Choosing Lawful Tax Avoidance
Why "reduce" when you can completely and Lawfully avoid the tax altogether?
Date: 11/16/2016 3:22:00 AM ( 5 y ) ... viewed 1029 times
Scroll down for a January 12th update.
January 7, 2020 - Many Would Like to Know That ... -
"... All IRS-generated Notices of Tax Lien and Notices of Tax Levy are unenforceable and do not constitute Notice, as the IRS has no powers of distraint"!
November 16, 2016 - Lawful Avoidance (By Choosing Not To Volunteer or Be Coerced, etc.) vs Legal Reduction -
The very best that a conventional tax consultant can typically offer is what they call "Tax Reduction Planning". However, if you are not lawfully required to pay a tax then why "reduce" when you can completely avoid the tax altogether?
There has been a number of researchers of the federal tax code who have essentially "cracked the code." This blog-writer has blogged about a couple of these researchers in the past. Recently he has been introduced to another researcher who has a subscription to the Organic Laws Institute and who acknowledges the exceptional research of Dr. Ed Rivera. He presents himself as a tax avoidance expert. He has a report and with legal references. He agreed to make a live presentation. We ... planned and delivered one on January 27th, 2017.
January 12, 2020 - More re: "Tax Avoidance Expert -
Just received the following update saying:
"... My client's 2017 and 2018 returns establishing $0 tax liability have enjoyed a 100% acceptance rate by the IRS. One client just got an $18,500 refund (100% of his income tax withholding!)
My one client who the IRS has picked on for 16 years (I have worked with him for about 3 years now) just got audited for 3 returns I helped him with--but the IRS ended up closing the audits on all three returns with NO increase to his $0 tax on each of them. This guy earns well into the six figures! They also ... released his lien and gave him a $12,000 refund."
April 12, 2018 - Were You Made Liable? -
“That the power to tax is the power to destroy,” is a fundamental premise of taxation expressed by then Chief Justice John Marshall in the landmark Supreme Court decision of McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316, 431 (1819). This premise expresses the bottom line of the plenary power of taxation that the sovereign has over those who are subjects to the sovereign. With this plenary power of taxation, the government can tax a subject to the point that the subject is destroyed.
I stand on the principle that the servant can never have the power to destroy the master. As per the preamble to the Constitution for the United States of America, I assert that I am one of the posterity of “We the people,” who ordained and established the Constitution which set forth the powers and proscribed the limitations of the government of the U.S. of A.
As I am not one who has made himself subject or has been made a subject to government, I am therefore not one who can be subject to destruction by government.
But if I am not one who is a subject who can be destroyed, then who can the government tax even to the point of destruction?
Just prior to his statement that the power to tax is the power to destroy at page 429, Chief Justice Marshall expressed the following:
“All subjects over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; but those over which it does not extend are upon the soundest principles exempt from taxation. This proposition may almost be pronounced self-evident. . . The sovereignty of a State extends to everything which exists by its own authority, or is introduced by its own, permission ......”
If I am not one who exists by the authority of the state or federal government or introduced by the permission of either, I am exempt from involvement from any taxing scheme that obligates me to waive fundamental rights. If this was not so, the servant could destroy the master and that premise would fly in the face of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution for the United States of America and the Bill of Rights of the respective Constitutions for each of the States. This appears to me to be the reason why the IR Code, which to date has passed Constitutional muster, does not make a citizen liable for a tax that requires the waiver of rights regardless of the erroneous expansive wording of regulation 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1.
Unless I am clearly liable or made liable by a specific statute(s) of the tax code and I am one obligated to waive fundamental rights, I do not have a “legal duty” to file any income tax forms, keep or produce any records for the government, or give any information to any government entity. It would follow that if you are not a subject, you would not have any such "legal duty" either.
The final determination, however, is yours. You will have to determine whether you are one who is a master over your government or one who is a servant subject to it. You will have to determine whether your rights to work and exist are actually rights or just privileges that are subject to destruction.
You will have to determine if you are one who has waived his fundamental rights to speak or not to speak as protected under the First Amendment, your right to be secure in your person, home, papers and effects, as protected under the Fourth Amendment, your right not to be compelled to be a witness against yourself and your right to due process of law as protected under the Fifth Amendment, your right to an impartial judge and jury, as protected under the Sixth Amendment, or any other rights protected under the Ninth Amendment.
