, 30. 914 7000)) 42. Prejudicially PRESUME that I have a status under the franchise without evidence that proves that | satisfy the criteria by showing that the definitions EXPRESSLY INCLUDE that which you want to include. See: Presumption: Chief Weapon for Unlawfully Enlarging Federal Jurisdiction, Form #05.017 btp,/sedm, org/Forms/Formindex.ht 4.3. Enforce the Internal Revenue Code outside of the Only remaining intemal revenue district, which isthe District of Columbia See 26 U.S.C. §7601 and also: ‘Federal Jurisdiction, Form #05.018 hhupy/sedm.org/Forms/Formlndex. hn 5. Noone can lawfully make me a “taxpayer” EXCEPT me, because no one can lawfully donate your otherwise private property to a public use, public purpose, or a public office without your consent. If they do, they are committing ‘THEFT and violating the Fifth Amendment Takings clause. 5.1. Federal judges cannot declare anyone either a “taxpayer” or a “nontaxpayes” per 28 U.S.C. §2201(a) forbids this. 5.2. Neither federal judges nor the IRS can lawfully expand the definitions of words within the LR.C. to include anything or class of things no EXPRESSLY identified. This kind of verbicide constitutes THEFT and TREASON. See the following for a defense against such cruel and criminal tactics by THIEVING public servants: “Aifdavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 100/38 Convrig Snereon Ect nd Defoe Mn, ss oct Ferm 200, fo 8192010 sxmare_ A# seeRuREe ae eeees bee ae ‘Rules of Presuumpiion and Statutory Interpretation, Litigation Tool ¥01.006 hpy/secim.ore/Forms/Formindex.htm ‘53. Neither the IRS nor any court can lawfully make anyone into a “taxpayer” by PRESUMPTION or without demonstrating your EXPRESS consent to be one in a format that | and anyone else, specify. See: ‘Presumption: Chief Weapon for Unlawfully Enlarging Federal Jurisdiction, Form #05.017 ‘hup:/sedm.org/Forms/Formindex. htm 5.4. Third parties cannot unilaterally or lawTully elect you lato public office By filing an information return that constitutes prima facie evidence that you lawfully occupy such a public office. See 26 U.S.C. §6041(a). All such false reports ar a criminal offense. See: ‘Correcting Erroneous Information Returns, Form #04.001 itp FonmsiFé 3. De Facto Officers are TERRORISTS and they MUST be prosecuted Because I never expressly consented to occupy a public office in the U.S. government AND select a domicile on federal territory, then the laws de facto officers seek to enforce do not have the “force of law” in my case. Civil statutes can only acquire the force of law with my express consent manifested in a form that I and not any government prescribes. Consens fact legem. Consent makes te lew. A contract ea law between the partes, which ean acquire force only by consent [Bouter's Maxims of Lr. 1856, SOURCE: ht: /Mamgvardian ore Publication’ Boswisr MaxinsOfLaw/BowsrsMaxins hin) (Once again, no such consent has ever been oF will ever be provided, and therefore what de facto officers instituting this illegal enforcement are doing isan act of intemationalterorism, organized crime, and THEFT. 1 remind the reader thatthe states of the Union continue to be “nations” and also legislatively “foreign” in respect to the United States federal corporation, "The Sieesbenveen each ator are sovereign and ndgpendent They ae distinct an separa sverige, except mo far ey have parted wih some ofthe atrbutes of soverotgnt by the Consinuion. ‘They continue we nations, wich all he igh, and unr aller national ebigatins, ad wih ll Ou right of nations it ‘very particular. The right ofeach State, wher no 0 yelded wp, remain abso.” {Bank of Augusta Bare, 38 US, (13 Pot) $19, 10 Lal 374 (1839)) “In determining the boundaries of apparent confting powers between states and the general government the proper question is, not so mach what has boon ntrms, reserved othe ste, as What has Ben, express or by necessary: impleaion. granted By te peopl othe atonal grneroment or ach date pase ll the posers of an independent and soversign nation, extent so far at they have bao ceded away by the ‘onsitin. The federal governments bu a creature ofthe people of ete. ae ean oe appoied Prine doch poy at hon ere ore) pd ahr te arr is ‘People oxreAty. Gen. V. Nagle, Cal 24 (1850) Hence, the de facto officers instituting this ilegal enforcement are TERRORISTS. Whereis the Department of Homeland Security when you REALLY need them? If they were doing their job, almost the entire national government would be in prison camps, and especially those who Mark Twain affectionately calls “The District of Criminals”, which apparently has become a haven for international terrorism, Even the beasts own definition of “terrorism”, afterall, describes it as violence or coercion implemented through fear and intended to politically influence a population. ‘That fear is being created through “selective enforcement”, ignoring the requirements of law, and abusive and excessive spending and debt that will destroy al future generations and enslave my own children. Such violence and coercion also includes acts of financial terrorism that steal money or deprive me of the ability to support myself or my family Tle 28: diol Adminstration PARTO~ORGANIZATION OF THB DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ‘SAS General fmctions, (0 Exercise Lead Agency responttily 1m tmvesigaring all crimes for which i has primary or concurrent huisdition and seich involve lerorst activites or ate in preparation of terrors actives within the “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 1 of 38 Copyright Sovereignty Eduction and Defense Minis, biteslm.018 Farm (2.005, ev. 81192010, exumrr_ Astanory jurisdetion of the United States. Witkin the United Sees, this would include the collection, oordnaton analsis management and dissemination of ineligence and criminal infamation as appropriate ‘another Feral agency ides an weal who i eraged in terrorist ectivies or acs m preparation ofterrori acts that agency 8 requested promptly not the FB, Terarsm includes the unl ase eb force and violence aginst persons or propery to intimidate or core a government the cian epilation or any segment there, urherance of elce oscil abet. “ernorism_ te semaicuse of error esp. asa means of coercion [Webster's Ninth New Collegiae Dictionary, 1983, ISBN 0877795004 p. 1218) In this case, the “political objective” described above is to compel me out of fear to nominate a de facto band of thieves and communists masquerading as “government” as my “protector” by calling myself a statutory “citizen”, “resident”, “inhabitant”, domiciliary, “U.S. person”...ete. on a government form and therefore a customer of a Nazi “protection racket". All of these statuses have in common a domicile on federal territory, which is a political choice that de facto government terrorism is designed to compel. Making that compelled and fraudulent choice to identify myself as a resident alien by filing a 1040 form also makes me a criminal by sponsoring obvious and widespread acts of international terrorism. {WDLELS > PARTI > CHAPTER 13B> § 23324 23374 Finacial rasan (0 Ofene— ey spre reais aed yh Srey of he Ten a cnn wh te See of ‘Site whoove, being e United Sttr person, knowing or heing reasonable caus o Row that cou it under setae 6) of the Exper Adnintratn A s intrationa fn fnencal ransaton with ‘Mull beled under tse, morsoned for not mar han 10 wears, bach, ‘The international terrorism that these de facto officers are engaged in is thoroughly described in the following: The REAL Matrix hp:/femguerdian org/Media"The REAL. Matrixwmy Itis an undisputed fact that it is FRAUD to claim to be a resident ofa foreign jurisdiction that I have never physically lived at. The LR.C. also does NOT authorize nonresidents to claim to be statutory residents who don’t physically live on federal territory unless they are married to people who do, which I don't satisfy." The “resident” therefore referred to in all federal franchise “codes” such as the income tax codified in LR.C. Subtitles A through C can really only mean a government contractor acting as a public officer and officer of the federal corporation as described in 26 U.S.C. §6671(b) and 26 U.S.C. §7343, ‘The only thing a lawful de jure government has ever had legal authority to impose dutics upon people with is law regulating ONLY its own officers and employees. Otherwise, the Thirteenth Amendment has always prohibited involuntary servitude. ‘And for those who won't make the choice to commit fraud by declaring themselves a statutory “U.S. person” and public officer per 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(30) voluntarily, the de facto thieves and the franchise federal courts they share their plunder with: 1. Deny me any remedy at all because nonresidents and nontaxpayers who are the vietim of criminal acts by de facto officers have no remedy in federal courts or in the Internal Revenue Code itself. 2. Literally kidnap my identity and move it to the District of Criminals by filing a RESIDENT tax form, Form 1040, without my consent as part of the Automated Substitute For Retum (ASFR) process executed under 26 U.S.C. 3602006). 