Larry Becraft, John Green discussion income tax, 2012/12/16

Telegraph radio or cable of dispatches messages and conversations originating

within the United States messages transmitted from a point within the United States to a point

without the United States are subject to the provisions of the ACT unless sent

with charges reversed or collect messages transmitted from a

point without the United States to a point within the United States are not subject to the tax unless sent with

charges reversed or now you can go through all of these

regulations that relate to this particular tax in an effort to find a clear and express provision that tells

you where it applies and my suggestion to you is is that that's what you see in

yellow is all that there is now from reading what appears in yellow can you

reach the conclusion about how the tax applied who applied to was it even internal

didn't it require crossing the borders front abely did everybody reaches that

that conclusion okay so regulations can be real

important now let's let's go back to the um can I get do an introduction here for

a second or not well yeah I think everybody's here what's that did you say Okay uh

this was Larry's suggestion to do this kind of researcher meeting we have two attorneys here John Green and Larry

becraft but for the rest of you I gave you a form and my my idea is that we should Network better around the

country and there's people researching and some of you in here might be the some of the best researchers in the country but Mo nobody knows you so our

hope is to gather your names and you don't this form is voluntary we're not the government here if you consider

yourself a researcher paralal or or you're a liberty-minded attorney you want to build a network of some sort so

so when you're researching something or having a problem you can go out to others and talk to them maybe video conference with them or get documents

from them if you think that's a good idea you may want to fill this form out I want talk to John and Larry they like

the idea so um that's kind of it so I

ran out of name tags for those don't have any so uh but they're going to I'm going to just turn turn the meeting over

to Larry this is a $2 donations roll informal today if you if you can do it bring it by sometime today uh we just

want to pay for the room and uh I hope you get something out of it Steve's got

a available back there CD and I want to explain what's on

it you know here this is kind of an introduction to what's on the the CD but

what you will find here is that all of the virtually all of the ma major tax

acts are on this disc along with with the relevant regulations so for example you know the

first one that's here is the Revenue Act of 1918 and of course you can with the

statutes at large this was compiled you know I personally did all this I had

somebody scan and convert to text you know this stuff right here and I went line by line by line through all these

acts to make sure that they're correct and so here you have the text

conversion of the Revenue Act in 1918 and it's all word searchable let's see how

you well let's let's not do it for right

now and it's real important in my view for people to be conversing with the

pattern that you run across when you start looking at the the tax laws this

Revenue Act of 1918 let's see maybe it pass it should be in section

210 ah now we're getting out of the

tax in lie of the tax imposed with subdivision a of section one of the Revenue Act 1916 and by section one of

the Revenue Act of 1917 there shall be levied collected and paid in Li

of okay so what what's happening here they're saying that they impos you know

if you go back to Revenue Act of 1916 and section one of the Revenue Act 1917

the Revenue Act of 1916 imposed the tax revenue Act of 1917 Section 1 amended it

and so you had as a result by by 1918 you had in effect those two acts which

impos the tax now they're com in along and saying oh well you know that that

tax is still in effect but in lie of that tax where we're establishing this

new one with these new rates can you see that in Li of

now let's go down to

21 210 we go

there inl of in layman's terms means inl of instead of instead

of

John rad normal tax section 210 that that in

lie of the tax imposed by section 210 of the Revenue Act of 1918 there shall be

levied collected and paid for each tax per year upon the net income of every

individual a normal tax of 8% per percentum of the amount of the net

income in excess of the credits provided section 2116 right so at this even here in

1921 whatever was whatever tax was imposed in

1916 Revenue Act of 1918 comes along says well in lie of that tax is still

upon the same thing right with the exception you know now they're monkeying

with the rates would you agree and so here we are in

1921 oh the 21 tax was in L of the 1918 tax which was in L of the 1916 1917 tax

can you see

that

24 so on the disc the the a switch to the statutes at large no the all the

acts are in the statutes at Large I yeah

it and this is pulled from the statutes large and we're we're we're not here

dealing with title 26 at least not

yet now John you want to read it again if you make it bigger

yeah normal tax section 210 a in Lee of the tax imposed by

section 210 of the Revenue Act of 1921 there shall be Lev collected paid for each taxable year upon the net income of

every individual except as provided in subdivision B of this section a normal

tax of six percentum of the amount of the net income in excess of the credits provided in two6 section 216 good enough

enough now can you see it's in Li of so here you if you were let's say it's 1925

you're going to sit down and look at the federal income tax you're going to turn to this 19 24

act and say it's in L well then you in L of the 21 so you turn back to the 21 and you'd read

section 2 the 21 you oh that's in L the one in 18 1918 so you turn back to the one in 1918 oh that's in L the 1916

1917 that's what you would do would you

not replacing the previous one yeah I I'll explain to you later

while this was

done section 210 joh normal tax section 210a in lie of the tax imposed by

section 2 10 of the Revenue Act of 1924 they shall be levied collected and paid

for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual except as provided subvision B of the section A

Amal tax of 5% percentum of the amount of excess of

the credits provided in6 okay so we're seeing that they're monkeying with the

percentage right yep and it here in the tax and post section they're plain to tell you it's

in Li of right and so you see a direct connection all the way

back now the format changes in 1928 this is the structure that

ultimately goes into the 1939

code section 11 is now the place where you find tax

imposed

John section 11 normal tax on individuals there shall be levied

collected and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual

a normal tax equal to the sum of the following does it have a l out there no

so now somebody coming along in 1928 they open up the tax code boom there shall be

Levy now if you limited your oh I'm going to form my opinion about this tax

just based on Section 11 you're going to miss something will you not and doesn't They isn't taxable

year a new term as well well uh we can go back up to the

definitions but hey you know you can you can see these terms a lot of these terms that you see in the current code they go

back start off in 1918 yeah but half the people don't pay income tax so they

don't have taxable years yeah now let's go down to most people would sit there

and say oh you know all I need to know is take a look at tax

imposed what Congress did is they carved out in Li

of stuck at someplace else

boom there it is they carved it out of tax

imposed stuck it over here in section 63 now you don't you don't see you know

unless you read along law you're unaware of the taxes imposed by this title shall

be in Le of the corresponding taxes imposed by title two the Revenue Act 1926 B section sections 11 211 we're L

of 210 so these now now you got something a

little bit different you have let's go down to

32 actually

11 well if you're in 1933 and you had a business and whoa now

you're hearing a gee what about this federal income tax if you make so much money you may not may be required to

file a return or if you're a new accountant you graduated a couple years before and you're beginning to oh what

about this tax you're going to start looking and how many people are going to sit out and look at the whole bling thing they're going to sit there and

look at section 11 woo every individual I'm an

individual and they're going to limit their inquiry to just this is that

correct yes natural human tendency

however past

it section

63 taxes imposed by this title shall be L of the corresponding taxes imposed with the sections of the Revenue Act