The standard for the waiver of rights has already been established by the Supreme Court when the court stated:
“Waivers of constitutional rights not only must be voluntary but must be knowing, intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences.” Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S. 749, 90 S.Ct. 1463, 1469 (1970). See also Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972); Brookhart V. Janis, 384 U.S. 6 (1966); Empsak v. U.S., 349 U.S. 190 (1955); and Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 58 (1938).
The bottom line is that unless I have somehow waived or lost my fundamental rights, it is not within the power of Congress to impose a tax, applicable to me, that would destroy those rights.
As an example, back in the 1960s, this limitation was reinforced in a Texas voting rights case. The state of Texas was imposing a poll tax on the voters prior to letting them vote. In U.S. v. Texas, 252 F.Supp 234, 254 (1966), the U.S. District Court said:
"Since, in general, only those who wish to vote pay the poll tax, the tax as administered by the state is equivalent to a charge or penalty imposed on the exercise of a fundamental right. If 'the tax were increased to a high degree, as it could be if valid, it would result in the destruction of the right to vote. See Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233, 244, 54 S.Ct. 444 (1936)."
Note that the district court reiterated the fundamental premise of law expressed by Chief Justice John Marshall in the landmark decision of McCulloch v. Maryland, cited above, that the “power to tax is the power to destroy.”
The Texas District Court went on to quote from the Supreme Court case of Harman v. Forssenius, 380 U.S. 528, 540, 85 S.Ct. 1177, 1185 (1965), when it said:
"It has long been established that a state may not impose a penalty upon those who exercise a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Frost v. Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of California, 271 U.S. 583. ‘Constitutional rights would be of little value if they could be * * * indirectly denied,’ Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 664, ‘or manipulated out of existence,’ Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339, 345."
That Texas district court held the poll tax unconstitutional and invalid, and enjoined the state of Texas from requiring the payment of a poll tax as a prerequisite to voting. Taken on direct appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, the judgment of the district court was affirmed. See Texas v. U.S., 384 U.S. 155 (1966).
So if you don't believe you have waived your rights and come within a “taxable class” of subjects, I suggest that you make inquiry of the IRS and your State taxing entity and ask for copies of any statutes making you specifically liable for an income tax. I also suggest that you request copies of all documents of determinations made, with the documents of fact and law in support, that show specifically that you personally are obligated and have a "legal duty" to waive fundamental rights or that you are within some "taxable class" obligated to waive fundamental rights merely for exercising your right to work and exist. Also request any documents of fact showing how you may have brought yourself within the purview of a taxing statute that required the waiver of your rights.
What is most important is that you make the inquiry. What you get in response to your inquiry is not as important as what you don't get. Absent documented verification of a waiver or loss of rights, you can confidently claim your status of master over government and deny any "legal duty" as a subject to it, regardless of the decisions of any courts that assert that government, with their plenary power of taxation, can tax you to the point of destruction.
Robert L. “Bob” Minarik,
November 14, 2018 The Actual Nature of IRS Business -
"Pedigree of the IRS" By: Anna Reitz:
For all those who need to know, this is what the IRS is and what it does and who it does it for--- I quote Pao L. Chang for convenience sake:
"The Internal Revenue Service is considered to be a Bureau of the Department of the Treasury; however, like the Federal Reserve, it is not part of the Federal Government. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS, et al., CV-93-405E- EJE - U.S.D.C.D.I; Public Law 94-564, Senate Report 94-1148, page 5967; Reorganization Plan No. 26; Public Law 102-391---and is in fact incorporated in Delaware ...." ("Internal Revenue Service" was incorporated in 1925, the Municipal "IRS" was incorporated in 1933.)
"It is pointed out that all official Federal Government mail is sent postage-free because of the franking privilege; however, the IRS has to pay their own postage, which [again] indicates that they are not a government entity."
"They [the Internal Revenue Service/IRS] are in fact a collection agency for the Federal Reserve, because they do not collect any taxes for the U.S. Treasury. All funds collected [by the IRS working under color of law "as" a Treasury "Bureau" and collecting funds under false pretense as the funds are collected under what appears to be a Treasury presentment] are turned over to the Federal Reserve. If you have ever sent a check to the IRS, you will find that it was endorsed over to the Federal Reserve."