3. Prosecute people for refusing to volunteer into this office with bogus highly publicized trials of famous personalities for “failure to file” under 26 U.S.C. §7203. The de facto goverment are terrorists... al of them. ‘The de facto officers engage in the crimes above even though they KNOW they have NO AUTHORITY to do assessments ‘against human beings or nonresidents and the Internal Revenue Service's own Intemal Revenue Manual acknowledges this " See 26 CFR §1.871-2. “Affidavit of Duress: Tegal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 12 of 38 Conyrigt: Ecducation and Defense Ministry, isco ors Form 02005, Rew 81192010 sxrunrr._ ff1 fact. They change my status without my consent and against my will to that of a “resident” even when they have in their 2 possession affidavits of status indicating being a nonresident. See: the Government Can't Assess sings With an Income Tax Liability Wi i, Form #05011 bttp:/sedm org/Forms/Formlndex. tm ‘This brand of legal terrorism under the color but without the actual authority of law is not only FRAUD, but itis criminal Kidnapping, whether it is physical or virtuaVlegal. Kidnapping is the hallmark of terrorists, and the de facto thieves instituting this unlawful collection are terrorists or the servant of terrorists. And HERE is how the U.S. Supreme Court politely refers to this kind of legal kidnapping. ‘The phrase “be able to caich” really means KIDNAP the identity of in the case of the income tax. The de facto officers instituting this unlawful collection are PREDATORS, not a PROTECTORS: " “the ions would oad Incase wa. of any staat a. {B.oach Tn ihe cae ofthe present tar, the inprobablty of the Unie Ses atomping to make acs done In Panama or Casta Ria criminal is obvious, yt the law begins by making criminal the ais for Which ies ‘righ to sue. We Hunk I entirely plan ha what the defendant dn Panama or Casta Rica not wih he ‘cope ofthe statute so far as the present sit x concerned. Other objections ofa serious nature are urge. ut need not be dacusted. Taner a a1 357-355) 2» And here are one Native American Indian’s words on fraud and treachery by a corrupted United States government that 21 STOLE his lands, gave him diseased blankets that killed his family, and moved him into the middie of the desert to die of 22 thirst after discovering gold on his reservation: SURE; YOU CAN TRU THE GOVERNMENT. ™ THE WORLD ACCORDING TO CHEF WHITE HAWK 3 1. Noose Whe man atorney who change meaning of words. a 2. Noirs Chen lack robe and hammer. He kidngp mary 2 3. No trastmanin black clothes wth gun and red light en moving wagon. e tax eallecor for White Chief a back robe an hammer. 4 Notre White man in black robe with wooden hammer, He lie mach, 3. Notre White Chefwho break treaty many tes. {6 Notre Whit man who love green paper. 7 Notast White man who mats money out of air & Notre White man who lan phony money and mate you payback tn sweat 9. Notrst White Chief who take your pay before you reetve i = 10. Notas black Chief who nie enemy lve land 1, leno righ tobe Chief who not bor in and 12 No ast black Chie who blame former Whue Chi or everything. 13, ‘No trast back Chie who no proect reseretion from those who sneak an reservation to ste what do ro ‘nt belong othe ® 14, Notrast White man that no respect he Great Creator Spirit. " 15, Noma We man that no ke hs promise. 2 16, No trast White man that dona pray to Great Spr ® 17, Nota Wt man who kl arbor babies with pear “ 18, No trast White Chief whe do not read the good Book. 6 13, Notmst White man wh believes the earth belongs othe great White chief. * 20. Notas Whe man wo devise plan tomate slave ofall man. “Affidavit of Duress: Mlegal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 73 of 38 ‘Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Minky, it: /secm ore a Form 02.005, Rex. 81792010, -BXHIBIT:' [Chief White Hawk} 2 And HOW does “Chief in black robe and hammer” stealthily kidnap people or their legal identity and move it from a 3 legislatively foreign state such as a Constitutional but not statutory state of the Union to what Mark Twain calls “The 4 District of Criminals? By: 5 1. Making prejudicial presumptions about their status or what the law requires, ‘ (1) [4993] Conetusve presumptions afetng protected interests: 7 A conchsve presumption maybe defeated where its application would impair a party’ constitonaly- : rotected liberty or property interests. In such eases, conclusive ° ‘bars due process and equal protection rights, [Vandi v. Kline (1973) 12 US. 14, 49, 93 SCI 225, © 2235; Cleveland Bed. of Ev. LaFleur (1974) 414 US 532, 63-640, 94 SCL. 1208, 1215 presumprion wer h nos law that unmarried fathers are unfit velats process} » ‘ater Grn Proce Gukde-Federal Cv Tris aed Evidence paraaraoh $4903, page SK] » For further exhaustive details, see and rebut: ‘Presumption: Chief Weapon for Unlawfully Enlarging Federal Jurisdiction, Form #05.017 Lhttpz/sedm.org/Forms/Formindex.htm 2. Willfully omitting to address ALL the issues raised, and thereby violating Ul " trustee under the Constitution trust indenture, fiduciary duty asa public officer and “ “As exressed there, the powers delegted 0a publi oer ae hold in treat fr the peopl an are tb " circ eof th gvronet oof lies ho may ete iret of te ofc = 2 Sahat bee cea sente end nes fds ana acu a ae 7 - iiss: ten x Frthermore hs bon sed tha ny enero tds) The pele eta itch fend 0 akan = ‘ul confers andr mine te sens op scart fr nd gh i ei publ poe” & 185C dm-aw-a Publics and Employes $247), 2» 3. Misrepresenting a private law franchise as public law, and thereby evading the government's duty to demonstrate proof a of consent on the record ofthe proceedings that would cause a waiver of sovercign immunity. The Internal Revenue = Code Subtitles A through C area private law franchise that acquire force of law ONLY jn the case of MY consent, and » the government as moving party asserting a lability MUST demonstrate proof of consent in order to enforee it. The x» fact thatthe LR.C. Subtitles A through C are private law isthe ONLY reason that disputes relating to it can be = officiated in an Article I legislative franchise court as required by 26 U.S.C. §7441. See: * State ex rel. Nagle v. Sullivan, 98 Mont 425, 40 P2d 995, 99 ALR 321; Jersey City v. Hague, 18 NI 584, 115 A2d 8, > Georgia Deptt of Human Resources v. Sistrunk, 249 Ga 543, 291 SE2d 524. A public official is held in public trust. Madltener v. Finley (Ist Dist) 161 Ill App 34 796, 113 Ill Dee 712, 515 NE2d 697, app gr 117 Ill Dec 226, 520 NE2d 387 and revd on other grounds 128 Ill 2d 147, 131 Ill Dee 145, $38 NE2d 520, * Chicago Park Dist. v. Kenroy, Inc. 78 Ill 2d 555, 37 Ill Dee 291, 402 NE2d 181, appeal after remand (Ist Dist) 107 Il ‘App 34 222, 63 Ill Dec 134, 437 NE2d 783. * United States v. Holzer (CAT Ill 816 F2d 304 and vacated, remanded on other grounds 484 U.S. 807, 98 L Ed 2d 18, 108 S Cr 53, on remand (CA7 Il) 840 F2d 1343, cert den 486 U.S. 1035, 100 L Ed 2d 608, 108 S Ct 2022 and (criticized ‘on other grounds by United States v. Osser (C3 Pa) 864 F2d 1056) and (superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in United States v. Little (CAS Miss) 889 F2d 1367) and (among conflicting authorities on other grounds noted in United States v. Boylan (CAI Mass) 898 F2d 230, 29 Fed Rules Evid Serv 1223). © Chicago ex rel. Cohen v. Keane, 64 Ill 2d 559, 2 Ill Dec 285, 357 NE2d 452, later proceeding (Ist Dist) 105 Ill App 3d 298, 61 Ill Dec 172, 434 NE2A 325. 7 Indiana State Ethics Comm'n v. Nelson (Ind App) 656 NE2d 1172, reh gr (Ind App) 659 NB2d 260, reh den (Jan 24, 1996) and transfer den (May 28, 1996). “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 14 of 38 {Copyright Soveregney Education and Defense Minky, io sess, Form 2.05, Rev. 87192010 exnrorr_ A8 be ‘Requirement for Consent, Form #05.003, Sections 10.10. Lhttp:t/sedm.org/Forms/Formindex. htm 4. Calling the issues raised “frivolous”, which really consituies an admission that the judge or the court are not operating a a court inthe judicial branch under Article II, but rather ina political capacity as an administrative franchise arbitration board in the legislative branch under Article I and IV. Hence, a franchise court or franchise judge, inorder to usurp jurisdietion over a non-franchisee, must presume I am a franchisee and a public officer before they ean operate in political mode, and do so in violation of due process and outside thei jurisdiction. When they do, they are committing fraud if I are not lawfully occupying a public office BEFORE becoming involved in the tax system. The LR. creates NO NEW OFFICES, but simply taxes EXISTING offices already lawfully created within other titles of the U.S. code. All such presumptions of authority cause identity theft and a violation ofthe separation of powers, doctrine. True Article III judges are not allowed to operate in a political capacity and have a financial conflict of interest to have the power to actin either a poitical/franchise capacity ora judicial capacity. The ONLY thing that a Judge can do who is operating in a LEGAL capacity rather than POLITICAL capacity is produce the de expressly includes what he wants to include. Any attempt to evade that uty including calling something “frivolous” is criminal obstruction of justice. See: ‘Meaning of the Word “Frivolous”, Form #05.027 hitp/sedm.org/Forms/Formindex him ings to legal definitions that do not expressly appear in violation of the niles of statutory construction, resulting in a violation of due process of law and judicial THEFT of formerly private property. “uct verbcidet calculated to convert the Const ito a worthlts scrap of paper and o replace our goverment of laws with judicial oligarcl:.” {Senator Sam Ervin caring Watergate hearng) “Wen words los her meaning, people wil as ther tery. (onus, 300 BC] For a tool that combats this tendency within litigation against the government, see: ‘Rules of Statutory Presumption and Interpretation, Form #01,006 bitp:/sedm.org/Forms/Formindes htm All of the above devious and treasonous factics amount to COMMUNISM, the essence of which, according to the beast USS. Congress itself, is @ willful refusal to recognize or respect the constitutional limits placed upon officers within the government, ‘ILE 50> CUABTER 23> SUBCHAPTER I> See. 84 ‘Sec. 84L = Findings ‘The Congress fnds and declares that the Communist Party ofthe Unied States [consisting of the IRS, DOJ, anda corp federal airy colluding together agains private right to convert them ino publi right ‘and publ offices subjectto government urisdicion witout the consent ofthe owner], elkough purports {police party, 1s i Jct an insanely ofc conspiracy to everdhrow the {de jure] Goverment of te Che Stes and replace wih de fo gvemment raed 1 the uy coins Jone ssca- wna ston) tne demanding for tl he rig and meas Tnclding ‘monty from prosecution for ther wrongdoing in volaion of Article|. Sedion 9. Claise 8 of he Constiuon) accorded political parties, but denne al ahers dhe ert Dl