bearing the same numbers but now it's a li up still in Li up so the 32 tax even

though it's a little bit harder to find now the the 32 tax was in L the 28 tax

28 was in L 26 26 was in L 24 24 was 21 21 was L Revenue Act of 1918 which was

the L of 1916 1917 is this are they making it a little bit more

complicated number

34 so it's 1935

you're an accountant you buy from the zero interal

Revenue tax code you see the table of contents you

open it up Bo well there there's a tax on individuals and I'm only going to look

here why should I go anywhere else problem

is

there's a problem taxes above title shall be in L

of the corresponding taxes both Revenue Act at 32 so 34 was in L of 32 32 in L of 28 28

was L of 26 26 was L of 24 24 L of 21 21 L of 18

L of 1916 1917 so is it all kind of

connected

1936 there's our section 11

read Bob and I'm a reading glasses I'll try there shall be Levy oh you're like me

you can't see and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual normal tax of four percentum

of the amount of the net income of in excess of the credits against net income

provided in section 25 wow so you're going to sit there you're curious this tax is growing and

you're hearing more about this tax better look into it and so you turn to you know you get a little booklet from

the Bureau of internal revenue you start looking around woo look at this section

11 well all I need to do is just read this little booklet of the Bureau of internal revenue right but then not the

whole thing right right you wow there's a tax imposed okay I I'll take a look at

the instruction book because they reproducing the race and and history is going to be

ignored history was being ignored at that

time did you you scroll past every I caught

every person liable really quick well we we can we do that minut but listen I want to take things a step of a time

okay here we go taxes in L

34 agreed so why why did they was there

some purpose in you know carving out the alua feature hey when you to 1924 you see a

and pose you were put on notice well it was in Li of now they carve out and stick in Li of over in section

63 all right so this is 36 let's go down to

38 and of course that HTML file that you if you get the disc you know it's going to look a little bit different than what

we're looking at here on the screen but here we are a night

1938 John roller session 11 normal taxs on

individuals there shall be levied collected and paid for each taxable year upon the net income of every individual

a normal tax a 4% on the amount of the next income in excess of the credits

against net income provided in section 25 well what do you think most people at

that stage you know hear the they're hearing about this tax you know you're a vice president of some large

manufacturing company last year you didn't pay any income tax but this year you know you're hearing that oops oh

good grief I'm sorry

I moved disconnected project there we

go so you never paid a federal income tax so you you run to

your friend that happens to be an accountant he's been an accountant for 10 years he's beginning to hear about

this uh tax and he's might have heard some other accountants talking about

this tax you know that didn't affect a whole lot of people except the high of society and so you look into it and you

there aren't any schools that are going to teach you about this you know you're just going to pick up a booklet and form

your own opinion as an accountant or as an executive of a large company right

and you're going to who hey that that answers all my questions right there section 11 did that

happen and uh Capone got convicted yeah oh yeah yeah that woke a lot of people up or got

their attention rather but that wasn't for income tax

that was for alcohol violations it involved income

tax he was Gunn down for bought down for income tax but because he made alcohol based on

theot yeah his activities yeah rep passed that important

section there it is

1938 in L up and most people would you know since they're just beginning to get

into this they're not going to try to study it and you know it's just creeping

up on people and most people are not going

well it l up even if the ran across section 63 so what they're going to look at the

current one and there's a tax imposed on every

individual now in in December of 1938 you had a whole bunch of tax laws

or appeared all throughout the United States statute large you had title 26 in in effect at that time in 1926 we came

out with a the current uh you know the law that established the 50 titles of the US code

that we presently use and you know if you went and took a look at and it's on I'll show youall

this might be a good spot to look at that isn't this the beginning of administrative law well the

administrative procedures act came along in

1946 let me show you what title 26 like

this is on all that disc back there here we go in 192 as of well it says December 7th of

1925 you

know Title 18 title

26 you want to see what title 26 look like in

1926 oops passed down down to

Indians

there you go ever seen title 26 in

1926 it's way they divided it

up you know that like chapter 18 income tax uh chapter one Commissioner of

internal revenue special taxes chapter

4 chapter is that 11 opium cocoa leaves is that what it says and something else

compounds compounds and Manufacturing

so what they were doing back then is you know of course this was a reflection you know this is if you brought everything

up to the way it looked like on a certain date all the internal revenue laws and put them into a pattern this is

what it would look like of course it's it had a different structure than the tax law itself most people are probably

going to sit there and look at the title 26 you go to the law library here's the

title 26 this is what they going to see I you know we're don't have the time to dig into this but in reference to the

income tax which would be down there in chapter uh 11 or what is it 18 yeah

18 um it would be the two acts you know like you if you you looking at 1937 if

you were looking at title 26 what look like then it would have in one SE one one half of that chapter would be the

1936 tax and the other half would be the 1934 tax but as You' see you know that's not

the whole thing the whole thing would be all the AXS in fact in fact my disc back

there is closer to being a real reflection of title 26 than than what you see here or what you see in the

current code so I just I digress for a minute that's what it looked

like but now let's get back to

CD

so at that point in time you've seen it what title 26 looked like at that one stage you in

1926 you got some idea and I've explained it to you you've seen that we've got all this in there's an

interner relationship you know there's a a connection between you know really in 19

if you were in December 1938 if you really wanted to understand all of the income tax laws you wouldn't just focus

in on the Revenue Act of 1938 but you know if you really did something you well it's this is built on the 36 tax

and then you get back to the 36 tax oh it's built on the 34 and 34 is built in 32 32 is built in 28 28 is built in 26

26 is built in 24 24 is built in 21 21 is built on 18 which is based on 16 and

17 so if you really wanted to follow it forward forward you you you really need

to as the Supreme Court has said perhaps in in reference to Federal stuff you you

got to construe the tax laws in par materi which means don't look at the presid you got to construe the whole

shooting match all at once and if you don't look at the the whole shoot match all at once and you only focus on the

present what you know what's right here don't you think you might miss something

it's a pretty big radical yeah okay so now let's let's deal with 39

code February 1939 you had all these you

had tax on white phosphorus matches imposed in let say 1934 you know State GI imposed in 1928

you know taxs on wine you know they're all over the place and it wasn't cified

so what Congress did and you there's various arguments about the 39 code which I think are incorrect because I've

actually been to Washington DC been to archives pulled out the enrolled bill

for the 39 code and it's the printed version you know what passed through Congress was they had already printed

the sucker up it was the bound book that you see in the law library and I got a

copy of one of those but I went there and I you know I was looking for the signatures you know bills that are filed

with the uh Secretary of State to uh be the permanent keeper of all the

laws you know when you go and pull out the the law that for the 39 code it's that bound book and it side you can see