"The Federal Reserve, in turn, deposits the money with the International Monetary Fund, an Agency of the United Nations (Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, page 816.) where it is filtered down to the International Development Association (see Treasury Delegation Order No. 91) which is part of the "International Bank for Reconstruction and Development" --- commonly known now as the World Bank."
June 12, 2019 - Further Unveiling of the IRS By: Anna -
"We have a Church of Criminals operating out of island bases as pirates, plundering and pillaging the people of the Earth, and using undisclosed Spanish Law of the Inquisition to enforce judgments on everyone else-----and all in the name of Jesus."
1977 was the last year this writer filed with the IRS. Now forty-two years later and the true nature of that organization/organism is more fully exposed in the light of day. The departure that began with just with a silent inner-knowing now has the knowledge of Law, the law of grammar, as well as a special brand of dark legal logic as references all validating what was not completely articulable forty-two years ago. Thank you to Anna von Reitz, the Living Law Firm, and all the many anonymous researchers of today and of the past! The truth expressed is finally setting us free!
January 19, 2017 -
The "live presentation" is now in place!
Most recently I received additional clarification from our "tax avoidance expert" that I now find all the more interesting in light of Omraam's current "Thought for the day".
The expert wrote: "This is not about 'reducing income taxes'. It is about altogether avoiding them. As in 100%. This idea alone freaks some people out, especially accountants and other IRS go betweens. It's a threat to their livelihood. Too bad. They are dinosaurs ...".
Now the Omraam "Thought" in its entirety:
"Dinosaurs were reptiles with four legs that lived on earth millions of years ago, and we now know that birds are the product of their evolution. Over time and with successive transformations, the front legs of these reptiles have become wings. Yes, as unbelievable as it may sound, dinosaurs are the ancestors of birds. How to interpret this evolution? Perhaps among these reptiles there were some who were more enterprising, more daring, more curious who wanted to break free, tearing the ground. Some others followed suit, while others, lazy and stubborn, have continued to crawl. Take this interpretation as you want. Now transpose this phenomenon into the world of humans. Over the course of history there have always been the daring ones who wanted to open new paths, explore new lands. Some followed them, others refused to move, but it is thanks to the bold that humanity progresses. So it is up to each of us to decide whether we will continue to crawl along the ground or if we want to make an effort and take to the air, like a bird, and be free. - Omraam Mikhael Aivanhov"
I am deeply grateful for all the "bold" ones who dared to contribute what they could toward the "evolution" of "tax avoidance". And now it appears we have "new paths" along this evolutionary line that are open for Individuals to consider. I am all the more grateful to be hosting one of these trail blazers!
January 21, 2017 -
Author Robert Heinlein reportedly left an index card in his safe (apparently to be discovered after his final threshold crossing) upon which he wrote that the two most important themes he wrote on were Freedom & Self-responsibility which he coupled together in three of his signature works including Stranger in a Strange Land. In Rudolf Steiner's own words he regarded his "Philosophy of Freedom" as his greatest work. In the Gene Keys by Richard Rudd the 55th Gene Key is the only one of 64 Gene Keys that has the same theme for both the Gift frequency as well as the Siddhi. That shared theme is Freedom!
I believe that freedom is our genetic imperative. But what is freedom and how do we obtain it? I find it very interesting that according to the Gene Keys the 49th Gene Key (of Changing The World From The Inside) with the Gift of "Revolution" and Siddhi of "Rebirth" is very closely related to "Freedom" in the 55th as they are both part of the same Codon Ring. What does all of this have to do with "Lawful Tax Avoidance" one may ask?
The answer to this question depends upon how you define your freedom as well as the apparent opposite/s by whatever terms you wish to use (not limited to "slavery"). Steiner spoke of freedom in terms of our essential ability to think and to bring our thinking forces into our beliefs, attitudes as well as our conventionally shared thoughts in order to discover what these things are founded upon and how they pertain to us as Individual spiritual beings. The Gene Keys ask for contemplation upon all three frequencies of each Gene Key starting with those that are most prominent in the individual's holographic profile. Freedom in the Gene Keys is obtained by facing, embracing and thus releasing the fear of the Shadow frequency of Victimization. I am convinced that freedom requires our dedication to an inner-work that leads to our personal transformation - mind renewal.
Can you have freedom from taxation and especially freedom from the fears that have been associated with tax evasion? Are you willing to rethink the beliefs about what "taxable income" consists of? Lawful taxation is based upon taxable income. Do you have taxable income according to what the Law says taxable income is?