of Rights ewaranted by ‘he Constitution. Unite political partes, which evolve the policies and programe through pubic means, by ‘he reconellation of @ wide vartey of ndvidual Views. dd subrt tho polices ad programs 10 the het arse pra or daproa ples an programs of he Commun Party we ey Indocrnaion [nthe pubic school by homsexuals bral, and socialists] wit respect tos objectives and methods and are organized, mstrucied, and disciplined fo carry ito action slvishly dhe assignments given ‘them by ther hierarchical chieflans. Unlike poleal partes, dhe Communist Party acknonledsis no ‘sonstulonal or siawioy liaations upon is conductor upon tha of ix members, The Commamsst Pars Pelatvely small munertcal and gives scant tndleation of capacity ever fo ata sends by lawful plc ‘means, The perl inherent lis operation arises not font aunabers, but from is fallre to acknowledge ‘aw Liniaion-ox_to the mature of ix octities_andi dedication tothe proposiden-tha the present ‘ouuutonal Government ofthe Unled Sates ult ot be browpi 1 run by any avulabe mers, “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 15 0f 38 ‘Copyright Sovrelgnoy Education and Defense Minky, ik. sede Form 02.005, Rev. 81192010, exuor__ At‘hore indivi oe seed lo he service of the world Communist movement ned do ts bidding land directed and controlled i th conspiratorial performance oftheir revohtanary sorsces Therefore, the Communist Party shouldbe outewed >The reader is reminded that a statutory but not constitutional “citizen” (26 CFR §1.1-1(c )), “resident” (26 US.C. + §T701(0\(4), “US. person” (26 U.S.C. §7701(a)30)), or “inhabitant”, all have in common that they are customers of a ¢ corrupt “protection racket”, and that like any other business, I have @ right NOT to be a customer and every de jure ‘» government has an obligation to respect and protect that right or else it ccases to be a government at all. As a prospective customer of corrupted de facto government and organized crime “protection racket {and not said de facto government v2 am the only one who may lawfully define what constitutes “protection” and whether what is provided by s > is within that definition, T define EVERYTHING instituted by the present de facto federal government as an injury and an 1 actof inferational terrorism not worthy of my financial support. If what a de facto govemment provides is not within my 1 definition of “protection”, then like every other private business, I have the unalienable right to FIRE them as my protector 1 by simply changing my status on government forms as an expression of my unalienable right to disassociate and not 1» contract. To argue to the contrary is to unconsttutionally impute supernatural powers to government that no private human being has, and institute a state-sponsored civil religion that “worships” corrupted rulers as a superior being. That satanic 1» religion is described below: ‘Soclalism: The New American Civil Religion, Fora #03016 ‘atipy/secimorg/Forms/Formindex. him x» The status that I choose is how I exercise my UNALIENABLE tight to both contract and associate for protection. 21 Protecting my PRIVATE right to contract or not contract, and to associate or disassociate is the very PURPOSE of the ‘= establishment of all civil government. That is why the First Amendment isthe FIRST amendment: Because the first thing ‘you MUST do when forming @ new political group or government is give everyone the right to NOT join with, contract > With, or associate with that govemment. This is exhaustively proven in: ‘Your Exclusive Right to Declare or Establish Your Chil Stats, Form ¥13.008 inupy/sedm,ong/Forms/Fonnindex. him 8 x By refising to recognize my voluntary choice of status, de fact officers instituting this unlawful enforcement aetion are interfering with my UNALIENABLE right to NOT associate with and NOT contract with a corupted national government. ‘The Bible makes disassociating with a all governments my religious duty, and so the criminal de factos are therefore also interfering with the fre exercise of my religion in violation ofthe Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. Chapter 21B. The only thing I am allowed to be under the private law “protection racket” franchise that a corupted government calls “domicile” is a nonresident and a “nontaxpayer”, and that corrupted government is STEALING, enslaving, and Kiinapping my identity to not respect that choice. “De yu nt know atensip wih he worlds ely with God? Whoever therefore wants 1 ew lend suuse Hanes 4, Bile, NRT nuxes Fr if you sorve tei gods [under contact or agreement or franchise, i wil swrely be snare to you." (ics 2832-33, Bible, NIV] peaeus * “Pare and undef reliion before God and the Father i this: to vist orphan aed ides in thie role “ ‘do Keep oneself unspoted fromthe wrld ihe ligation and concems of the worl, © 7 (anes 127 Bible, NRSV “to sl he no ar eds cng ptr serene ary es] tee Me or skeet hie Mer “Affidavit of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers 16 of 38 Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Mink, i sedmre Form 02005, Rov 8/192010, aasses es “ffidavie of Duress: Megal Tax Enforcement by De Facto Officers Copyright Sovereigns Education and Defense Minky, hts 08 Form 02.008, Rev. 8/192010, “Then all he elders of rae gathered together and came to Same! [te priest ina Theocracy] ot Ramah cd sd 0 him, “Look You fhe pres win a theocracy) are old, and your sons do not walkin your ways. Now make us a hing for olitial rar] oie ws lk ll the nations [ond be OVER them “But the thing displeased Samuel when they sald, ‘Give uso Kina or pollen! ruler tv Judge ws" So Samuel ‘prayed othe Lord. And the Lord said Sanu, ‘Heed the noice ofthe people all tha the say to you: for ‘hey have reflected Me {God that {should not reign over them. According to all he works which they have doesnt do that | rut then wp out of Lp, ven this day wth which ther ar ost Be is thelr ORLY Ki tered other io you asa {Goverment polars cto flor [Sam £25, Bible, NRIV] "Do not walk inthe sites of vow fathers [the heathen). nor observe ther judgments, nor defile yourselves ‘mth ther (pagan government] wots. 1am the LORD your God: Walk n iy satus, beep My judgments, and dd them: hallow My Sabbath, and they wll be sign Between Me and you, that you may know that Fam the LORD yee Gad” ‘eal 20-1020, Bibl, NKIV] "Haste LORD as great delight im burt oferings and series, Aso obeying the voce ofthe LORD? Behold, to ebevis beter tan sacrifice, ‘Ando eed than the ft of rans. Eocebellion as the sin of witcherat, ‘And smbbornness i as infanlty and ida, ‘Because vow have relied the Word fand Lawl ofthe LORD, [Sane 15:2223, Bible, NIV] “For hii the covenant that F wil make with the house of Trae after dose das, saps the LORD: Li put intel mind and write and I wil be thelr Goo and [liek 5:10, Bibl, NIV] “Therctore. rw brethren, x0u aso have become dead to the law Lman's am through the body of Christ [oy shiling your legal domicle to the God's Kingdon, that you may be marred 0 anvther—to Hm who was ‘ase from the dea, tht we should bear fat fs agents, fiduciaries, and rates) to God. For when we were In the flesh, the sinful passions wihich were aroused bythe law were ef work im our members to ear fruit 0 death: ut now we have Been delivered from the low. having ded 10 what we wer eld by, so that we should Serve inthe nownes ofthe Spirit [and newness afthe ls, Gots ee) and not tho oldess af he eto TRorn. 2:46, Bibl, NEI] ‘The wicked shall be nemed into hel, And al the nations [and peoples] that forget fr disobey} Go [or His CHAPTER 79 > See. 701 ‘See. 7001. Definitions (4) Definitions (0) United States ‘The term "United States" when used ina gengraphical sense includes only he Sate andthe Disrct of Cotenbia (10) Sate ‘he term "State" shal be conserued 9 include the District of Columbia, where such constuction ts necessary 0 carry out provisions ofthis tile [TITLE 4- FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES (CHAPTERS - THE STATES Ses. 110, Same; definitions (4) The term "Sia" inctudes any Teritar or possesion ofthe Untied States “Bspresio anus eat exclasio alterias. A marin of statatory interpretation meaning tha ithe exclusion of another, Burgin v. Forbes, 203 Ky.496, 169 :W 2d 321, 325; Newblockv. Bowles, [70 OH. 487, 407.24 1087, 1100, Mention ofone hing imptes exclusion of another, Under this maxim, {Ff saiue specifies one excerion 10 a general ride or assuswes to spec) the effecis of a cenain provision, other exceptions or effects ae cluded. {Black's Lew Dictionary, Sth Editon, p 581) 11, The financial transactions tkety to rest from our relationship are excluded from (not “subject 1" but not “exempt’ taxation pursuant tothe ‘following authorties and therefore not subject to withholding “Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, and Tax Status Page 3 of a2 Copyright SEDM, hio:/sedm.ora, Fm 02.001, Rev. 424-20117-1. EUSC SBSi(@)GNOVM: Eamings from labor oF honrestient alone” not engaged fi a"tade or business” and working in the “United ‘States ¢ not deemed to be income from sources within the "United States" 11.2, 28S, 6340%(a\6): Nonrasident alons do not earn “wages” 143, 25US.C. £14020) Nonresident aliens do not ean "selemployment income’. 1114, 25U'S.C-864(0)1)A)- Eamings of nonresident aliens” working for foreign employers such as private employers do not have eaming ‘ssocated wih a“tade or business inthe United States" 115, 25 GFR §31.540'(@)6)-1(): Remuneration of nonresident alions outside the “United States” is not subject to taxation. 116. 26CFR §1 872-2(9; Eamings of nonresident alons outside the "United States” do not constute "gross income” 41.7. 26 CFR §1.871-7(a)(4): Nonresident aliens not engaged ina "trade or business" earn no “gross income” 12, Taxwithnoling is only appropriate for those having a tax iabily. A nontesident allen NON-inchigual such asthe submitter with no “income ‘or eamings from “sources within the United States’ under 26 U.S.C, $871 can have no tax labilly. If you think you, as a private employer or vate insttuton, consttute 2 “source wahin the United States, then wry did the IRS Internal Revenue Manual say the folowing and where fate states ofthe Union included in “United States" as defined above? 