FDR signature and president Senate and you all the signatures are there on that

printed book so the bill I'm sorry I

keep the bill itself what's that book and a lot of people want to sit

there and say well you know G the there's you know the 39 code uh repealed all the underlying law well yeah that's

true but the this act also everything that was contained in this law that was

passed by Congress it was in some prior law it was repealed and all of the then existing

tax laws then in effect were now put into one spot one title which makes

sense to me consolidator and that's what you have with the 39 code so now let's let's

examine the 39

code this may be boring but there's a

point here we are table

contents now section 11 of the Revenue Act of 19 38 became section 11 the 39

code well the 38 Act was had a section 63 in L of remember

that and everything that got pulled from some prior act result was repealed if it was

contained in here and it was also in a prior law it

was the prior law was repealed making this the embodiment of the law so here

we have section 11 of the 38 act goes into section 11 of the 39

code but what about it

l

oops God we're getting real close there's on Section 61 there's section

62 lower ball there section 63 does it say Lu up

no so section 63 from the 38 act still

is one of those things sitting out there unrepealed in fact that publication statistics

that's stuck there in section 63 comes from I think in 1926 or 1928 act you

know you can get the you can get the derivation tables you pull out the 39 code it has the derivation tables it'll

tell you that you know the table itself will say this section comes from you know this law and so if we were to look

at that section 63 right here where it came from off the top of my head I

remember came from some 1926 to 1928 you know other other law so section 63

didn't make it into the 39 code and therefore section 63 of the 38 act wasn't repealed was

it is it hidden someplace else it's still sitting there you know it's section 63 not it's not in here

someplace else no it's not in here anywhere so section 63 still sits there

today and of course it makes all sense in the world because you know the the 38

Act was dependent upon all those others and if you're going to codify all the laws into one one act you know uh you

could have stuck section 63 here and then you would let the world know but

then that's not essential that since they didn't it just simply means that section 63 of the 1938 act still exists

unrepealed today okay does that mean it's valid what does

that mean it's valid yeah it's still it's just an odd feature of the law but I mean how many people

are going to sit there and you know dig to all this stuff to see it most people are going to sit there I'm going to deal

with the 86 code and you know and this is a real problem I talk to people in

the tax movement John copar is a good friend of mine

sap I I've never heard of all this stuff I just deal with the 86 code or the 54

code how many people in the movement even look beyond the get your code says

irn hey you can buy your code tab from me look all you need to do is just study

the code well you know you can reach certain conclusions by the code but then again you know if you only do that if

you ignore a history what's the old adct that goes along with that Doom to repeat it oh and I've just

seen too many times being doomed to repeat it as is a very expensive lesson

screw you back then screw you twice yeah yeah yeah so now let's deal with oh G should

have done

that okay we're at the 39

code and here we are the have the 54 code which is also a text conversion now

this is the way you know from uh February 1939 the 39 code was in

effect and in August of 1954 they were wanting to come out with the 54 code a

lot of people are going to sit there you know they're in this movement you can hear some all sorts of wild

Tales but what is the 54 code well the 54 code imagine this here's here's a

putting it into illustrative examples what is the 54 code imagine the 1939 code the way it

existed way it looked in August of 1954 you know it was the 39 code as it

was originally enacted there were a whole bunch of amendments in the intervening 15 years you know Congress

would come along and amend section you know 114 to read thust and such or 119 to read th and such you know add word

here and subtract a word there you know there were a bunch of amendments they're always tinkering with

it but they uh even though they Tinker with it still the basic features you know who's subject to it Remains the

Same but imagine the 54 code

uh it being created from the 39 code and what they did is take the 50 the 39 code

the way it looked in August of [Music] 1954 take some scissors to it cut up the

sections and so you have one piece of paper has one section which you know you know some of these sections be that long

but then come along and cut up some of those sections into subsections and now

you got a whole bunch more little pieces of paper now reshuffle it you now you got all these pieces of paper Shuffle it

like a deck of cards into a new format and then even makees some word

changes but the 54 code the way had is equal in meaning to the 39 code after it

was cut up reshuffled re words changed

you know the government says Congress says Stills the same

thing that's the 54 code so now you have the 54

code you know remember you have the section 63 the 38 act even at this stage

is still sitting out there and of course the 54 code which is

this looks it looks entirely different in fact you

know let's just take one example let's go back to that 39

code pull up section [Music]

22 even pass it

there we are maybe increase the

size you all right done supposed to breath the air and drink the water

look at section 22 gross income includes gains profits

and income derive now most people going to

look that sentence income is the gains and profits

which are a part of not the totality of salaries wages and compensation is that

a more accurate reading of that if income is derived from salaries then

not all salaries are Income right not all wages are Income am I am I

correct you see that point any questions inally confusing huh it's

intentionally confusing intentionally complex so the confusion is

created I call I call it government by indirection yeah good good good

observation John but I I got this you know let's take this is something I

think is real important and I was talking about it yesterday you know you have these statuto definitions you like uh let's say to use

an example uh you know animal animal in this law means a dog a cat a horse and a

cow okay and I think y'all have agreed with me that a dog and a cat are two different things even though they're

animals subsets of animals but wouldn't you think the same thing here that you know as a matter of

law salary is you know put put a dog there and under wages put cat there and

salaries and wages is just are as different as a dog and a cat right they are two different things would you

agree then that makes what's that next phrase compensation for personal

services is a little bit different

now let's go to now when when what's real Handy is to

there's a committee report you know the Senate and the house each came up with committee reports

regarding uh the 54 code and you sit there they have a section by section

analysis and I might have it here on my computer but you know I can't find it real quick but when you read the section

61 analysis you it would say oh well you know why we've changed the word to

simpli change the word to simplify it still as a matter of law section 21 I

mean section 22 is equal to section 61 of the of the code of the 54

code but now do do you think that there are even though as a matter of law says

Congress section 22 equals section

61 doesn't it look different yes and if you ignored the

history will you not look at this and Come Away with something entirely

different in the way of an impression you know I would look at

section 22 and say oh income compensation for services is the

source for gains and profits right y but

now you're going to come along and oh we've simplified it yeah you've simplified

it to imply something else is that right

Steve yes and guess what ladies and

gentlemen you see wages and salaries there

is it

there now let's go to something

else um years ago 20 or 30 years ago guy

a friend of mine from from Dallas was chaning reading some of the old regulations and he ran across what

you know has now been popularized by other people this is from regs 45 which would

be for the Revenue Act of 1918 and guess what we see there gross

income excludes items of income specifically exemp by Statute and also

certain other kinds of income by Statute or fundamental law free from

tax so here when you have a you know the theme of the tax laws is

first first let's to determine what net income is and from net income you

know taxable income is derived so the all the way up to the 39

code the concept of the tax law was well

while we're only taxing taxable income to arrive at taxable income we must must first determine

net income but then again some of that net income may be exempt a statute or

fundamental law right that's R 62 which should

be okay article 71 again something's excluded gross income excludes the items

of income specifically Exempted by Statute and also certain other kinds of income by Statute or fundamental law

free from

act5 again article 61 65 would be I think off top I don't have it here think

this is for the 1924 act term gross income as used in this act does not include those items of income Exempted

by Statute or by fundamental law 69 are all these laws still active

today no these what I'm showing you here are the regulations we've been we've already been through you know the very

