Audio Archives

Posted on October 11, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

John Collins Show soon to be posted.

Posted in Audio Archives | Leave a comment

Child and Family Services SCAM

Posted on October 11, 2010 by Paul John Hansen 
As the Bible says, if you don't work, you don't eat.
This freeloading must stop.

>Welfare Scams, This is one more reason to get out and vote on Nov 2, 2010.
>Please forward to all of your friends and tell them to get out and vote and
>be heard, we need to end this mess..
> Because you the taxpayer are the one paying for it, how is that hope and
>change working now?
>
>LETTER FROM A DANVILLE , ILLINOIS DOCTOR - GOVERNMENT RUN PROGRAMS
>
> Dear Mr. Limbaugh,
> I was speaking to an emergency room physician this morning. He told me
> that a woman in her 20's came to the ER with her 8th pregnancy.
>
> She stated "my momma told me that I am the breadwinner for the
> family." He asked her to explain. She said that she can make babies and
> babies get money for the family..
>
> The scam goes like this: The grandma calls the Department Of
> Child and Family Services and states that the unemployed daughter is not
> capable of caring for these children.
> DCFS agrees and states that the child or children will need to go to
> foster care. The grandma then volunteers to be the foster parent, and thus
> receives a check for $1500 per child per month in Illinois . Total yearly
> income: $144,000 tax-free, not to mention free health-care (Medicaid) plus
>a monthly "Linx" card entitling her to free groceries, etc, and a voucher
>for 250 free cell phone minutes per month. This does not even include Wick
> and other welfare programs. Indeed, grandma was correct in that her
> fertile daughter is the "breadwinner" in the family.
>
> I hope you share this story with your listeners so that they know
> how the ruling class spends their tax dollars.
> Also, many thanks for the fine service you provide in educating
> people about the merits of conservative thinking.
> Cheers,Sebastian J. Ciancio, M.D. Urologist, Danville Polyclinic, LTD.
> (217) 477-4766
Posted in Welfare Scams | Leave a comment

Foreclosure, Sheriff Candidate Brief, NM

Posted on October 8, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

((I do not agree with all of the below but many main points are correct based on my (Paul-John) research over the years.))

Moratorium on Mortgage Foreclosures

The Constitution for the united States of America is the Supreme Law of the Land, Article VI, paragraph 2.   All statutes and laws enacted by Congress must be in harmony with the Constitution.  Any statute or law enacted by Congress that is in contradiction or disharmony with the Constitution is null and void from the beginning.  It creates no duties, creates no rights, imposes no obligations or duties upon any Citizen of the united States of America.  It is as if it never existed.  Marbury v. Madison, U.S. Supreme Court decision, 1801.

 

 “…all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”, Article VI, paragraph 3.  When we refer to the Preamble of the Constitution we find this statement, “…do ordain and establish this Constitution for the united States of America, italics for emphasis only.  By slight of hand, this statement gets converted to, “the Constitution of the United States”. The term “United States” has a specific meaning.  Title 28, USC, section 3002, defines “United States” as a Federal corporation.  So then all executive and judicial officers who take the oath to the “United States” are working for the corporation identified as the “United States”.  They do not take an Oath to the original Constitution.  By trickery and deceit, the government has converted all executive and judicial officers into corporate officers working for the corporate United States for the benefit of the corporation and not for the benefit of “We the People”.  That is the current dilemma. We cannot get the corporate officers to listen to “We the People”.  Look at what just happened with the so-called Health Care Bill.  Simply rammed down the throats of the American People.

All corporations have one goal, to maximize profits no matter what the human cost, or the environmental cost.

This oath to the “Corporation” creates quite a legal conundrum.  The minute that “all executive and judicial Officers” take an oath to this mother lode “Corporation”, they have engaged in an act of treason against the People of the united States of America.  However, it the nature of criminals to protect themselves, and their actions against prosecution for their crimes.  Especially when they are the ones writing the so-called statutes and laws.   To wit, Title 18, USC, section 2381 defines “Treason” as  “levying war against the United States”.  So then “Treason” is clearly defined as levying war against the corporation known as the United States, not as engaging in act of Treason against the People of the united States of America.  Thus “all executive and judicial Officers” are free to betray us and engage in all sorts of belligerent and unlawful, actions against Americans Citizens with total impunity.