"Only when we realize our potential to be a unique individual are we free. ... it lies in our freedom to achieve freedom; only when we actively strive towards freedom do we have some chance of attaining it."
Jan. 24, '17 -
Added Footnotes  & 
January 29th, 2017 -
Several of us gathered for the "Lawful Tax-Avoidance" event in San Diego on Friday the 27th. We each received a substantial handout that was much like the power point presentation. The presentation made mention of Joseph Banister who is an outstanding example of a true-blooded freedom-loving American and former IRS agent turned IRS truth advocate! I just found Joseph's Forward to a book by William Conklin. I highly recommend reading it!
Also in this book are some conclusions, one of which is part of my search regarding the fear factor and the IRS which is how I found the book. Conclusion #8:
"Knowledge is power. On the other hand, ignorance breeds fear. The IRS is able to get away with its terrible abuse because lack of knowledge about their own rights leaves individuals afraid."
January 31st, 2017 -
Began offering complimentary "discovery sessions" in regards to "liability" for the Federal Income Tax.
Arthur Stopes, III writes:
"... learn to function as an American Citizen (technically, a State Citizen), not 'Taxed'. All 'U.S. citizens' (technically, 'citizens of the United States', per the so-called '14th Amendment'), are presumed to be domiciled in the District of Columbia, and therefore may be subject to 'direct Taxes' - and are, in fact, 'subjects of the federal government'.
The writer has been flatteringly described by a federal Judge, in his Court, as a lawful tax avoider. I.e.; not a 'tax evader'."
February 3rd, 2017 -
We have a legal basis for lawfully avoiding the Federal Income Tax because:
"Income Tax is an Excise Tax" and the activities and priviledges that incur the excise tax are all avoidable!
Springer vs United States, 102 U.S. 586, 26 L. Ed. 253; “An income tax, under the internal revenue laws, is not a direct tax within the meaning of the Federal Constitution, but is within the category of an excise or duty.”
House Congressional Record, 27 March, 1943, page 2580
“The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax........”
See also American Airways vs Wallace, 57 F. 2d 877, 880 (Concerning excise taxes and privilege taxes.)
The Only Way A Person Can Be “MADE LIABLE” For Any Internal Revenue Tax Is By A Provision IN THE LAW (a statute or Code Section).
In the decision of Botta v. Scanlon, 288 F.2d 509 (1961), the United States Court of Appeals explained that there is only one way that a tax liability can be created. It stated: Moreover, even the collection of taxes should be exacted only from persons upon whom a tax liability is imposed by some statute. In Sutherland’s Rules of Statutory Construction, an authoritative reference book on interpretation of statutes, Section 66.03 states: …the obligation to pay taxes arises only by force of legislative action… Legislative action is the passage of a statute (a law). For anyone to be “liable” for income tax, it must be so stated in the IR Code.
Provisions Making Anyone Liable For Payment Of A Tax Must Be Stated In CLEAR, UNDERSTANDABLE LANGUAGE.
In the decision of Higley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 69 F.2d 160, head note 2 states: Liability for taxation must clearly appear from statute imposing tax. Sutherland’s Rules of Statutory Construction under Section 66.01 titled Strict Construction of Statutes Creating Tax Liabilities refers to the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Gould v. Gould. 245 U.S. 151 which states: In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the established rule not to extend their provisions by implication beyond the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operation so as to embrace matters most strongly against the government, and in favor of the citizen.
I.R. CODE Provisions Imposing Liability Are CLEARLY STATED And Use The Word “LIABLE”.
The word “liable” is found in I.R. Code Section 4401(c), 5005(a), 5703(a) and 1461 which create liabilities for wagering tax, distilled spirits tax, tobacco tax and “income” tax respectively. Section 1461 is the ONLY section in the I.R. Code imposing a liability for payment of “income” tax. That section applies to WITHHOLDING AGENTS ONLY (those required by Section 1441 and 1442 to deduct and withhold from payments of “income” owed to foreign persons). Section 1461 states: Every person required to deduct and withhold any tax under this chapter is hereby made liable for such tax.
February 5, 2017 -
In addition to the fear factor (mentioned above) there is the authority factor. Actually these are two sides of the same "coin". Our fears feed the outer authorities and the outer authorities feed our fear. You can certainly call it a fear-based torus.
The following is something Ra Uru Hu had to say about this.