SAS and you know we didn't descend to that but the acts themselves would sit there and say oh and the Commission in

conjunction with the Secretary of the Treasury can promate you know regulations are the regulations still

this is this is a set of Regulation this is 69 and and you watch them you know and

they keep growing and growing and growing and but hey you know you keep seeing the same old words used all over

again can one refer to them as existing regulations these are not existing they're not this is historical

okay and they're all they're all on that desk you know let me what what benefit

would they be if they're not the reason that they're beneficial is because of that

adage that we've been talking about if you don't know history you're Ted to repeat it yeah yeah history is a great

teacher and see here you have you know here you have on this disc here are the

link you know if you pull up the h mail file the laws the folder laws well here here are all those tax

acts and but then again the the regulations are here regulations 45 for

the 1918 act regulations 45 for the 19 for

amended 1920 reg 62 you know all of these you know all

these were you know we've been through the acts and here are the regulations that would be adopted by the

commissioner and the and the Secretary of the Treasury for for each specific act you know like reg 677 I think would

apply to 1932 act I've got a disc that you published I

guess it was conjunction with We the People okay a lot that information is still yeah yeah yeah ACC yeah you

know you add stuff and you subtract stuff I can't tell you what you know for for a number of years what you're seeing

right here is the way I've distributed this reg 63 Reg 103 is for the 39 code

reg 101 is for the the 1938 act reg 94 is for the 36 act uh re 86 is for 32

28 26 24 is there any sequence or behind the

uh correlation of numbers like you're saying yeah because you know you got to go you got to go back things were

simpler then Congress had passed the law and you know like like uh hey oh maybe I can

show let's see I might have some here so the secretary decided to issue a new set of

Rags for a speci well a new act would come out and he would uh

see does each secretary to rewrite his his regulations okay wait just wait wait

wait okay here we go look okay

yeah and the s in a simpler time you like the these regs T td3 let's see this

related to o on margarine so regs 34 were for uh the o old margarine tax for

uh that was in effect in January 1920 regs 36 related to Cotton you know

and and you can see I I stuck the word in here to you know for my own purposes

you know I can see the regs 38 related to the corporate excise tax reg 39 related to the missions tax reg 40

related to the stamp tax reg 40 also dealt with the stock tax excess profits

uh dues Admissions and dues that's real important that was a tax go to the theater a cabaret and there was a tax

all and so you know here you go the you know the the commissioner comes along and when Congress right here re 43 RIS

applies to part one related to the tax on emissions imposed by title 8 of the Revenue Act of 198 18 approved February

24th of 1919 and this all this came about because of the 16th Amendment no

this this 16th Amendment only related to the to the income tax and you know

Admissions and dues doesn't have anything to do with income it was uh if you were going into a a theater are

these excises then well the courts would construe a tax

upon the admission to a theater as certainly being an excise tax

and you have look look here's tax on sodas which was regs 44 regs 46 child

child labor which was declared unconstitutional uh sales see he had a

whole bunch of sales taxes you know and I've just um

transportation that's the regulations 48 related to Transportation reg 48 excuse

me regs 49 dealt with that this one deals with art and

jewelry toilet trees RS 51 so you know you can see s does

clothes RS 54 dealt with clothes so I see that this imposes a lot

of taxes but it doesn't necessarily establish liability of those taxes that's by pay well you have to you each

each Act you know you have to we're concerned with the income tax in the past you know before before Congress

became dependent upon uh income taxes you know you had taxes imposed a wide variety of things you've seen some of

the titles and so you know you go back through and you know States and gifts to

is this toilet Tre no this is motion picture films and so you know they have tried

various taxes and hey look at what the here there's radio Transmissions which we incidentally covered a minute ago

starting out this morning let see insurance tax on

insurance you know so they they have just booze here's regs reg 60 double

booze is that what they called it they called no that's that's just my handy term okay can you see that yeah I put

regs 59 which is treasury decision 28 2983 and I that is my own word there

when I named the file so that I can have a general idea as to what I'm looking at that's right you said that earlier you

know so it you know to me alcohol is booze I think a lot of people call it

booze although this file happens to be called alcohol it maybe it may be a different

this may be the alcohol that you drink this may be denatured or something like that see what it is yeah denatured

alcohol okay people used to drink that too yep give

tax you know so you've had a wide variety of taxes and have imposed perfumes look here's perfumes you know g

s treasury decision 2063 it is 11 pages long or maybe a little less but there it

is that creates a lot of government jobs yep they pass a lot of laws and they

write a lot of regulations you know here oh oh here let me we don't have the time

to do it but you know I now that we're in this happen to be in this folder remember I started off and I was

explaining to you you know you look at the regulations and you know G that the you

here's the one spot where it seems to tell you exactly how it applies but then you've also gone we've

gone through this and and the boat example is a real good reason if we have the time to go through

and show you the infinite details of the boat RS uh but this explains in my view it's

a real good illustration of explaining why they use this in LOF trick and

they've been using it you know that some inventive genius in the treasury Department came up with it probably the 1860s

1870s but you know in 1909 uh Congress passed the tax on Farm

buil Ys you know obviously designed for your Morgan your vanderville and the

Rockefellers and people like that and of course those people initiated a lawsuit and uh went all the way to

Supreme Court Supreme Court Justice white comes out and the you know the case dealing with tax un formed yachts

and justifies it's of course it's constitutional and incidentally in that in that decision white says you know

there's a difference between things domestic and things foreign in their use and that's inherit in the Constitution

whoa that I think it's pretty profile statement it's inherent the Constitution something the difference between things

domestic and things foreign and their use and they're sitting there dealing

with the tax imposed on foreign built Yachts but I

digressed when you when you when you take a look at that boat tax you know I call it you see I call it

boats um you know Yachts were call boats back then that was full

of you know here after the Supreme Court Justified and determined to be

constitutional they got boats okay this is y or boat Yachts pleasure boats power

boats motor boats with fixed engines and sailing boats over five net tons link

not over 50 ft well you know when

you Congress after the first tax was Appel now they come along in Le of well

in Le of the tax which incidentally the Supreme Court found to be constitutional and deare declared to be an excise tax

in L of that tax we he might oppos this tax and if you're looking at the if you're

looking at the lot itself there doesn't seem to be any apparent connection to

foreign but you descend into the regulations and boom you see a real

clear description of far and so you know I use the boat example as an a real good

example of uh why they use the alua feature make something

you got a very limited constitutional tax you want to make it look bigger hey

pull a little trick in L of and then you know then then hide it

in history and of course the people people never learn from experience people never

learn from history so they going to ignore history just like we have done and they're not going to go back into

and they're not going to see they're not going to see what we were on a minute ago

let me go back to where we were we were at

here R 65 article 71 I think we covered this

one 69 term grosser income is used in this

act does not include those items of income Exempted by Statute of fundamental

law

term gross income as used in this act does not include those items of income Exempted by Statute or by fundamental

law

77 same thing doesn't it fundamental law

what is what the world is fundamental law well common law constitutional

law different there yeah

yeah neither income Exempted by Statute or fundamental law or expenses incurred in connection there withth or uh other

than interest enter into the computation net income by section 21

now you have another additional income not taxable by the federal government under the