Hence, we come to the central point of the mortgage foreclosure planned fiasco.  Within the four walls of the courtroom, the judge is acting in the capacity of corporate officer interested in protecting the revenue of the corporation.  He is not adjudicating law.  He is simply a revenue officer.  A little known fact is that the judge makes a commission on each and every judgment that goes through his courtroom.  The amount of commission is in dispute, could be as high as ten percent or more.

Continuing with the mortgage foreclosure fiasco.  Courts with real judges, hard to believe, but there are some judges with a sense of moral imperative, all over the country have set forth stringent lawful requirements that a bank or mortgage company must meet before a foreclosure suit can be initiated and proceed.

First, the lending institution must enter into the court record, the original “Note” and the original “Mortgage” document as of the date the Complaint was filed.  The problem is that the lending institution does not have the originals anymore.  Immediately after completing the closing, the lending institution sold the “Note” and the “Mortgage” to a group of investors and turned over the original “Note” and “Mortgage” to the investor group.  The original lending institution no longer has any capital at risk.  Based on this requirement, the foreclosure suit cannot go forward.  However, the revenue officer, the so-called judge counts on the abysmal ignorance of the Citizen losing their home and the judge proceeds to steal the property.

Second, the lending institution must file an affidavit of ownership, which clearly identifies the Plaintiff as the “Real Party in Interest” with all of the attending rights, title and interest in the “Mortgage”.   When the lending institution sold the “Note” and the “Mortgage”, they stopped being the “Real Party in Interest”.  Hence, the lending institution has no “Standing” to sue on the property.

Third, “Standing” is an absolute pre-requisite to filing a lawsuit.  There are three lawful requirements for “Standing”.

  1. Injury in fact-not a hypothetical injury.
  2. Causality-that the actions of the borrower created the injury in fact.
  3. Redressability-that the judgment will make the injured party whole.

The revenue officer, the so-called judge, on the case will not require that his corporate buddies, the lending institutions, prove standing in the courtroom.  Thus, without “Standing” the lawsuit cannot go forward.

Fourth, in order for a contract to be valid and binding, there must be “Consideration”.  “Consideration” means “something of value”.  The Citizen borrowing Federal Reserve Notes, brings his real estate, “something of value”, to the table in exchange for paper called Federal Reserve Notes.  So then, one must ask a few basic questions in regards to this transaction.  When the bank loaned the borrower Federal Reserve Notes, did the bank go the to vault and take Federal Reserve Notes on deposit and loan those to the borrower? 

Ask any banker friend and he will tell you that “No”, they do not loan out their deposits.  So then, how are the Federal Reserve Notes “produced”?   The bank goes to their computer and by the use of their “magical, Hollywood wand”, a few keystrokes, produce, out of thin air, say $100,000.00 Federal Reserve Notes, to loan you.  This is where “Credit” comes from.  One second before, these Federal Reserve Notes did not exist.  Now, by magic, the bank has $100,000.00 worth of Federal Reserve Notes to lend you.   So if creating “something of value” out of thin air is real, then it is easy for me to convince you that the Easter Bunny lays different colored eggs once a year.

In the following sentences you can take the red pill or the blue pill.  You must chose.

There is a caveat here at this point.  Before the bank or mortgage company create “credit”, also known as Federal Reserve Notes, it needs to have on hand some collateral.  You signed two major documents at the “closing”, the “Note” and “Mortgage” or “Deed of Trust”.  Most Americans do not realize how valuable their signature on documents is.  The Mortgage document serves as the collateral needed by the bank(from this line forward, when I say bank, I also mean mortgage company).  

When you sign the “Mortgage”, the bank turns it into “money” and deposits it into a special, secret account set up in your name.  By the magic of “banking”, your signature is needed to “monetize” the “mortgage”.  To the bank, the “mortgage” document is actual “money”.

If you don’t believe me, request a copy of your “Note” and “Mortgage/Deed of Trust”.  Examine the Mortgage documents and you should be able to find a stamp on the document that says, “Pay to the Order of, without prejudice ABC Mortgage Company/ABC Bank.”   Now we just hit the mother Lode.  Follow the money.

Under 18 USC, the “Mortgage” becomes a negotiable instrument, also known as a “Security”.  Hence, you, the borrower, by your signature, created a “Security” for the bank.  Which in turn, the bank, converts into “money”. 

Now here is where it gets fun.  Now that the bank has “money” that it deposited into your secret, undisclosed account, it can loan you your own “money” back at interest.  The bank then must balance its books, so the bank writes a “hot check” against the “money” in your secret account to “pay off” your debtor.  Then your bank demands that the bank receiving their “hot check” pay them back with Federal Reserve Notes.  Now the bank turns to you and says, “Now that we loaned this money, you owe us for the next thirty years”.  