"We're here to live what is correct for us, not what is expected of us. ...—my big thing is authority. And I know a lot about authority. I have a 1st line in my profile, I'm a 5/1, and I have ten 1st lines in my design. I have a lot of 1st lines. First lines thematically are related to authority. I'm purely individual. I don't like authority. Individuals don't anyway. They don't like having anyone tell them what to do or not to do, all of these things.
So, authority is something that I am well aware of. I live out a role as an authority, so it all has its humor. But there is a dark part of that, a deeply dark part of that. It's what the seven-centered being gave us. What it gave us was the bowing down to authority. That's what it gave us. It's not about it being bad. This is the way, obviously, that human beings were organized. They were organized that way. This is the way they were controlled. It's the way we've always been controlled. We give up our authority.
You're taught that from the moment you come into the world you have no authority. You come into the world, you have no authority. You're not allowed any authority. Children are not allowed authority. They have to accept the authority of their parents, they have to accept the authority of older siblings, and they have to accept the authority of teachers. And as they grow up they begin to see that everybody is accepting somebody else's authority. They get to see that their mother is accepting the authority of their father and their father is accepting the authority of their boss and so forth and so on.
And that on whatever day they pray they all go together to their particular whatever and they all bow down to an even greater authority that has a greater authority over them. And once a year they all fill out their tax forms. In service to, in payment to that authority that they recognize as an authority over them, that rules over them.
Everything about the seven-centered being, everything about the way in which the hierarchy was established was established in that way through authority. You give up your authority. The moment you give up your authority you become a sheep. And you can be led this way or that because you have no authority. This is a seven- centered being."
This inspired me to also look at the Gene Key correlation and I see it in the 21st Gene Key with the three major frequencies identified as: Shadow: Control, Gift: Authority and Siddhi: Valour. "Control" has "much to do wit power and money". Gene Keys author Richard Rudd writes: "One of the major areas to plague human beings and the cause of enormous conflict and violation of basis human rights is the issue of control. All control os rooted entirely in a single theme - territory. ... In the past, control was about resources and food, and food depended on maintaining and defending your territory. In the modern world however, the battlefield has changed even through the genetic dynamic has not. Today the battleground is money, and this 21st Shadow has much to do with power and money." Government is based on "territory" as in proprietary jurisdiction. The phrase "proprietary jurisdiction" is not one that is taught in the public school system and therefore it is natural that people who have been raised/conditioned under this system are ignorant of the basis for Lawful government. Consequently there is a great need for re-educating individuals regarding the Lawful basis of government in general and in regards to taxation in particular. There is an equally great if not greater need for educating individuals about their HumanDesign and the how their nine-centeredness is their basis for their inner authority.
February 6th, 2017 -
Recap: The two main factors that one needs to be self-aware of in order to determine one's own liability (or non-liability) for Federal Income Taxes are:
1.) a fundamental knowledge of Law
2.) a willingness to admit to fears of outer authority.
These two factors feed one another. The more important factor is the first one listed here as it is well known that ignorance breeds fear and ignorance of the Law breeds fear of Law enforcement. Therefore knowledge is superior to fear of outer authority. With right knowledge one may Lawfully avoid the tax!
Introduction to "a fundamental knowledge of Law". -
Government in the United States of America is limited by the four Organic Laws; what are these?
According to the Organic Laws - what is government's Lawful and limited jurisdiction based on?
February 7th, 2017 -
The "discovery sessions" (mentioned above on January 31st) is intended to cover the following:
#1.) The interests that one has in Lawful tax-avoidance.
#2.) A prioritizing of these interests.
#3.) The individual's educational background in Law.
#4.) All other knowledge of Law that the individual has obtained.
#5.) The individual's general filing history including submitting of W2s, etc.
#6.) Past and/or current IRS "problems".
#7.) Internal conflicts in regards to any of the above.
#8.) What the individual wishes to have by working with a mentor/counselor regarding Lawful tax-avoidance.
#9.) A plan of action.
#10.) A written agreement.
February 17, 2017 -
"No other failing gives rise to as much disappointment and misfortune to human beings, as the stubborn defence of certain beliefs and points of view, without testing their validity."
The belief that we Americans are required to "pay our fair share" of income taxes is possibly one of the leading causes for "much disappointment and misfortune". In any case it most certainly is a belief that typically is not tested for its validity! If just the following three key terms alone were "tested" they could cause an Individual to rethink their belief: income, taxable income, individual.