Constitution who now it's becom a little bit more little clear it looks like to me that old expression fundamental law

translates into

this what year was that oh let's see that's going to be 86

is probably going to be Revenue Act of 1934 or the rare times they use that

term I bet you well we look we're going okay now this is 1936 so this would be

for the 36 tax I think okay now they're kind of expanding things let me blow it

up here as I'm using Federal Register Pages here

that under Section 22 exclusions from gross income certain

items again come specified in section 22b are exempt from tax and may be what

exclude from gross income these items however exempt only to the extent and

the amount specified no other items are exempt from gross income except those

items of income which are under the Constitution not taxable by the federal

government and what what what is that hey interesting question is

it now they don't tell you any placeit no that's that's that's part of arguing

about all this stuff um I can't see the what section of

the regulations this is evidently it's healthare oh it's

article 115 we were on that a minute ago on the other one you know I showed you 115 a minute ago and now looks like to

me it's kind of expanded now can you see the benefit you know you you look at you know just a minute ago I

showed you this and it looks like I've added a few more words this time you know they keep you know adding a little

bit more we we looked at one the 115 rag a minute ago and now we're on the 115 rig

for the next set of RS and it looks like to me they've added a few more clarifying words among the items

entering into the competition of corporate earnings or profits for the particular period are all income Exempted by Statute income not income

not by the federal government under the

Constitution okay 116 oh that's State

officials I want to bring this to your attention yeah this is something something

that maybe that's a little bit too

large well prior to this time and all the way up through

34 what was real clear they were taxing uh the income of non-resident aliens not

engaged in Trader business here in the United States to find Trader business I think personally I think

Trader business is something that's engaged in by again you know P popular Patriot

mythology says Trader business will be the performance of a government office that is not born out when you

study the history trade of business in my view is any trade of business engaged

in and carried on by by Resident alien even though it even though it's

defined as public office inod got the word

includes so you know it's kind of like there's a lot of people right now you know what is

it 74 23 you know oh you know the tax crimes only apply to corporate officers

blah blah blah because you know they're using the word person well you know that argument is addressed by you got to use

the you know 7701 A1 the definitions of person

you know that right there that word person applies to the entire code but

then you know we have a a bunch of people in our community coming along and ignoring that and sitting there and

saying 7423 23 I guess that's the number you know it says person includes a corporate

officer and they make an argument that oh the tax crimes only apply to a corporate officer well you know that's

wrong because they're ignoring you know the the definition of person in the in the code but you know one of the the

things that I see here you know you when they when they came along and now they're

expanding from a non-resident alien not engaged trade visit here in the United States now for a non-resident alien

actually engaged was engaged in trade or business within the United States or had an

office or place a business therein you know why does suddenly when

that happens now you find you know now they

expand the tax to non-resident aliens actually engaged to trade business here in the United States and suddenly out of

the wild blue yonder accept those items which are

exempt from taxation by Statute or treaty or which are not taxable by the federal government under the

Constitution a phrase you've seen before you know why is that you may I suggest

to you I think a porman has a direct relationship to this

okay let's see if there's what's a using the word means versus includes when it says government

employee means or this means as opposed to this includes is there well you know

I wouldn't want to for any one particular thing I wouldn't want to uh limit my argument based upon what

you see currently I would go back and trace it all the way forward because

when when you trace it forward you know I've just seen too many people when they limit their conclusions based on the

current code and ignore history they often reach a conclusion the exact

opposite of what the truth is the reason I and that includes professionals we have professionals which is tax lawyers

and accountants we have people in government that work in the tax field you know

everybody we're all going to deal with with the current well they're going to reach erroneous conclusions just like

the movement's going to reach the erroneous conclusions if you ignore history but everybody's bound and

determined can we do that with the r can we look at like 26 CFR at

6331 four I think it is it says uh federal employees paragraph

about federal employees and it says what a lot of people on Bas on 6331 reach the conclusion based on the statute maybe be

May on the officer or employee but you know hey you know you won't you won't

you will not understand who an employee is until you look at it historically I'm

not going to tell you what it is I'm I'm going to let you go out and learn who an employees but another the key factor

here is uh the meaning of income because historically we find that

it does not mean compensation for labor including tax wages or salaries it meant income

derived from those things which would be uh not

the compensation itself but some earnings that you might Ur occur by gain

or profit arising from the employment such as John if your

employer is paying you vacation pay and you do not have to surrender any labor

to get vacation pay could you if you were looking at it from the Viewpoint of the government wouldn't that be a gain

or profit uh it could be if you were getting sick

leave you know you don't surrender any labor for a sick leave you know wouldn't

that looking at it from a government Viewpoint wouldn't that be a gain or profit from salary or wages well or if

uh you were be paid by the end of the week and you weren't paid until the end

of the month and the employer paid you interest on the money he borrowed from

you for 3 weeks uh that interest would be income yeah but not the wages

themselves yeah but I mean I would suggest you look at what specifically

treated is at length in the regulation the specific items under Section 61

regulations is about what income is and it's kind of but hey let's let's move on

we got here it is 11:25 and I'm just simply showing to you here we are the

regs 101 for the 1938 act and again you

have this language no other items are exempt from

gross income except those items of income which are under the Constitution not taxable by the federal government

and you know

this you know in a number of places you know you you see you know as time goes

by you know more and more often you find more and more spots in these regulations where they're talking about this income

not taxable by the federal government under the Constitution there's one spot and let's see here's another spot

oh you know I I nothing irritates me more than you know the the uh I don't

see why state employees nothing has changed constitutionally and boy this

this was an accurate statement then as well as today compensation state officers

employees compensation received for services rendered to a state is to be included in gross income less the person

receives such compensation from the state as an officer or employee thereof and such compensation is immune from

taxation of the Constitution of the United States and today you know you know I I

don't think constitutionally a state employee can be taxed but they don't care State surrender yeah here's a again

you know once these non-resident aliens were taxed on doing business here in the

United States by maintaining an office but there's something that even they do

which may not be taxable by the federal government under the

Constitution I think federal federal employees should be the only ones paying the damn tax they the ones getting the

benefit from it yeah yeah well go back and go back and look at some of the old

stuff about compensation for personal services do you think that the federal government might have even reached the

conclusion that a government worker has absolutely a zero basis in what he is

pay paid by the government you know under it seems like to me it's an acknowledgement that they're what what a

government employee is being paid as pure profit because they have nothing invested in it

it's it's all gravy where I mean if you if you sit down and take a look at the

what they have to say about government employees and reference to compensation for personal services you know there's

some real real interesting uh conclusions one conclusion being the

government acknowledges that the the work of a government worker is

valous and therefore is pure profit title 4 section 111 says that the United

States consents to income tax courts employees in corporate

offic and that that's of course then a contractual

agreement to pay taxes uh rather than uh

you know the ation of a statute for without the Contra element of contract

well that's put in their contract for them yeah I have a quick question sure

um back in the mid 90s I was involved in a group here I don't think's around anymore but a guy come up with some