The bank very conveniently ignores the “money” that you created by your signature and the bank deposited into the secret, undisclosed account.  By the fact that you abandoned this secret account, the bank considers this “money” a gift from you.  See, under the law, you cannot reclaim a gift that you made.  Of course, the bank defrauded you when they took the “money” that you knew nothing about.  Wow!  What a system! 

However, the “money deposited into your secret, undisclosed bank account”, is still there.  The bank considers this secret, undisclosed account abandoned.  Thus, they lay claim to this “money”.  However, this theft of your property is a second degree felony called “Conversion of property”.  However, the banking system has little to fear, we as Americans have been dumbed down to the point of illiteracy by our indoctrination system.  Oops, did  I say indoctrination, I meant to say “education”.

Lets go down the rabbit hole a little more.  When the bank deposits your “Mortgage money” into your special, secret account, you owned your home free and clear.  The bank neglects to inform you of this little tidbit of information.  Pretty convenient and self serving isn’t it?  

You would think that the bank would be satisfied with this transaction.  After all, it has risked nothing, got your home for free and enslaved you for the next thirty years.  No sir!  The bank knows no limit on their avarice and greed.  The bank lusts for your property in a satanic and demonic machination.

The bank then turns around and sells your “Mortgage”  to Wall Street through groups of investors, for full value.  Now this is coming to full fruition.  The bank has now gotten paid twice on your signature on the “Mortgage” document.

Now class, pay attention.  This will be on your test of Life. 

1.     You created the “credit” for the bank, which the bank treated as “Money”

2.     The bank monetized the “Mortgage” document through your signature

3.      The “Mortgage” document is a negotiable instrument

4.     The “Mortgage” document is a “Security” under 18 USC

5.     This “Mortgage money” is deposited into a secret, undisclosed account at the bank in YOUR NAME.

6.     The bank turns around and writes a “hot check” against this “Mortgage money” to pay off your debtor.

7.     The bank demands and is paid by the receiving bank in Federal Reserve Notes.

8.     The bank considers the “Mortgage money” in your secret, undisclosed bank account, abandoned, and lays claim to it.

9.      Thus the bank steals your money in your secret, undisclosed account

10.    The payments that you make into this secret account are also considered abandoned, and the bank lays claim to them.

11.    The bank turns around and sells your “Mortgage” to Wall Street investors, who in turn sell these as “Mortgage Backed Securities” back to the public.

12.   The bank has risked nothing in this entire transaction  

13.   You, the borrower, have voluntarily given your home or ranch to the bank for free.

14.    You, the borrower, are enslaved for the next thirty years to the bank because of your own ignorance.

It has been said that “Truth is stranger than fiction”.  This is a wet dream for the Federal Reserve Banking system.

Fifth, I saved the best for last.  In the first paragraph of this article it was established that this Constitution for the united States of America is the Supreme Law of the Land.  Any statute or law out of harmony with this Constitution is null and void from the beginning.  Any court decision that is out of harmony with this Constitution, is null and void.  The Bill of Rights clarified for the government, that the rights enumerated therein, are God-given rights, not rights given to men by other men or governments, and that these rights are Sacred and untouchable.  They cannot be removed or abrogated by any government or any man or any corporation, under any circumstance.

The Fourth Amendment  guarantees the right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The Fifth Amendment guarantees that a Citizen accused of a crime cannot be deprived of his three most sacred possessions, life, liberty and property without a trial by jury.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right of trial by jury in any controversy where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars.  Here is where it gets tricky.  A “dollar” is defined as “a gold or silver coin” of a specific weight.  Federal Reserve Notes are paper created out of thin air with no value whatsoever.  Federal Reserve Notes have been denominated in increments of “dollars”, to make them appear to be dollars, but cannot by law, be dollars.  Federal Reserve Notes have been decreed to be “legal tender” by the corporation known as the United States.  “We the People” have been tricked into accepting Federal Reserve Notes as “money”. 

Again, back to the mortgage fiasco.  When the revenue officer, the so-called judge, on the case, does not provide the borrower being sued, the protection of the Fourth, the Fifth and the Seventh Amendments, he knows that he is not adjudicating law, but simply acting as a revenue officer protecting and enhancing the revenue of the corporate, United States.  In fact, he can ignore all requests by the Defendant for a trial by jury because he knows the Citizen being sued has no idea of what jurisdiction he is being sued in.