1RM5.14.102 (09-30.2004) Payroll Deduction Agrerents m Taspayers should ‘determine whether their employers wil accept and proces eecwted agreements before agreements are submited for proval oF fralced ‘inlwew irs gov ich 14s 10. 18. You can only be an “employer” am an “employee", according to 25 U.S.C. §3401(4). 1am NOT an “employee”, because al “employees” ate “public ofcers" engaged ina “rade or business” who work forte United Ststes government as the equivalent of "ternps" or "Kelly Gis" ‘on loan to private employers such as you. 11DO NOT consent to actin such cepaoty, and therfore you cannot be an “employer in the ‘context of me: 26.CER 631.340) Employee ‘the tr femployee] includes [ts lnited 0] ofcers and employees, whether elected or eppint, of the United States, « [federal] State Territory Puerto Rivo or any poco subdivision, there, or the Distriet of Columba, or ay agency o instrumentality of ‘anyone or more ofthe foregoing. The rm employee alo includes an officer of a corporation." 26 USC.§2401(c )Enplovee For purpose ofthis chapter, he tr “employee” includes [is tinted 10] an ocr, employee or elected ofl of the Untied States. ‘a Star, or any polical subst thereof or the Dist of Columbla, oF amy dene)? tramentall of any One or more ofthe foregoing. The term “employee” aso includes an oficer ofa corporation. Federal Register, Tuerday September 7, 1943, £404 105, pe, 12267, Enpoe: “Th tr enor pecan offer al npc her cel copped, oh Unie St 2 tare or political subivivion Hereotor the Dis weer a sors. {you disagree with this tem, please rebut the admissions at the end of the following document within 30 days or be held in default and fesloppel to chabenge later: Why Your Government is Ether a Thief or You Ave 8 “Public Oficer”for Federal Income tax Purposes, Form 905,006; hto//sedm ora/Fosms/Fomindeshim 44, You are onl fable to withhold you are sn “erployer” and #1 receive wages”. 26 CFR §91.2403-1, 28 CFR §31.3111-4, 26 CFR §3102- ‘(c). The only wey I can receive "wages" is to sign @ contract called @ Wi-# absent duress consenting to cal what| eam ‘wages’ as legally fined but not commony understood. Ion" sign the contac: then I dont eam “wages” subject to any witnolging or reporting! “Everyman has a matro ight othe ft of hs own labor, is generally aiid: an no other person can rigs deprive him of {he Anslope, 23 18,55 10 Wheat 66,6 Ld. 268 (1825)) "Included in he rights of personel here and the right of rival properte-ertakng ofthe nature of cachaic the right mae contract for the acauion of property. Chief among Zich contrat i hat of pertonl emploesrd y which labor and other Series ae exchanged for money or oher forms of property 7 he wil, the person oflering to gel $40Ua.3 Amounts deemed wages under voluntary withholding agreemenss (adn generat. " (aa lations thereunder, the term this section with respect to which there fs-4 voluntary withhold Emma fected scion Lip ero A Chae deton o apeconed i actor EC) aoe ‘deemed refer also his section ($31 3401()-3. Tile 26: mena Revenue ‘Affidavit of Olizonchip, Domicile, and Tax Statve Page 4 ofa ‘Copyright SEDM, nipufsodm ora, Form 02.001, Rev. 4-24-2011"FARE ST=EMPLOTENT ARES AND COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE $31 M02) Volunary winholdnt atreement, (2) n generat ‘An employee and bis employer may emer ino an agreement under section 3400) to provide forte withholding of income mx upon ‘payments of amounts desried n paragraph (1) of $31-$401(a)-3, made afer December 31, 1970, An agreement maybe entered {io wader this ection only wih rezpect a amt which are include inthe gros inane of he ade scton 61 ‘must be anpenbl ool such amounts paid bythe emplover fo he employe, The amount 10 be withheld pursuant fo an agreement lund section 3402() shall be determined under the rales conned In satin 3402 and the reulaionsthereuner See $31 3405(0)- 1.Q&A-3 concerning agreements 10 have more than 20-percent Federal income tax withheld from eligible rollover dsibuions within ‘the meaning of scion 402 16. If never go you an IRS form W-4 and thereby consont to call what | eam “wages” as defined inthe Internal Revenue Code, then you can't lawfully withhold or report anything: 18.1. Everything that gous onthe IRS form W2 constitutes wages’ as legaly defined and not commonly understood. 182. Tax wihnolding ONLY pertains to “wages' es legally defied and NOT all eanings, The U.S. Supreme Court confirmed this: ln Whatever form 2nd under whatever creumstances 3 ‘should be iresied ae Ingame. Certainly the term “income” has no broader meaning in the 1919 act than in that of 1809 (see ‘Siratton’s independence v. Howbort, 231 U.S. 369, 476, 417 S., 34 Sup. CL. 136), and for he present ‘purpose we assume there is no difference nits meaning as used inthe two acts" {Southern Pactic Co, v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 880, $35, 38 S.Ct 640 (1818)) 183. Ifyou are ordered bythe IRS to withhold at single zero because I rofuse to submit an IRS form W-4, then you must withhold and report ‘ONLY on wages” as statutoly defined and Imited pursuantto the LR. "ade or business” franchise agreement. don't earn wages" if never consented to call them “wages” using private conrect called an IRS form W-4, 16. On the subject of unlawful watnolcing, the Bile says the folowing. “Wages” as used below implies the ordinary and excludes the statutory sefinon "Woe 1 him who builds shea by unrighteousness “And his chambers by injustice, ‘And gives him nahin for hs Wark,” ‘lee 22:13, Bible, NEV] "Come no, you rch, weep and how for your miseries tha are coming upon you! Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are ‘motiv-caten. Your gold and silver ae corroded. and their corrasion wil bea witness against you ad wl eat your sh ike fre, You Ihave heaped up weasure inthe las days. Indeed the wage ofthe laborers who mowed your lel, which you ket back By fraudcr) ad he cris ofthe reapers have reached the ara of the Lord of Sabah, You te business owner who conros the pars of the Workers] have lived on the earth i pleasure and tsar): you have ftened your hearts esa day of seughter. You have condemned, ‘ow have murdered the ast: he does nor resis you. * ‘aos 5:1-8, Bible, NRIV) "You shal not cheat our neighbor, nor rb him. The wagexof hia who shied shell ot remain with you al nih until morning, * ‘ibe, NIV) 7 TAX REPORTING LEGAL REGUIREMENTS: ‘. WARNING: itis a criminal offense to file information returns against any payments you rake In connection with our relationship. Filing of false information returns carries severe civil and criminal penalties. Information returns Include IRS Forms W-2, 10425, “1096, and 1090. | can only earn "wages" reportable on an IRS form Vi-2 fam lawfully engaged in public fice” inthe U.S. Government as required by 28 U-S.C. §604(a). Voluntary signing @ contracVagreement called an IRS form W-4s the onlyway that a nonresident alien [NON-ndividval not engaged in @ “trade or business" can engage in such a "public office” per 26 CFR §91.2401(a)-3(a), and 26 CFR '§31.3402(9}-1. Otherwise, Its a cxme to impersonate @ publi officer In Volto of 12 U'S.CSu2 wo fle a lformaton return. If you fle ‘any kindof information return relating to me, you wil be gulty of conspiracy to commit al the folowing crimes and cil infractions: 114. False information retums submited in Volation of 25 U.S.C. §7434, Punishment is all atomey fees plus twice the false amount ‘reports. 112. Impersonating a public oficerin violation of 18 U.S.C. 5912. Punighment i a fine and upto three years in jal, Only “public ofcers™ ‘can act as “taxpayers, and you are creating a flse presumption that | am a “taxpayer” by fing false information returns 113, Conversion of private property to a public use, public purpose, and pubic ofce as a“withnolding agent’ in lation of 18 U.S.C. 054, 114. Impersonating a statutory “US. cizen” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 8911, Punishment sa fne and up to three year in jal. Only statutory ‘and not constutioal US. clzans* can lawfuly aci 28 pubic officers" engaged in 2 “rade or business” and am NOT a statutory “USS. elizon® pureuantio & U.S.C. §1401 but rether a non-citizen national 115. Fase information retums in vation of 28 U.S.C, 67208. Punishment i upto a $100,000 fine and 3 years in jl to Re a false Information retur, +16. Fale information retumns in violation of 25 U.S.C. §7207. Punishment fs upto $10,000 and 1 yea in retum, 17. Patuty in votaton of 18 U.S.C. §100% and 18 U.S.C. §1621. The IRS Forms Wi-3 and 1096 submited vith the information return is ‘signed under penalty of penury an verfes the accuracy offre accompanying information rturn These forms are cubmited as @ ____ government offcer and agent called a 'wihhoiding agent defined in 28 U.S.C. §7701(a)(16). Those forms ate FRAUDULENT now. 40 submit false information ‘Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, and Tax Status Pages of 2 Copyright SEDM,pii/sadm.ora, Form 02.001, Rev. 424-2011Tat you have been nollied tat they are false and you wilfully refuse to eitier slop Hing te fase report or corre the fake reports aloady fled, 2, IRS Publication 515 indicates that nonresident alles wo give you IRS form W-ABEN are exempt fom 1098 reporting. This form serves the equivalent purpose end is a superset of that form. “Foreign persons who provide Form W-SBEN, Form W-8ECI. or Form W-HEXP (or applicable docunentary evidence) ae exempt rom backup wielding and Form 109 reporting? ‘HRS Pubcon 15 Yeu 2000 0-2) 3. 