February 21st, 2017 -
Continuing re: "... fears of outer authority" and control as posted above here on the 5th and 6th.
"Self-love is a rare thing because it’s rooted in your own authority. ... From the moment we come into the world we lose our authority. We are trained to give up our authority to our parents or teachers or any authority figure! Partners, friends, governments, gods… You name it.
We give up authority to everything; it's fundamental in us because everything about the homogenized world is rooted in control. The only way to keep our society civil, so to speak, is control. And having authority over the population is the only way the control mechanism works, so we’re all trained from a very early age to give up our authority.
Yet the moment you give up your authority, the moment that it is in the hands of others, you're never complete. You can never trust in yourself and then of course you end up in a life in which your not-self mind, rooted in your openness and conditioning, is making decisions for you, taking you further and further away from who you are."
I have often wondered what happen to the American people who were once defined by the American spirit (i.e. "the Spirit of 76") as enshrined in our first Organic Law - "The Declaration of Independence". Now I know! The original American spirit is most fundamentally the spirit of Self-Government! After the Constitution of September 17, 1778 there began a relinquishing of self-authority within the "Rights" realm that devolved into the political sphere as we see it today. The American people surrendered their self-authority/self-government. When exactly their "surrender" occurred is not precisely known however it was definitely some time after 1788, after April 30, 1789, and more probably after "The Whiskey Rebellion" - September 11, 1794.
The crux (IMO) of the "Whiskey Rebellion":
"The Rebellion raised the question of what kinds of protests were permissible under the new Constitution. Legal historian Christian G. Fritz argued that there was not yet a consensus about sovereignty in the United States, even after ratification of the Constitution. Federalists believed that the government was sovereign because it had been established by the people; radical protest actions were permissible during the American Revolution but were no longer legitimate, in their thinking. But the Whiskey Rebels and their defenders believed that the Revolution had established the people as a "collective sovereign", and the people had the collective right to change or challenge the government through extra-constitutional means.
Historian Steven Boyd argued that the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion prompted anti-Federalist westerners to finally accept the Constitution and to seek change by voting for Republicans rather than resisting the government. Federalists, for their part, came to accept the public's role in governance and no longer challenged the freedom of assembly and the right to petition."
"Whatever else we may say of it, the Declaration of Independence was profoundly American."
March 4, 2017 -
We are ending a long history of relinquishing self-authority. This history goes back millenniums to when the people abandoned tribal self-government and instead choose to have a king rule over them. The king archetype runs deep in the collective psyche. Reclaiming one's own self authority is a radical act and now is a most excellent time for that act!
June 21, 2018 Happy Summer Solstice (if you live in a Northern Hemisphere otherwise Happy Winter Solstice ; ~ )! -
Just sent the following regarding a certain "sample letter" to the "U.S. President" that I suspect needs correction before I advocate sending it:
P.S. Just read the "letter" .... IMO - this letter appears to be missing a most crucial criteria, one that the Organic Laws established for any Lawful basis to tax, namely: that the subject of the tax involve the extension of a federal privilege in regards to some form of government property - that is property that is owned by and under the exclusive legislative control of government.
Isn't federal jurisdiction most essentially proprietary based? ......... And if that's agreed as true then wouldn't the inclusion of that (required proprietary basis as an identifiable limit to the application of tax laws) be a crucial element in any proposed legislation to "explain this"?
I invite your thought on this.
 From a private correspondence on 1/19/17 between this writer and the "tax avoidance expert".
 I find this an interesting phrase that I wish I could inquire with Omraam about.
 An explanation of "Organic Law": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_law#In_the_US
 Why No One Is Required To File:
 page 71 - THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO THE HUMAN #SanDiegoSustainableDesignSymposium inspired many of us. http://wanderfoot.com/sd-symposium/ SYSTEM
 Ra Uru Hu in "Learning Self-Love" of the "Discover Your Design" series:
 When New Hampshire became the ninth State to ratify the Constitution on June 21, 1788:
 The first inauguration of George Washington:
 In or about the 18th paragraph of:
Also see: "The States of America, 'The U.S. of A.' and 'The U.S.'":
"'Right Knowledge' ... for 'American Law' Part II":
taxes, tax avoidance, Tax Reduction, tax code, excise tax, federal income tax, made liable, irs, federal reserve
Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!Print this page
Email this page