documentation from it's not the tax law but it was laws back in

1869 where it showed that federal government employees had to pay a 3% Cas

yeah that was a tax on before that it was 1864 but you know there there's

we're not talking about you know historically you can examine the taxes

of the Civil War era yeah and because there's a lot of related parallels uh you know the documentation

that they're talking about is in reference to withholding you know I think that the

argument really back then was you know it was based on statute that there was this distinction they were only engaged

withholding on government employ employes uh but you know all of that that's historical you know I use certain

parts of the Civil War stuff to reach certain conclusions but beyond that I don't I don't study the Civil that's

kind like the beginning of all this Inc well I mean you know to me uh I haven't seen any record you know anytime you

engage in Fiat you're going to have a Fiat monetary system you got to suck up that excess credit from the economy you

got to have a way of taking something from everybody yeah to maintain the value of the CR

credit so an income tax who performs that that function well what and so they were they they knew that they were going

to come out with paper to finance the Civil War so you better come up with an income tax if it

did well and you had different features you know one is sophisticated is what we

have today yeah well one thing that's interesting to examine in this connection is the

gift taxs because I would say that vacation pay sick pay

bonuses and all that are gifts they're not compensation for

anything well yeah that's that would be an argument but we're we're not even to that stage yet because you know it's

quite possible that the government is sitting there telling us hey wages are

sick leave you know vacation pay severance pay I think it's a real good

argument and but because we're over here uh we haven't even ress to addressing

those issues you can make those arguments our contention would be hey that's you know we we do have a basis of

vacation pay but you we haven't even resolved the question of the taxability of compensation for labor job yeah but I

would say that the same analysis shows that gifts are not income

true and yet the government is treating them as though they were a gain yeah yeah Mr be yeah why is it you suppos

that if you look on 2012 website of the IRS now W2 W2 1099 and all those are

class five what's your gift to the state why well uh I'll tell you

this you know I I was educated by Wayne Benson you know 25 years ago about

6209 you know you can draw certain conclusions about uh you know like tax

class and everything else you can draw certain conclusions you you know there are some interesting things about the

way that the IRS oh God got keep doing that there are interesting things about

how the IRS keeps its books and Records you know the computerized books and

records and I don't think that you know we would probably benefit if we had somebody on the inside that could teach

us something more than you know our people sitting down and looking at 6209

but I I don't think you sit there and draw straight conclusions that the law

operates in a certain fashion from the way that the IRS you know the

conclusions we draw from the way that the IRS keeps its books and records and

you know even though you know you might want to make make an argument about you know certain tax classes you know this

is this is thisty you know we haven't really I I wouldn't want to sit there and based on

6209 and you know tax class or something then draw a conclusion that's the way the law operates so they could based on

that well tax class we move it over to this whatever but I you know I uh employment as far as I'm concerned based

you know and I've studied it all the way back to the beginning as it suggested here the employment taxes are uh a

method of of collecting uh the income tax from whoever is an employee and so

it statutorily is directly related to a feature of the income tax I ask you a

question can I ask you a question about jurisdiction all right in your

opinion where would my body have to be domiciled for this to all this all this

to apply to me my when you say all of this you talking about like the income tax that's everything you talking about

well I think that there's a you know one of the reasons why I think it's important for people to engage in word

searches is um did you say word SE word searches absolutely and you know I think

and I don't know what Steve's got on the the regs disc but you know I created

okay here we go let me get over to it can I bring up a point about what you

just said yeah if you go to us code. house.gov that's the office of law

revision Council MH and they have a search engine on there and if you search the code for and you got to put it in

quot because if you don't you'll get a 100 zillion hits but if you search for income tax collected at

source at us code. house.gov office La Council you'll only get three hits in

all titles you're are you reading zo's website no I'm this is I developed this

search on my own it's in the one of the yeah uh zult is a friend of mine

he's got what is tax and who is taxed that those websites and it's the same thing you

know you know I I I have my own personal idiosyncrasies I kind of like doing word

searches not bulling searches but you know word searches in PDS but it's interesting because in uh if you look at

income tax collected at source that's specific has to do with the way the 16th

Amendment is worded true I'll tell you if you if you take a look at you'll understand the

employment taxes when you take a cooh hard look at the applo taxes going all all the way back to the beginning and

after you just move forward into time you know the only the only conclusion is that you'll reach is wow the world is

really screwed up and it's interesting because the only people Lial is the

employer employer yeah and but but who is the employer 3403 what is the citizenship stat you tell me what's the

citizenship status of an employer the employer I think that I believe it's

referring to is the one described in title 4 section 111 which says the

United States consents to in tax well you know you're you're you're you're

reaching outside of the tax stuff to reach a conclusion absolutely why don't you why don't you go over to the tax

stuff and and see if you based upon that reach that same conclusion 26 though instead of why

don't they set why don't they say in title 26 the United States consens income tax but it's in title four the

government title because that's a function of government it's their prerogative to do either

approve or not but my argument is well then where's the where's the section of law that makes private sector employees

liable for income tax well or private sector employers that's another good uh

search you go to uh if you go to the US House uh us code website and search it

for I made liable is liable shall be liable I did all that it's easy to find

there's no there's nothing there that makes me liable right I got all the search for results at home is it an important question of where

we're it really it really is I think it's a good question it absolutely is

however all I'm telling you I don't know whether Steve's got this but I have it

on my hard drive you know I just take all the you know like I'll take this right here this is the folder that has

the 2003 Rags you know I've got I got the 1997 1998 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 3

2004 2005 2006 you know all those volumes of tax regulations which you can

pull down off of a government website but for uh 2003 what I used is I strung

together all of the part one RS you know you can either certain to have 13 or 14

different searches you know I like to do things the lazy way I just combined it all into one 10,000 60 page document all

the regulations and so now do the advanced

search let's not do that let's do

that wow there a lot of hits but look at look at

that crap and those in the r yeah this is just

RS which is equivalent to CFR Yeah the code of federal regulations

that's what this is I call it RS citizen resident are they the same

D yeah I know exactly what you mean you know you're going to find under Section

871 regulations if you want a definition of residence in D go over there

doile a resident is somebody that goes to has a separate doile you know I'm

domiciled in Alabama I I'm here in Austin if I stayed

here for a while for a couple months to do something I'd be a resident but my doile would be in Alabama that's what

and you would not be a citizen of Texas no I wouldn't but you know a citizen of

America an American citizen can go anywhere in any of the states and just

like that what's make a determination that he's going to become a citizen of the states point of National American