When the revenue officer, the so-called judge, issues a judgment against the borrower for defaulting on the “Note” and “Mortgage” without a “Trial by Jury”, he knows that he has betrayed the confidence of the American people, but he is doing the will of his master, the corporate United States.  His betrayal of the American People is not legally Treason.  Treason can only occur if he goes against his master, the corporate United States.  The so-called judge is simply being a good “Nazi”, just following orders.  However, the revenue officer, the so-called judge, also knows that he is violating the protections of the Fourth, the Fifth, and the Seventh Amendments afforded to the American Citizen.

In New Mexico even under the military rule of General Kearney during the 1850s, the right of a trial by jury in all matters dealing with life, liberty and property remained protected by military law.  Subsequently, during the time that New Mexico was a territory, for about 60 years, the right of trial by jury was preserved to all Citizens.  When New Mexico became a state in 1912,  in article II, section 12, the right of trial by jury was guaranteed to remain inviolate as it had heretofore existed.  Thus the New Mexico Constitution deferred to the Supremacy of the pre-existing condition as stated in  the Organic Act establishing the Territory of New Mexico.

So then, the banks,the judges and the lawyers are the new “Mafia”, extorting and defrauding the American Citizenry for lucre, due to our abysmal legal ignorance.  The banks, the judges and the liarwyers are the modern “Ghengis Khan”, raping, pillaging and plundering the landscape simply because they can.  Fact is, most of us are “legal idiots”.  This is by design and with the specific purpose to keep us enslaved to the “Legal system and its Liaryers.”  Most liawyers and judges have sold out their birthright as Americans for “thirty pieces of silver”, or more specifically, for a few hundred worthless, Federal Reserve Notes.

Judges are no more than ambulance chasing liawyers who put on a little black dress and love to be called “Your Honor” by their ass-kissing fans, the liawyers.  A prime example of the psychopathic arrogance that this ambulance chasing group of men engage in, is the fact that in order to cover up their own crimes, these so-called judges have given themselves “judicial immunity”.    Don’t believe me, when is the last time you tried to sue a “judge”?

However, “We the People” live under “this Constitution for the united States of America” and thus have the protections of the Fourth, the Fifth, and the Seventh Amendments in all matters dealing with life, liberty and property.

This is where I will declare a Moratorium on all Mortgage Foreclosure lawsuits and evictions until the banks and mortgage companies meet all five stringent lawful requirements as stated above.

No family will be evicted from their home or family homestead, as a result of a mortgage foreclosure suit, without a trial by jury and meeting the other four lawful requirements.

When the Citizens of San Miguel County elect me as their next Sheriff, before any Citizen in San Miguel loses their homestead unlawfully and unconstitutionally, I swear on the Altar of Almighty God, I will arrest the presiding judge on the case and the Special Master assigned to sell the property. 

 

– Rico S. Giron, Future Sheriff of San Miguel County

Posted in Banking/Money Issues | Leave a comment

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA, Right to Travel Act

Posted on October 5, 2010 by Paul John Hansen
As of today the bill has had a second reading on 01-13-2010
I tracked down Georgia HB 875 Right To Travel.  It died in Committee after a second reading and will have to be reintroduced after Nov 15, 2010.
10 LC 34 2350
House Bill 875
By: Representative Franklin of the 43rd
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
To amend Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to motor vehicles and traffic, so as to repeal Chapter 5, relating to drivers’ licenses; provide for a short title; to report the findings of the General Assembly regarding the constitutionality of certain laws relating to drivers’ licenses; to provide for an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:

 

SECTION 1.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the “Right to Travel Act.”

 

SECTION 2.
The General Assembly finds that:
(1) Free people have a common law and constitutional right to travel on the roads and highways that are provided by their government for that purpose. Licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of an inalienable right;
(2) In England in 1215, the right to travel was enshrined in Article 42 of Magna Carta:
It shall be lawful to any person, for the future, to go out of our kingdom, and to return, safely and securely, by land or by water, saving his allegiance to us, unless it be in time of war, for some short space, for the common good of the kingdom: excepting prisoners and outlaws, according to the laws of the land, and of the people of the nation at war against us, and Merchants who shall be treated as it is said above.
(3) Where rights secured by the Constitution of the United States and the State of Georgia are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation that would abrogate these rights. The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime. There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon an individual because of this exercise of constitutional rights;
(4) American citizens have the inalienable right to use the roads and highways unrestricted in any manner so long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of others. The government, by requiring the people to obtain drivers’ licenses, is restricting, and therefore violating, the people’s common law and constitutional right to travel;
(5) In Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Potter Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that the right to travel “is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association…it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” The Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; and we hold that the right to travel is so fundamental that the Framers thought it was unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights;
(6) The right to travel upon the public highways is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will but the common right which every citizen has under his or her right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his or her inclination along the public highways or in public places while conducting himself or herself in an orderly and decent manner; and
(7) Thus, the legislature does not have the power to abrogate the citizens’ right to travel upon the public roads by passing legislation forcing the citizen to waive the right and convert that right into a privilege.