26US.C. s6041 says that only earings connected with a vade or busines” may be reported on an infomation retum suchas IRS forms 2, WES, 1042-5, 1096, end 1098, ‘TIELE26> Sabie E> CHAPTER 61 > Substupter A > PART I> Suboars > § 6061 ‘$OOHInformasion a source (2) Payments of $600 or more person of rent, “alaries, wages, premiums, annuities, compensations, renanerations, emoluments, or other fed or determinable gins, profit, ad Income orer than payments which setion £42 (41), 644 (a1), G47 (e), 6049 (a) or 60SON (a apptes,and other ham pees with respect to which a statements required under the authority of sccrion 642 (a2), O44 (a2), oF DAS), of $600 or more tn any axa ear, oF. the cae of such payments made bythe Untied Ses, he officers or employee ofthe United States having Information ast such payments and required to make returns regard thereto bythe regulations hereiafe provided for, shallrender 'Sceretar, under such and in ch form and. prescribed by the Secretary, sling forth te amount of sich xaine profits aed income, and the name ond address of he recipient each "None ofthe earnings connected wit our relationship pertains oa rade or business” 2s statutory defined below, anc therfore isnt subject to reporting: 2AUSC See. 701(4)26) "The rerm rade or busines cues the performance ofthe fncion of pls iss. “Tne torm “income” is defined in 26 U.S.C. §543(b), and only “income” may be reported. Since | am NOT an “estate or tet”, eam no reportable “income TUDLE26> Subile A> CHAPTER 1 > Subchuper > PAREL> Subpur.A > 5643 ‘68 Definitions ampliable te subpar 4. Cand come Fo purposes of ts snp ne sap BC andthe rm acme” he at se eth rs “ae, tle i, lems of gros Income constntng eraordnary Ghidends or taxable Soc diets wih he fiuctary. cg tn god fey dcrincs tobe allocable to Corps war the of the goreiog Insrument aa applicable acl sal be considered income 'S Form 1042-S may ony be prepared inthe case of statutory “nonresident alions" (per 26 U.S.C. §7701(6)'1)(6) who have “income” from sources vithin the statutory but not constitutional “United States thal snl comected witha “rede or business” and therefore constites “gross income’ win the meaning of 26.S.C. $61, Al euch sources ere expressly indicated in 25 U.S.C. §871(@). Allofthese soures are sdovernment payments. The transactions lkely to occur between us are NOT government payments and are not fisted in 26 USC. 67 1(a), Spd rcere ay olay be ovoid. For rte deal, oe the leng a ‘Affidavit of Chizenship, Domicilo, and Tax Status Page 6 ofz2 (Copyright SEDM, htp:/seam ora, Form 02.001, Rev. 424.2011‘SECTION 2: AFFIDAVIT OF TAX STATUS ited Sates er oe Use 207 at ‘Submiter has NO tax lability or “gress income" purant to 26 CER §1.872-2(), 25 CER S1.871-1(6), and 28 U.S.C. §861(@)(3XC\) and therefore no need to deduct or withhold Submit ls nota statutory Taxpayer as defined in 26 U.S. §7701(a)(14) and not subject tothe revenve laws. Bese Lae ato asses Lumens. fcr clr. etd of de Federal Goverment ad on-taxpayers [Averican CitzendAnerican Natlonals not subject to she exclusive jrisdiction ofthe Federal Government and not oo the ale of sis fc a pable aft.Telaer re io tie Ne ia at ‘Economy Plumbing & Heating v.US., $70 F2d, S85 (1972)) ‘Submitr is not “exempt or an “exemot individual’ as defined in 26 U.S.C. $7701(b)8) because one must otherwise be subject tothe LR.C. tobe such a legal “person”. Rather, Submitior is “not subject ntarnal Revenue Code Subtite A franchise agreament and ie a nonresident Since IRS forms very deliberately do not have a block for ‘not subject’ and are ony for use by those who are taxpayers", Submiter had to ‘make hisiner own for, THIS form, fo aveld commiting perjury on @ government form in descreing tisiher status under penalty of peiury “Those who are “not subject” are described NOT as a ‘perso’, “indwidual’ or "taxpayer, but simply as “Torelgn” or @ “orelgn estat” In 26 USC, §701¢0)1) ‘IDLE 26> Subtle F> CHAPTER 79 > $7701 ‘SZZ0L Detnitions () Depions (3) Foreign esta or rust (A) Foreign esate Sutera nonin a stattory defined pruan to 26S. $7010N)) tne "oneint an nd. Arneson allen is defines a8 one who is “neler a clizen nora resident of tho “United Sates”, which is exactly what an “American National’, of “national” born ina state ofthe Union who isnot domiciled on federal tertory inthe "United States” is. The only wihnoding form that a “nonresident” whois nether a statutory alin” (per 28 U.S.C. §7701(@)1)(A) nor an “indhduaf (per 26 CFR g1.1461-1(c (3) and SUS. {S2105{a)) and who is not engaged in federal franchises can fi out is a W-BBEN with block 3 modified to add the word “nonlaxpayer” ot “human being'to. Allstatutory “Taxpayers” and "individuals" are “alens" per 26 CFR §1.1441-1(c (3) and publi officers in the national and not state government, and therefore submitter cannot check the “indviua block of the W-BBEN form without commiting perjury. Even statutory US. Ciizens" per 26 CFR §1.1-1(¢) and 28 U.S.C. §3121(e) must be aliens in relation to a foreign country under a tax eaty per in order to be taxpayers” Submiteris nat engaged ina ‘rade or businoss", which is defined in 26 U.S.C. $7701(a)(26) as “the functions ofa public office". Receipt of ‘earnings from the District of Columbian connection witha trade or business" under 25 U.S.C. 271(0) or not connected under 2° USC. §3871(@) are the only ypes of “gross income” of “iaxable income’ that nonresidents wo ate not aliens can have under LC. Subtiie A. ‘Submiter is "vangient foreigner but not Statutory “foreign person” of stlutory “allen” respect to the natonal government and fede {errtory, & human being or artfciel enity such as @ sate comoation domicied in a stale of the Union isa “transent foreigner but not @ ‘person’, “ndvidua’, or foreign person” for the purpoees ofthe Intoral Revenue Code becauce the term “Unted States” ic defined in 25 ESC" er7atlaNs) anc 10} asthe Dist of Colrnbiaandis nowhere enpresly expanded f include any sale of the Union. ‘Submifer is notin receipt of any treaty benef under the terms of an income fax treaty wrth a foreign county, Submiter has not made an election to be treated asa “resident alien” as defined in 25 U S.C. §7701(0X1)(A) under the authority of 26.US ©. {$6013 and Submiter is nota statutory “individual” as defined in 26 CFR §1.1441-1(c)) oF a “person as defined in 26 U.S.C. §7701(c) because not domiciled of resident on federal tortory and not eligible or consensualy participating in any federal enchise or “bent” in the context of {his exclusively pvate aed pot public vansacton. AS such, he/she i net a "publ offcer within the goverment but rater a private human being. The only thing the government can regulate or tax are pubic aces, public officers, and public “employees” who are the only "persons mentioned in the LR.C. franchise per 26 U.S.C. §7343 and 66710). itis otherwise unconstuional te regulate exclusvey private conduct ‘The power to “eps generally mpon” fhe PRIVATE] We, liberty. an property, as opposed to the “power to provide meses of adress” again afensine sate [e.g public officer "empleyee"] acon, as “repugnant o the Conshtuton, dat 15. See also Unie States v. Reese, 92 LS. 218 218 (1876) United Staves, Hrs, 108 118-625, 639 (7883): James , Bowman, 190 S127. {L30(1903. Although the specific Holdings of these early cases migh have been superseded or maid, see, e. Heart of Alta Motel In. ¥ United States, 379 U.S. 2411968): United Sates v, Guest, 83 18. 745 (7966), their ecment of Congress §5 power «as corrective or prevent, ot definitional, has net hen questioned." otfccrne¥ Flores AchOshop af San Antonio 521 US. 07 (1097) ‘Submiter is NOT subject to IRS Frm 1089 reporting, wthholsing, or backup withholding pursuant to 25 U.S.C. §3401(@)(6) of 28 CER $31.34011aN0-10): "Foren persons who provide Form W-8BEN, Form W-8ECI, or Form W-SEXP (or applicable documentary evidence) ae xem from backup withholding and Form 1099 reporting.” (HES Publication S15, ear 201, ‘Submitor is not 2 "U.S parson” ae statutorily defined pursuant to 28 S.C. §7701(@X30). The term “U.S. persons statutory defined as ‘ellos: “Ailidavt of Giizenship, Domicio, and Tax Status Page 7 ofa? Copyright SEDM,hit:/sadm.ora, Form 02.001, Rev. 4-24-2011THLE DOs Suhre F> CHAPTER TO Soo 7701 See. 701. Deflniions (0X30) tonite Stats person The tera "United States person" means ~ (A) a citizen or eevident ofthe United Stores, (8) adomesicparmership, (Cladomesie corporaion, (0) any ese re tn reg ese, thin he meaning of paragraph (31), nd (Chany rst (i). court within he United States saber exercise primary superison over the administration ofthe trust and (i) one or more United States persons have the arty contol ll substantial decisions ofthe trust. 12. The team “United States" as used inU.S, person’ above is defined in 26 U.S.C. §7701(2),9) and (a) 10) 2 flows: {IIL 26> Sabie > CHAPTER 79 > Se. 7701. [ternal Revenue Code} Sex. 7701. Defnions (a) Wien used in this tie, where nor xherwivedsiniyexpressed or manifest incomparilewih te intent therenf— (9) United Saves ‘The erm "Unie States when sed in a geographical sense includes only the Stat and the Disc of Columbia (10) State ‘The erm “Sure” shal be construed to nclude the Dire of Columbia where such conic Is necessary 0 carryout provisions of taste ‘Pursuant tothe rules for statutory construction, if the states ofthe Union are not mentioned anywhere in Subtle A of the Internal Revenue ‘Code and are not intuded inthe definition of United States” above, they can be safely assumed fo be EXCLUDED by implication: “Bxpresio ulus est exclusoaterias. A maxi of sary interpretation meaning tht the expression of one thine i he exclusion Lat, Darin ore, 285495 19 SH 2431, 5, Rewblck Bots, 17 OM 740 Pd 197,100. Menton of One hang implies exclusion of another. When certain persons or Tine At ain, Pane spe icon Crop ee para ee Ee the eects ofa crtanprovsion athe exceptions or eet are cxcuded [Black's Law Dictionary, Siah Eaton, p. 581) "Nonresidents not engaged ina “trade or business” such asthe Submitter are not required to provide Ientiying numbers to open financial ‘accounts, The reguation below mentions “nonvesident aliens”. and nonresidents who are not statutory “alens” must be treated the same: Te 31: Money and Finance: Treasury ‘PART J03~ FINANCIAL RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING OF CURRENCY AND FOREIGN TRAYSACTIONS ‘Shnart C=Revonds Regul To Be Mainained. ‘$108.4 Adlional recor abe ark ad etuined by hans. (3) A taseaneidentiiotion number reared under parazra (a) ofthis ection