National versus American hey look a national is a guy from the in Pres

in like Puerto Rico well there you you got to look at

tiate some of the instr possession dudes have been made citizens you know Puerto

Rico the Virgin Islands I think the only possible Nationals you can have today are Swain's Island and you know I've got

it here okay all right you bring it up you bring it

up no I don't think well let me look well Nationals include

citizens but not all nationals are citizens well you can be a national an

American abroad can be viewed by other countries as a national we would be

classified as a national but here internally I'm sure zeld out a national

yeah by the way it's useful in uh aru care look okay

let me see let's be real specific since it's been brought

up I got a few that would be the baseball team

right that was a joke sorry sorry oh it's because we're on this B

thing that's word yeah well then I got I got still got a

Zoom that'll it let's

see residents of the northern Maran Islands who did not elect to become US

citizens oh okay here we go ah here we

are the following are the only persons classified as us Nationals persons born

in America Samoa and or Swain's Island and the northern

Maran where they do not elect to become a US citizen that right there ladies and

gentlemen are the only Nationals we have in this country but inherently they get to

choose however a statute can come along and say oh wherever the word national

applies here it will include citizens or Nationals so you but in

apparently you know this word national didn't get it start until the first time you find it in in the law is in the 20s

it's just kind of a new term that came up it's been used in the International Community but the inherent nature of a

national is somebody that's in in possessions and so we have a whole bunch of Patriots running around saying oh I'm

a national I'm a national I'm I think that's that's that's dangerous what about uh dual citizenship after World

War II there's a lot of that as we had our services our forces headquartered or

not station overseas well I don't know Mom and Dad have a baby in Germany or Panama Canal they have dual citizenship

up until they're 21 and how does that work I I've never looked into that I have no idea so can I ask my question

again sure so where does my body need to be domiciled for the United States

government and all these agencies to have any kind of jurisdiction over me Mr

D and Resident are two different things I just ask you doile doile is where you

have an intention to live cently I told you my my doile is my house understand

in hille Alabama your doile is I'm asking you where do my body need to be doneil for any of this to effect on me

well any of this is the problem okay let me see United States government inal revenue code in the FDA for for any of

those congressional powers constitutionally granted yes sir it wouldn't matter where in the in the

United States meaning the 50 states you were domiciled the United States is not the 50 that's one of the definitions is

the 50 states there's four definitions generally speaking what is subject to the

jurisdiction of the United States are all states and territories possessions protectorates

leas holes the grounds of foreign embassies abroad US flag vessels at Sea and the

coastal Waters uh going out to whatever distance

we ass assert these days but that is still subject to further

limitations on the subject matter of jurisdiction but generally speaking

subject to the jurisdiction applies to all that territory now of course the government

has also been asserting jurisdiction for some subjects on US citizens abroad like

tax for taxes or uh in a few cases uh for

uh uh International crimes uh the law

offenses cancel law so are you saying are you saying that the United States government has

jurisdiction over who where you sit right here well did you did you you didn't come yesterday did you no I okay

we covered it yesterday yeah generally speaking there are there are three kinds of jurisdiction no I'm didn't ask me

that or do you have do the United States government have jurisdiction over you where you sit right now yes for some

subjects for what for taxes uh for some taxes could be not

others but remember there are three kinds of jurisdiction subject matter called

subject territorial jurisdiction meaning locom and personal jurisdiction Persona

all three jurisdictions must be established in order to bring a

defendant into court personal Territorial and subject matter matter

what's in r in r in R is on the thing you know like uh abilty you know there's

a lot of stuff in the in our movie where people are talking about ad to which is a lot of it's crazy but in real is

operating on a a thing is typically an interim action is pursued you grab if

you grab the thing like a ship the you know there's another expression you know

when it relates to men you grab certain parts but if you grab a a ship you know typically the owner will

follow and so abilty likes to acquire jurisdiction uh through in Rim memes

grab the grab the thing and the owner will follow so there's something there that I mean that well it's really a kind

of uh that was developed for for seizing ships and stuff like yeah but that does

doesn't mean that every seizure is is averty no no but there's a there's a lot

of people that will contend that erroneously but but there's adaly jurisdiction even to this day of course

yeah but it there is no app jurisdiction right here contrary to promoters that

have gone around here the last couple years there would be in Houston the Port of Houston for instance that could be

well but you know I I tell you even the Port of Houston is going to be the water because the peers along you know the

Supreme Court said this you know Supreme Court has made a distinction between a crane on a ship unloading cargo would be

enamy but a crane on the dock unloading the ship is not now that's pretty that's

cutting things pretty pretty close but then you know the the the ad promon to

run around wow they're going to say that you know I'm sitting here or I could be in the high Des desert and whoa this is

a but that makes sense because that would be a Japanese ship with the Japanese crane on that ship un Ling

American Goods hit some lady pushing a cart and then you know well but you know

the the popular contentions about aaly are uh I'll just say insane you know

there's nothing there's nothing Apple tea you know even though that it might be a river atar out there there isn't

anything a there isn't anything aity about Highway 71 or being white or whatever you're going to call it and

there isn't anything adaly about this this hotel and a lot of the areas that had uh did have adaly jurisdiction to

the United States they've you know suited it to the states like New York Harbor that was one of the examples

Larry used yesterday New York Harbor they've given up federal government's given up their jur exclusive isn't that

as crazy as them saying that because the certain field floods in a farmer's ground that that's wet lands and and no

that's treaty base let's go back to this question let go do you gentlemen can you gentlemen give

your opinion the two attorneys and John if the IRS has those three jurisdictions

over my body sitting here right here today it depends on you're right as you

sit here right now you're not within the jurisdiction of the United States but if you if you open a whiskey distillery in

your backyard I'm not going to do that okay so it depends you can't just they

don't exist unless you're doing something that allows the I'm just sitting here I'm just why do we call them the

IRS why don't we call them the entity forly known as the IRS and make that an

official label because that's what the treasury order says well I know but you know the popular mind is if you want to

get technical but the popular mind you know you're going to lose somebody if you went around and engage in

conversation with them the treasury order call it says the entity look it up treasury order 1 15-06 it's right there

I'm not making that stuff up that's an active treasury order today it hasn't

been rescinded that's where they they were abolished the designation was abolished not the entity yeah so let's

call it the entity because that's what it is if we call it the internal rence service we're giving credence to

something that doesn't exist you're you're you're right hey we've got to we've got to go out and affect the uh

the American people we got to get them to look at some of this stuff they wake up can't we do that in the court of law

can't we sue and say in your honor they're not the IRS most people are don't know or care what happens in

courtrooms I don't care about most people the judges do I know but we if

we're going to reach the American people we have to be able to take the message to them in a way that they can

understand and a court of Victory would do that only if they know about it well then you tell them and I got another

thing the Court's not going to give you a vict iory in a tax matter subject about all these well one

reason we're never going to get rid of this crap is because there's a cottage industry of billions and billions of dollars developed around the fraud right

there's too many people being paid off so if you can start suing third parties for using these Eternal re IR we can get

out of an I'll tell you this there's a lot of good ideas I talk to everybody in the movement has a well let's do this

let's do that I have my own long list of let's do this and and you know there's a

lot of real good things we can do okay here's one people to do them when you file your income tax form you're