 

SECTION 3.
Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to motor vehicles and traffic, is amended by repealing Chapter 5, relating to drivers’ licenses, and designating said chapter as reserved.

 

SECTION 4.
This Act shall become effective upon its approval by the Governor or upon its becoming law without such approval.

 

SECTION 5.
All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.
Posted in Right To Travel, Automobil v. Motor-Vehicle | Leave a comment

THE SHERIFF – MORE POWER

Posted on October 4, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

THE SHERIFF – MORE POWER THAN THE PRESIDENT

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan192.htm

>>

County Sheriff Handbook:

https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/sites/default/files/sheriffs_handbook.pdf

www.PoweroftheCountySheriff.org

Comment by Hansen > the problem that I see with the above is that it is not based on congressional law, or court president, for the “today’s” sheriff is a creature of the state and not of American Common law, he is a state officer.

Posted in Sheriff | Leave a comment

IRS 6203 KILLER QUESTION / DEMAND

Posted on October 4, 2010 by Paul John Hansen
IRS 6203, killer questions.
NOTE THE IRS AGENT MUST ANSWER
SUCH QUESTIONS, YOU can NOT, and
expect to win.
Always take a recorder with you when in an administrative hearing, and never ever set your recorder beside their equipment.  The IRS has in times past put demagnetizer close to our peoples recorders and nothing got recorded, everything was blank.  Talk to me before you go in to get updated.  And never ever go to Tax Court, that setting is only for a true taxpayer (US Subject), which you may or may not be, that burden of proof is on the IRS.

Upon studying the below that is, by design, to confuse and mislead the average man.

It all boils down to if one is a “Taxpayer” by the IRS own definition.

If not, even though the below quotes “taxpayer” 101
times, the IRS must produce evidence that you are in, in law, a “taxpayer“.