need not be secured er accounts or folowing: (9) non-resident liens whe are not engaged ina trade or business in the United State, {In instances described in paragraphs (aX3), (vi) and (x) ofthis section, the Dank shall, widhin 15 days following the end of any ‘calendar year in which the interest accrued in that yar ét $10 or more ae i et! effort to rcure and maintain the appropriate laxpayer idenifiaton number or application form therefor. {amounts to ‘compelled to association” in violation of the First Amendment fo force me fo associate wit or be dented as a“U.S. person” (under 26 U.S.C. §7701(@)(0), a statutory “US. citizen” (under 2U.S.C. §1401), ora taxpayer (under 25 U.S.C. 770114) of any status OTHER than that descrbed above. | would also be commiting perjury under penaly of perjury to sign any government form that Kentiied ‘me ae any ofthese three typee of entice. {Twi not allow you to compel me o partcpate Inthe "trade or business” franchise or contract wih the government by changing my status to be anything other than that described herein. All ranchises are contracts between the grantor and the grantee: ‘Ase ride, feanchiscs spring rom contracts btwnen the sovervisn peer and private citens, mae upon valable considerations, for ‘Purponesof indie acvantage aswell as public bon," and hus a franchise partake of double nature and character. So fas lt affects or concers the pub, publ urs andi sibjec to governmental contol. The lgisatare my prescribe the manner of {ranting to whom it maybe granted, the conditions and terns upon which may e eld, and ike dof he prance tothe public ‘xercising Band may also provide for ls feretre upon the ule ofthe grace to perform tht duty. Bat when gente it become’ ‘te roe efron nd sap ee, sect nthe ovement roving of aber es pi “hi ur 24, Franchises, 4: Generals} FEEREA ae Sagem STH sez scat. tn 7 Se cr ln Bn Pp 217 LAT, AS24685. Tovey Tver. st ona 8 we Ce At, 54 Ga731 115 SE289 Lepacot Alar 2 lows AD: Sere ston Balan Rage 217 La, A 2485 Tow. Tower Stet RES" a en Fn “Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicie, and Tax Status Page 8 oraz Copynght SEDM, hito:/sedm.ora, Form 02.001, Rov. 424-2011T7 Pursuant to te Dacsaraiony Joderienis Act 25 USO, S2Z0i|a) and te federal cours, he feoprent of is form and any Government agone handing this case has NO authorty t assume any tax satus ther than that indicated on this fom of 0 convert an innocent “nantaxpayer into a taxpayer. Specifically, Rowen sees a declaratory judgment against he United States of America with respect 0 “whether or noth plaints @ taxpayer prs, enor under 20 US.C.§ 720UGN14) (See Compl 2) This Cu leks ride to zu a dcaatry 7 the Tnlernal Revenue Code of 1986," 4 ‘ode section this nota se athe instant action. Set -US..2201, 0 alto Hughes , United State, 953 F.2d SH 536-537 (ib Cis, 99D (arming dismissal of claim for declaratory relief under § 2201 where claim concerned question of wx bli) Accord defendants moto dims is hrehy GRANTED, andthe tet ction hereby DISMISSED. owen 02/2005 “And by starory definition, Yaxpayer includes any person rust or esate subject to a tax imped by the revenue act. Since the stanory definition of Yaxpayer'is exclusive, the federal cons do not have he power to create nostanutory taxpayers forthe purpose ‘of appving the provision of the Reveuue Acts. (CHR. Trasees of Ine Assn, 10 F 2d 18(1939)) A reaumable construction of the txing antes doesnot inclu vesting any tx oficial with absolute power of acsessmentagalns Individuals not speed inthe tates as a person lable for theta without a Opportniy for juica review of hs saa before the ‘ppelation of taxpayer i besowed upon them ond thelr prope i eae." {ona v. Scanlon, 28 F 24. 504, 508(1961)1 18. A summary of Citizenship Status v. Tax Siaus and the meaning of "State" and “state” in the context of federal and state laws i fund In i ‘SECTION 3: DURESS STATEMENT. TFany other government form which the Recipent of ts form might have received or wowed wlan might have signed contradic anyinmng contained herein, the reasons are tha. sr was threatened oF fe threstaned 41.4. By the Recipient o ether not be hired or be fied i did not sign a W-4 agreement or submit a specific government from that doesn't pertain to me anc thereby comrnt what | know to be fraud andr perjury on a government frm. . OR. 12. By the Recipient because | was tld that | would be denied the EQUAL right of ll o engage ina business opportunity or fancal ‘account neaded fo austin my if if! didnot fl out and submit the form indicated and which | knew misrepresented my status or had no aptons to correctly represent my status. ..OR 41.3. _By he government because | would become ie target of unlawful or “selective” IRS/government enforcement that the legal profession, the courts, and the goverment routinely protect and encourage Because Of conte of intrest, uncue consabation of Dower, and greed “For the lve of money isthe roo of allel which whe some coveied afer, they have ered from the fh, and plrced themselves through with many sorrows. be tho, O man of Go, things: and flow ith, love Fight he good fight of ath, lay hold on eternal ie, whereunto tho art also called, and hast professed a god profesion before many witnesses." [1 Timothy 6:5 12, Bible, RIV} 414. By the Recipient, who may have refused to aoceptthis form or sent it back, because they knew they were violating bot the law and Im rights and wanted to obstruct justice, destroy evidence of ther wrongdoing, and tamper wih a federal witness because ths form Signed under penalty of perjury | was therfore under unlawful durees and the target of racketeering, extortion, andlor unconscionable “adhasion contracts" by the ecientigovernment ‘The orgin of the duress was the Recipient of this fom acting in a quasi governmental and “pbc officer” capacky ae “withholding agent” pursuant to 25 USC. 6770116) and who i therefore legally lable to respect my consutional rights and REFUSED demands to 30 80. "AND “The result ofthe unlawful duress was that | was compelled to contract wih or engage in commerce withthe goverment against my wil andor religious bei in voiaton of Arie 1, Section 10 ofthe United States Constitution, and to donate private property to @ pubic us, Public purpose, andlor public office inthe government such as the "vade or business franchise that isthe heat ofthe Internal Revenue ‘Code. Participation in all government franchises is an act of conracting because al franchises are contracs. "hereby forthe record deciare as void, untrustworthy, and not admissible as evidence of any obligation on my part any and all forms, decaratons of status, or other correspondence in confit with this form ar any atached form | may have provided because subritted under unlawful dures, “Am aprecment [consensual contrat obtained by dese coercion or niidation i inal since the party corend sno exercising fie wl or th tests ots mach the means By which the parti compelled 0 execte the agreement asthe sate of inde. | Der he rary bcos matrix vere oat ree hab ae wi he wes a Tsou Pay, 74S 205, 7 Wa 3, LESTA “Barna. Wal Faye Moved Nat Bagh 2708 38,70 L659, 46 C108 tat ined by me ich ome sly te maa er fc Py connate sere ato nw ini any ab tne wns on reread) Fata vat as 2484 2% WSN ak Gey v Caretta Se Fn it 52 Sa 73 wren hn Tad Carat Foy, t We Ne 2 Se eNom BLS 1-64 LEG COS COs ‘Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicle, and Tax Status Page ofa ‘Copyig SEDM,niioSeam or, Form 02.001, Rev. 4-24-2011‘uinepie of ralficaton [ike ether soldable conta ie valid ant ts avoided by he person sntd to oid,” Fowover ‘hres inthe orm of psical compulsion, which apart is caused appear to asten wen he has no intention of doing 0, enerlly ‘lemed to render the resulting purported contrac oi." (American Turisprudence 2, Dress, Setion 21] ‘This afdavit of duress and vold declaration especially includes, but fs aot inited to, anything reletng to government franchises, disclosures of government identifying numbers such as SSN or TIN, tax withholding or reporting forms such as the W.4 contract forms (28 CFR §31.3401(a)- ‘3(a) and 26 CFR §31.3402(p)-1), tax retums, or any olner declarations of status (e.g. employee" taxpayer. “indwvidua’“inhabtant, "US ‘etizen’) arising out of any tax, ctzenship, or Koensing forms provided tothe government such as cive's license applications, applications for 1D Cards, voter regitration, or beneft applications. ‘An expanded version ofthis dures statoment fs contained atte folowing address and is hereby incorpereted into this document by reference: ‘SECTION 4: DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ADVISE ME WHAT TO PUT ON ANY GOVERNMENT FORM OR TO CHANGE THE STATUS DESCRIBED IN THIS FORM ‘Ber 28 U.S.C, $5085, al tax forms must be signed under ponally of pour, just as Wis forms As Such, This fom and ALL tax forms | supritt you constitute “estimony ofa winess" and are protected by witness tempering laws. I remind the recent that itis a federal offense to tamper With witnesses. Tampering includes, but not imted to ‘Advising me what to pu on this frm or any tax or withholding fr and thereby conspire to commit PERJURY in violation of 18 U.S.C. ‘$1542, 1BUS.C. $011, 18 U.S.C. 61004, and 18 U.S.C. $1621, All such attempts sll frm an inseparable part ofthe forms you both Fecewve and must Keep on le so thal you may be held accountable Refusing fo honor tat status tat! deserbe here and thereby compeling me to commit perry for the PRIVILEGE of being treated EQUALLY to everyone else you service “Telina me that what | ut onthe form is INCORRECT or FALSE and thereby refusing to accopt the frm, and yet refusing to offer legal {evidence signed under penalty of perjury (as required by 25 U.S.C. 86055) PROVING that its false “Threatening to withhold service or dscriminate against me while acting as a public officer called a 'wihholding agen” defined in 25.5.0. ‘§2701(a)14), That would be 2 denial of equal protection ofthe ta innputing or assuming a legal status OTHER than what | put here, and which might subject me to llega enforcement or penalties against pares not subject. All such acivtes constiute an Unconstivtonal “Bl of Aan” implemented againet those not conseneually and lawfully engaged in goverment frenchises. Not even federal judges can make such determinations. 