violating federal law how's that one because you're violating 691 it says you

shall file in the internal revenue District where you live or where you work that's paraphrasing it I agree but

that's what it says it says you shall in legal pars doesn't M that mean 99% of

the time mean must well then they they also compel you to file at the service centers by means of the the in

unpublished the rules that appear in the 1040 instruction book but if the Secretary of Treasury could hand out

exemptions to certain things like they've been handing out exemptions to Health Care yeah left and right I want

an exemption for violating that that law that says I got a file the internal revenue District where I live because

they got R than bam districts illegally in the district director position illegally because uh IRS R9 8

says it's in Congressional mandate at that section of code that the district director needs to approve in personal

writing on certain levies and that's Congress said that and uh there's that

am journal in 1962 that says you can't add or subtract anything with regulation from a statute otherwi otherwise the

damn thing is invalid the district director issue is part of what Lindsey Springer is litigating from but Lindsay

didn't research our Lindsay Lind

makes uh half of an argument he didn't research it he didn't say he went over

to my website you're what you're talking about and what Lindsay's talking about he pulled off of my website well I

didn't pull your it off yours I read the law I'd read the section 3445 and they

codified it in 6334 if you look at title 26 6334 it

still says District director but that yeah the regulations still say that yes

but the treas the Federal Register entry changed it to area director I understand

that they until they change the regulation it's have no consequence L

what do you mean it has no consequence because what's the consequence of well hey look we're almost the district director says is in the regulation but

the Federal Register says I don't know how long we got this room Steve I don't know whether we got a

vacate at noon or whether we hang over let's kind of wrap things up here

I I just got a question I'm just as confused as hell right now maybe you guys can get me straightened out just a

little bit back five or six years ago when the bankers were just absolutely outc crewing everybody underneath the

sun when they were yeah few people they stop they shorter list please a few

people came out and were just called idiots because they said man look at all this fraud it's going on so sure enough

it gets in the mainstream a few attorneys get a hold of it now and all of a sudden they get fin billions of dollars they couldn't care less nobody

goes to jail we're going on down the road power yeah so if we're dealing with

that same type of power structure here with the IRS and the government but a whole lot

worse is there any correlation is there any parallel that can be used with the bankers to try to get some semblance of

Justice here and I say no you know we have no remedy there there's no remedy

we would have a remedy maybe but we have no enforcement of that remedy so it's called the bailout no

well you know you're you're expressing a common view that uh oppressed people

across the world Al often speak like you and just because we got oppression here

doesn't mean that we're going to get an instantaneous solution when we're fighting a fire structure I know but here here's a point going to get we get

into that we get into cour which is where you all are are looking at and we get in there

they their favorite argument and you hit it yesterday well you know you're infringing on the power of the judge to make law well or something like that I

didn't say that well

somebody law the bench so come up and say a FR it's a frivolous argument you know uh here's something off the cup the

judge guess yeah I agree you know sustain you know the judges how do we

get to that point to make these people is there any way to make these people

follow the law this simp corrupt you know the condition of the courts is just it's it's just another fact of life it's

a feature of what we must be what what we're up against it's just like the sun will always rise in the east it always

has and always will and we we build our lives around the fact that the sun rises in the East and sets in the west well we

got we got uh judges that are protecting the system and it doesn't mean that uh

that's a factor that we got to take into consideration regarding what we do but that doesn't mean that we do nothing I'm

not saying and I would suggest to you that you know just uh as I said

yesterday look at what the hel case did I wouldn't have predicted the the hel

decision 15 years a healthare in Washington DC I'm sorry

Second Amendment stop oh second just this week seven circuit comes along and shoots down Illinois stop so there are

things that can be done uh judicially but I think that we've got a we need to be in forums where the the court doesn't

have a dog in the fight and when you're in federal court you know it's a real Prejudice

atmosphere the the judges have a dog in the fight because they're protecting the system I suggest you we go to state

courts to raise a lot of important of federal tax sister paycheck well let's let's examine

one other thing I've made good use can can I ask this question here it is

almost to the conclusion of our session does anybody else want me to show anything and then we can carry on if we

have to be out of here we certainly can go out there on the patio does anybody want to see anything

we can research that ourselves if we want to it count yes

yeah we going to talk about just Greg no I does anybody have something that

you I yeah I would like to talk about r98 because I think that's where they really screwed

up you know my point that I was trying to make was because I've raised this issue in many cases for many clients for

a number of years now since the rra took effect there has not been a lawful

assessment of any tax anywhere in the United States period I can't happen yeah

and the but do the judges care absolutely not because they their

position is oh well the IRS came up with another procedure for that I know and so the point is you know the definition of

insanity doing the same thing expecting different exactly that's not the same thing I've I've actually highlighted

3445 which is a section of code in r98 which says tells the office of law

rision Council you will update 6334 right right here to say District director it's Congressional mandate okay

I understand I understand that okay trial the point is that none of these

arguments are of of any use whatsoever in court exactly none of them why not

yours not anybody's in this room because you cannot win in court

they will not let you doesn't matter the Merit of your argument I went and got licensed in tax court because I had all

these clients that were helping telling me how bad it was I said oh it can't be that bad so I went and got licensed in

tax court and the very first day I step foot in the court I realized this is

this is 10 times worse than any of my clients ever told and that's the problem

but but the but the solution is don't get in the boat with them to begin with

which is why if you're going to go to court J if you have no choice but to go to court

all this stuff Larry's telling you is very valuable because it helps you protect records but my position is don't

go to court and don't get in their system in the first place because the law doesn't require it but there's a section code there's a section Cod

there's a section go says it's well settled well

settled 15 minutes I'm going to go up it's got to matter otherwise we don't have any rule exactly right

problem this is is political you will not get a solution in court this because

they're corrupt I agree 100% with John you have to you have to hey top

dogs just a second you guys can stay and talk but I me and Larry have to pack we

got to be on a shuttle to the airport soon but this room is paid for all day okay for those that want to stay and can

talk to each other or maybe if you want to we'll be back just turn in those things or you

can mail them in if you want to be on that Network that we're putting together brought a

point Robert had a client

tax

we American Liv [Music]

is that because of tax treaties that protect those citizens it's not on basis of

treaties it's simply asserted without

any that's what I wanted to know CU I heard you know hear what you had to

say cooperation of foreign Banks to report to the

irsi financial you might have an agreement

have the same effect right but it it just not bring US citizens under in those

countries under our jurisdiction the treaty doesn't do that it's just it's

just the government says the treaty is justly to

[Music] Discovery

well look the only value of all of this is in talking to the general public to

get them to support candidates and legislation that will change it that we reform

it the whole point of this is political there is no answer in

court and the only thing we can do in court is lose and thereby demonstrate to

the general public that we have a problem they have to elect different

people to Congress

well isn't going to change don't

know which is actually all we have which is 535 2%

is35 can't change we have to get majorities both

Congress and the presiden we don't do that we're

scre there's nothing we can

doity one treat

Nations fale