28 U.S.C. §2201() forbids such CHAPTER 12> SUBCHAPTER I> Sec 101. ‘SecL101 = Definuions {X21 The erm “narional” means a person owing permanen allegiance to a tate 2, The “slate” in the above defriton ie @ state ofthe Union. Al tates ofthe Union are “foreign states" with respect to federal goverment legislative jurisdiction, and therefore are lower case, Federal teritories are capitalized as State" within federal law. For example: TITLE 4- FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES (CHAPTER 4 THE STATES ‘Seq_U Sames definitions (4 The term "Stare includes any Testor or possession ofthe United Stars. 3. Even the “United States of America” passport recognizes the two types of clzenship defined in federal statutory law. On the inside cover of ‘the passport it says the folowing, Note the phrase ‘ciizennetonal’, which means “iizen OR national’ "The Secretary of State of the United States of America hereby request ll whom it may concerto permit the citizen/ national of ‘he Unted States nomad hore to pas without delay or Mcrae and in case of need ogi al lla ad protection” 4. Below sre some cites tht establish the foreign relationship between the state and federal government for the purposes of legistative Jurisdiction: Foreign States: “Nations ouside ofthe United States..Term may also refer 10 another state. a sister state. The term Yoreign ations” should be construed o mean al mations and ates oter than that which the action is browght and hence, one site ef he tn i joretgn to another tht seme {Blact's Law Ditionary. 6 Eon p48) Foncign Lan “The laws ofa foreign cour or ster sat” [Blacks Lae Dictionary, 6 Edition, p.617) "Genraly, eas of excep in ofr ashe United Sas is paramon asthe dominating goverment. can 30 fa he tales ae rege the {fratcraiy among sovereigns etalihed by the federal Censtinion, at bythe provision rearing each tate to iv fl feihand crit "othe public cts, records, and jucialproceedings ofthe oer sae.” [BIA Corpus Juris Secondan (C18), United Ses $29, legal encyclopedia} Tso longer open to guston tate wenena-xomcramen unl esas, Parmer v. Dagenhart 7.251.205. 38 S.C 529, 3 ALR. 649, Ann Cas JOISE 724, io inherent power respect ofthe internal afer of he aes: end emehatical ‘uo with ear to lexislation, lis aeholly diferent matter which is not necessary now fe consider Warter v. Carter Coal Co. 298 US.238, 6.5.1. 855 (1936)) 5. The Sole function of the federal government of the United States isto handle FOREIGN affairs with other countries, but thas no jurisdiction within states ofthe Union, incusing taxation. All of revenues must dere only fom the external affare over which i has exclusive legislative jurisdiction. The rulings below occurred AFTER the passage of the Siteenth Amendment and st lit the federal government ‘xclusivaly to extemal matters in relation to states of the Union. ‘The States, afer the formed the Union, continued o have the same rang of INTERNAL taxing power which they had before, barring only dates afjocting exports, Inport, and om tonnage [whick ell dea wth FOREIGNIEXTERNAL commerce ony). 2 Congres, onthe ‘te han, 1 lay ates inorder wo pay the Debs and prove for he common Defence and general Welfare ofthe United Stes Ar 1, See. 8, US.CA.Const can reach every personal every dollar ithe land with ue regard o Consintiona ations a othe method ‘faving tans” {Graves v People of Stat of Now Yor, 306 US. 466 (1935)] Te dificais arising ut of our dal form of government and the oppor or difring opinions concoring te relative righ of state and narional governments are many ulvadered the doctrine hat He wn power ‘Congress doesnot extend othe states oF thelr polical subdivisions. The samt basic reasoning which leads 0 that concasion, we "ink, requires like tnsation upon the power which springs fom the hankrptey clave. United Sates v. Butler. sypra” [Ashton ¥. (Cameron County Water Inprovement District No 1,298 US.513: 56 S.Ct. 892(1936)) a ed oli and collect aes and wo pn the debs and provide for he common defence and gener ie (ned Sates This doesnot neree withthe poner a th Sites wo internal fr d = oristhe az EXTERNALLY). In imposing tates or Stat purpose. hey ae ot doing hat Congres ep ‘empowered 10 1x for those purposes which are within dhe excusve exercises the power of taxation, neither is exercising the power of the other, bu, when a State proceeds reguate commerce vith foreign natons, or anuong the several Sates, exerci the ver power thas granted to Congres, [22 U.S, 20] ‘ands ding the Sery hing which Congress authorised ro do, There i no analogy, then, beovcen the power of taxation andthe power of regulaing commerce. [Gibbons v Ogden, 22 US.21 (1824) i ‘Afidavit of Chizenship, Domict, and Tax Status Page 12 of 2 (Copyright SEDM, hito/sacm.ora, Form 02.001, ev. 4-24-2011“Tiwi contrib the cactaton of he question Wwe iret consider the diferences between the powers athe adel ovement in expect foreign or exter aftirs and has in expect of domestic or internal airs. That there are diferences between them, and ‘hat these diferences are fundamental, may not be doubted. Dhe two clases of pers are diferent, both in respect oftheir origin and {heir nate. The broad tatemen tha the federal goverament can exercise no powers extent those specifically enimerated inthe ied cers x are cesar and proper tocar in ee! the enumeried powers, categorical eon eral as, haste. rar resofheConton ca oe gral elt {nthe enumeration sl inthe tates, Carter Carter Coal Co 238 US. 218, 294, 50S Ci. 839, 855. ‘The Union existed before the Constiation, which was ordained and established among aher things to form a more perfect Union! Prior to that eve, is clear tha the Union, declared by te Arties of Confederation to be ‘perpetual was the we possessor of ternal ists, and inthe Union it remained without change save in so far asthe Consiion express trms qualified us exercise The [Evans Convention as called and exerted ls powers upon the eehuable postulate ha though the utes wre several hee ‘esnectobfoneign afars were oe, [United States v.Curss-Wright Export Corprarion, 299 US..304(1936)] 8. The states ofthe Union are Yoeign’ to federal legisiative jurisdiction, because, asthe U.S. Supreme Court held sbove, they are no subject toit. This is result of what is called the “Separation of Powers Doctrine’, which was exclained by the Supreme Court as flows: aie sovereign ino ut an end in duel" Rather,federalz secret to citzen the Wberter tha derive from the difaion of ‘soxercign power" Coleman +. Thompson, 50) US. 722,759 (991) (BLACKMON, J. dissenting). Just asthe separation and Independence ofthe coordinate branches ofthe Fedral Goverment sere to preven the accumulation of excessive power in ay OMe {ranch a healthy balance of power benscen he Sates and the Federal Governmen wil rede the isk of tranny and aus from eer Bron Gregory v [505 US. 14, 182]. Asheroft, SI US. a1 458, See The Federalist No. $1 . 323. (C. Resse ed. 1961)” [New Yorkv, Untied Sates, 55 S128 1992)} 7. The federal government has no leilatve cower outside of “ron “Judge Slory, in hs ease on the Confers of Laws, ays down, asthe bass upon which al reaonings on the law of comity mast snecessrily rex the following maxins: Firs tat ep nation for sate] poses exclusive sovereignty and arisdcton ihn en territory’ secondly, that no state or nation can by is laws directly affect or bind property out of its own i a ‘subjects or others. The learned ‘lg hen as: From ese vo mains or propostions there flows atid, ad tha sha whatever force and oligo the laws of ‘one country have in another Sepond solely upon the las and municipal regulation ofthe kr; thai say, pon fk Own proper Jurist and poy. an upon is own expres or tcl [olunary] consent.” Sory on Conf of Laws $23." [Baluore & Ohio Railroad Cov. Chambers, 73 Oho St 16:76 NE. 91: [1 LRA. NS, 1012 (1905}] 8. The states ofthe Union are NOT “terior” ofthe federel government. They are insteed INDEPENDENT and SOVEREIGN states: "§1-Defaons, Nate, and Distinctions “The word erriory’ when used to designate a pollical organization has a distinctive, ced, and egal meaning wader the politeal inttations ofthe United States, and doesnot necessarily include all he tertrial possessions ofthe United Sates, ut may include ‘nly the potions theeaf which ee organized ond exercise governmental functions under ct of ones” “White the term ‘error ts often loselynsed, and has even been consined to include municipal subdivision ofa tervtry, and ‘erties ofthe’ Unied Sars sometines wed 10 refer she entire domain ove which the United States exerlses dominion, the word ‘ervory: when wed te designate a poical ogantation, has a disinctv, fied, and legal meaning under the politcal astiaons of ‘the United Sates, and the erm territory’ or Yervtries! des mot necessarily include ota portion or the portions thereof which are ‘orgamted and exercise government functions under act of congress. The ern Yerraores hasbeen defined 0 be politcal subdivisions ‘ofthe cuyng dominion ofthe United States, ain hs sense the er errr is nota description of definite are of land bt of polial unt gonerning nud being governe as such. The question whether particular subd or enty& @ferrory is ot ‘lesermined by the particular form of government with whic is, more or less temporal, ivesed. “Tervitories'or ‘erty’ as including ‘state! or “states.” White the frm ‘ierrtories of the’ United States may, under certain circumstance, include the state of the Union, a wed in the foderal Conttation and in ordinary acts of congress erry" does ot include a forign sate, "Asus in iste, the term ‘errtris generally refers tothe poitce subdivisions erated by congress, and not within the boundaries of any ofthe several tater.” 98, States ofthe Union retain their essential character as independent nations and foreign counties wih respect to the federal government cept inte mar of EXTERNAL alas elgaed by tem he Federal Govern ek comport pact 2 the ‘Unie Sas "The States Benween each osher are sovereign and indpendent. They are distin! and separa soveelgtes, except so fr as they have parsed with some ofthe atribues of overe'gny bythe Constaion. ‘Th contin o be nations, wth al ther righ and wader all ‘heir national obligations, and wth he rigs of nations i every artcwar; excep inthe surrender by each othe common purposes ‘and objects ofthe Union, under the Consitation. The ight of each State, when not ove wp remain abso.” Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 8 US. (13 Pet) 519; 101 Ed.274(1839)] metering te oud ofpprenty config powers betwen ean te rrr he Pree gestion re so.much what has beon,In ers, reserved ta the sates, as what has beh, “Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, and Tax Status Page 130f 22 (Copyight SEDM,hio:/sedm.ora, Form 02.001, Rev. 4-24-20111o the natonal goveranent or each aie poser all he powers ofan independent and sovereign mation, exept oof a Hoy have been ceded away by the constition, The federal government is bu a creature ofthe people of the sates, and ke an agen appointed Jer dpe nd specie purposes, ms show an exes or necessar)implied authori in th charter of ts ppoinimen ge ally [People exe Aty.Gen. V-Nagle, 1 Cal. 234 (850) 410./A human being (but NOT ‘person’ whois bor ina state ofthe Union, which is outside of federal exclusive leglsative jurisdiction, is called '2 national’. A person who is 2 “national is subject othe ‘polical jurisdiction” but not the “Tegislstve jurisdiction” oftheir mother county {35 such cannot be prescribed in any federal statue or law, because the Congress cannot wite any law that governs what happens within ‘ales ofthe Union, as the above ciation indicate (see, for instance, Carter v. Carter Goal Co, 298 U.S. 238, 58 S.Ct 855 (1936). The reason is thatthe states andthe people in them are SOVEREIGN, and ther creation, the federal government, cannot be greater than its ‘Crear, whic is the states andthe people in them. The federal government i ]@ SERVANT tothe states, not ther master the equivalent ‘oF an independent contractor that handles EXTERNAL affairs ony. This was confirmed by the Federalist Papers, which were writen prior to the rtiication ofthe Constitution by the stats ofthe Union in 1788: a eatin ct of Comers cone he Cotton con Be ad et hi ntl lint he det od te emeeniaes a mens he lot of ee consent or move rational sep tha fe courts ‘were designed 1 be an intermediate Bod berweon she people and he legsatrein order, among ater thins, 10 beep te Laer within {he lant assigned to shir authority. The interpretation of the ews is the proper and peciar province ofthe cours. & Contain is, {in faciand must be ozarded bo judges.os fundamental law. there should happen bean irreconcilable variance benseen te two, ‘the Constnition iso be prefered to he sare.” {Alerander Honiton, Federalist Paper 8 73} 11, Ris absurdly ridiculous to demand fom the submitera federal statute that confers but not defines cizenship status ofa person born outside (of federal usdiction. The laws ofthe states in the Union, and nat federal law, govern the tizenship satus of people bom within their ‘exclusive jurisdiction, States ofthe Union have exclusive and “plenary” jurisdicion to determine the status of People bom within their _Aisdiction and they have never yeted that authorty to the federal government eer inthe Constitution orin any subsequent amendment ‘renactment. To conclude otherwise i o admit that states ofthe Union have NO SOVEREIGNTY, because the federal government could JUst pass 2 law to fterlly STEAL al of ther ctizens. ifthe federal government had jurisdiction to pass a law that lowed them to STEAL allthe cizens ofthe states, then the states would be lft wit no one to govern! 42. Congress has the power o“naluralize” people coming into America, and when they do tis, these people become statutory “nationals” and constitutional but nt statutory "Chizene" "Provision of Nationality Act of 1940 that @ person becoming a national by naturalization shall lose his nationality by residing continuously for three years territory of a foreten sae, being practically enti t fs successor, which was condemned by United ‘States Supreme Court as discriminatory, oud have Been invalid as a Congressional amp oexpurate regards fin.” Untied Staves v Laclonne Herel, 358 P2437 (1976)) “The statutory dafition of Taturalization” confi that in America, naturalization means conferring the character ofa statutory “ational” and aata statutory “iizen" USC. §1101(0N23) wanuralaton defined (0425) The term “nararaliation* mean the conferring of nationality [NOT cizen* or "US. cen stam, bu "natonaty", whic means “aatonal"]ofa stave [ofthe Unio upon a person afer bith, by any meus whassocver, INOTE: Compare with the defntion of exoaration") ‘The power of naoraizaton vested tm congre fy the constinaton, i power to confer etensip, nt a power to take I awn. 'A ‘naralzed cz, sid Chief Justice Marshall, becomes a member ofthe society, possessing all the rghts ofa naive citizen, and ng ine wo he costo, me fing of et he somo do ot enthroned er echt 0 fara re a TUS»: Wong Kim Ar, 19 0S, 649 (1898)) 13.4 human being who i a “national” but nota “clizen’ under federal statutory law Is Kent as a “zen ofthe United States” within the Fouleenth Amendmentto te U.S, Constitution. The Unie States Constitution confines fel to describing ciizenship within the states of ‘he Union and therefore, the term “United Sites’, as used within the Constitution, means the colectve states ofthe Union [called “The United Staies of America’ and EXCLUDES federal tetores and possessions and the Dstt of Columbia. 5" mentioned n most faders enactments sre wo completely different and mutual ‘hiss shown in tabular form in Table 3 ofthe folowing pages. This is VERY important and fundamental to understanding the Seoaraion Be 14.1 you would ike tc learn more about why people bom in states ofthe Union are “nationals rather than 'élizens" under federal law, refer to the pamphiet below: Winy vou are 2 alona’ “sale nation”. and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen, Form #06.006 nto Zsedm oraFoms/Fomindex.him 15.1" ecient of his form disagrees with any ofthe facts stated inthis section, then please provide the folowing within thity calendar days or {forever bo estopped from challenging these statements of fact: 1:1. Witten evidence signed under penalty of perjury (not opinion, but enacted posive lew, regulations, and Supreme Court rulings but rot thoee of ower courts) of same 152, helmissions to nectons 1,3, and 14 ofthe quaetione indested below elgnea under penalty of perjury ae required under 26 USC “Affidavit of Giizenship, Domicile, and Tax Status Page 14 of 227. The Tolowing lables desaibes the relalionship of lizenship lo legal jridicion in he contest of Sizenship 8s desorbed on this form. Table 1: Citizenship summary BUSS 501 i) 26USC ST7OIB KINA) BUSC Srio1eyen 23 17. The table below describes the affect that changes in domicile have on citizenship status inthe case of both foreign nationals” and “domestic nationals” A “domestic national” is anyone bom anywhere within any one of the 50 states on nonfedaral land or who was born in any terory or possession ofthe United States. A Toreign national is someone who was born anywhere outside ofthese areas, Table 2: Affect of domicile on citizenship status ‘CONDITION. ‘Domicile WITHIN ‘Domicile WITHIN: ‘Domicile WITHOUT the FEDERAL the FEDERAL ZONE and located ZONE and located WITHOUT the In FEDERAL ZONE FEDERAL ZONE ore “Unied States per “United States" per ‘Without the “Untod Staley por 2BUSC. §§7701(2)(9) and 2EUSC.§57701(axs) ané__| 26 USC. §7701(2V) and (2\10), {a10), 770%(ay3), 7408(C), and | (a)t0), 7704(ay98), 7408). | 77O1(a\38}, 740844), and 4US.C. AUS. §r10() land 4 U.S.C. §110(4) 110) Federal terres, possessions, | Foreign nations ONLY Foreign nations and the Distt of Columbia (NOT sia ofthe Union, States ofthe Union federal terttories, of Federal possessions possessions “0S Parson" “US. Person Nonresident aie 20) 7703 | 2usc.s7zoyex _| Tax form) t0 fe TRS Form 1040 plus 2555 TRS Form 1040NR: ‘aben indivuale, “nonresident lion indvduele” noncitzen nationals” “Fon-ctizen Nationa USC. s1401 2ousc soit BUSC §1101x21) {Wot require fo fe if physically ois presence tos!) EUSC_€1101(@422)8) present inthe “United States” BUS S405 Decause no statue requires BUSC s1a52 "Resident allen "Resident alan abroad “Nonresident aon indiauar 2BUSC S77010KAKA) 26USC. soit 26.CER 61 144-1 ul. (Moots presonce test) ‘Aton’: SUS. §110%/8\3) "Aen indiviuat ECAR SL 4st. oIQ0 NOTES "Unie States iste as federation win 25 USC. $6770 (ah) ang (a0), 7701). and 74049, and 4 U.S.C, S114. des net ince any poton ofa Corserl sat of ie Union. “The “isi of Cola is sabiory defined asa fader corporston bat ot physical ace, a “ody poco de jure “goverment win the Dist of Comba Act 187,16 Stat, 419, 425, Sec. 3A. Sov: Comateaton and Povatzalon of he Covert, For #6.0%; in /seén ox/FonnsFominds. Ameria rafrals who are doncid asl of federal urscin, athena sll of he Union or a fren courty. re "atonal But netizens” indore law. Toy also quay as ‘nonresident ars under 26 U.S.C. 7701(0))). Soe sectons 4.11.2 cfthe Great IRS oa fr otal. “Terpaay done he mide clurn onthe ght rst et he requtemens the ‘Presence es documeredin RS pubis "FEDERAL ZONE™Deti cf Colma ad ontors othe Und Sits nthe above ttle “The tm ila as ued n te fom 1040 mears anal” engged naan. Al-txpyers ae ‘aes’ engaged na “ade or ess ‘Thins cored by 26 CFR 81.144 cK), 26 OFR§1.4-16K2N), end 5 US. €55286N2). Sito U.S. czars 9 dfned n 8 U.S.C G40! ae not “ls” unless erpory abroad pursuant 26 U S.C. and sbjectioan ene ax testy wha oe couny.Ithatcapecy, sts, cians" letac wih he LR. as" ales” ater ban US. ozs trough atx teay wih a eeign cout 18. The folowing table descrbes the definition of various terms used on this form and in other contexts, “Ailidavt of Citizenship, Domicite, and Tax Status Page 15 of 2 Copyright SEDM, hito:/sedm.ora, Form 02.001, Rev. 424-2011