Section 6203 Method of Assessment 26 CFR 301.6203-1: Method of assessment (Also: § 6330) Rev. Rule 2007-21 PURPOSE The Internal Revenue Service (Service) is aware that some taxpayers are claiming that, before the Service may collect overdue taxes, the Service must provide taxpayers with a summary record of assessment made on a Form 23C, Assessment Certificate-Summary Record of Assessments, that is signed by an authorized employee or officer. If a Form 23C is not provided, these taxpayers claim that the assessment is invalid, and, consequently, that the Service may not collect any taxes due. This revenue ruling emphasizes to taxpayers, promoters, and return preparers that, although an assessment is recorded on a summary record of assessment, such as the Form 23C or its computer-generated equivalent, the Revenue Accounting Control System (RACS) Report 006, there is no legal requirement that a summary record of
——————————————————————————–
Page 2
2assessment be provided to a taxpayer before the Service may proceed with collection activity. Further, if a taxpayer requests proof that an assessment was made, the Service is not required to provide any particular form or information in any particular format to the taxpayer so long as the Service provides the information required by Treasury Regulation § 301.6203-1 to the taxpayer. Any position to the contrary has no merit and is frivolous. The Service is committed to identifying taxpayers who attempt to avoid their federal tax obligations by taking frivolous positions. The Service will take vigorous enforcement action against these taxpayers and against promoters and return preparers who assist taxpayers in taking these frivolous positions. Frivolous returns and other similar documents submitted to the Service are processed through the Service’s Frivolous Return Program. As part of this program, the Service determines whether taxpayers who have taken frivolous positions have filed all required tax returns, computes the correct amount of tax and interest due, and determines whether civil or criminal penalties should apply. The Service also determines whether civil or criminal penalties should apply to return preparers, promoters, and others who assist taxpayers in taking frivolous positions, and recommends whether an injunction should be sought to halt these activities. Other information about frivolous tax positions is available on the Service’s website at www.irs.gov. ISSUE Whether the Service must provide a taxpayer with a summary record of assessment, such as a Form 23C, before collection may begin.
——————————————————————————–
Page 3
FACTS Taxpayer A argues in a request for a collection due process hearing under section 6330 or 6320 of the Internal Revenue Code that, pursuant to section 6203 and Treasury Regulation § 301.6203-1, the Service must first provide the taxpayer with a summary record of assessment of taxes due before collection action may commence. Taxpayer A further argues that the record provided must include a Form 23C signed by an authorized Service official. In response, the Service provides Taxpayer A with a record of assessment on a Form 4340 (Certificate of Assessments and Payments), MFTRA-X (Master File Transcript), or other similar document. Taxpayer A asserts these forms do not meet the legal requirements and until the Service produces a valid summary record of assessment, the Service is prohibited from collecting the assessed liability. According to Taxpayer A, the Appeals Officer conducting the collection due process hearing, in verifying under section 6330(c)(1) that the Service has complied with applicable law and procedure, may not rely on anything other than the Form 23C to determine, for purposes of the section 6330(c)(1) requirement, that a valid assessment was made. LAW AND ANALYSIS Section 6203 states that an assessment of tax (including interest, additions to tax, and assessable penalties) “shall be made by recording the liability of the taxpayer in the office of the Secretary in accordance with rules or regulations prescribed by the Secretary.” The section also states that, when requested by a taxpayer, the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer a copy of the record of assessment. Treasury Regulation
——————————————————————————–
Page 4
§ 301.6203-1 specifies that an assessment is made “by an assessment officer signing the summary record of assessment,” which a through supporting records must include the “identification of the taxpayer, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amount of the assessment.” Under the regulation, if a taxpayer requests a copy of the record of assessment, the Service will give the taxpayer “a copy of the pertinent parts of the assessment which set forth the name of the taxpayer, the date of assessment, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amounts assessed. The date of the assessment is the date the summary record is signed. There is no requirement in the statute or regulation that the assessment be recorded on a specific form or that the taxpayer be provided with a certain form as a record of assessment. Until its transition to computerized record keeping, the Service generally used Form 23C for the summary record of assessment, but it now uses, except in unusual circumstances, a computer-generated summary record of assessment known as the RACS Report 006. Both forms have been recognized as summary records of assessment within the meaning of section 6203. See March v. Internal Revenue Service, 335 F.3d 1186, 1188 (10th Cir. 2003). In Roberts v. Commissioner, 329 F.3d 1224, 1228 (11th Cir. 2003), the taxpayer argued that an assessment was invalid because the Service did not use Form 23C but instead used RACS Report 006. The court held that there was nothing in the law to show that the use of the RACS report was not in compliance with the statute and the regulation. The RACS report and the
——————————————————————————–
Page 5
Form 23C are both signed by an assessment officer. The RACS report, like the Form 23C, provides, when coupled with “supporting records,” the information set forth in Treasury Regulation § 301.6203-1. In response to a taxpayer’s request under section 6203 and the regulation for a copy of the record of assessment, the Service is not required to provide any particular form or document and may choose among documents that contain the items of information listed in the regulation.
Instead of a RACS report 006, which does not break out individual taxpayer information, the Service may provide Form 4340, “Certificate of Assessments and Payments,” or a MFTRA-X transcript (literal or plain-language transcript) of the taxpayer’s account, either of which sets forth all of the information required by the regulation, because each identifies the taxpayer, states the character of the liabilities assessed, the tax period giving rise to the assessment, the amount of the assessment, and the date of assessment. See Goodman v. United States, 185 Fed. Appx. 725, 728 (10th Cir. 2006); Roberts, 329 F.3d at 1228; Carillo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-290; Michael v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-26. In addition, an Appeals Officer is not required to obtain a Form 23C or other particular document in a collection due process hearing and may rely on a Form 4340 or MFTRA-X transcript to verify the validity of the assessment for purposes of section 6330(c)(1). See Nestor v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 162 (2002); Perez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-274. HOLDING The Service is not required to provide Taxpayer A with a summary record of assessment before collecting any taxes due. An assessment is not invalid, and
——————————————————————————–
Page 6
collection is not precluded, because the Service has not provided a summary record of assessment to the taxpayer. Additionally, Taxpayer’s claim that the Service must produce a Form 23C or other record of assessment as proof of assessment is frivolous. If a taxpayer requests a copy of the record of assessment, the Service may produce the information in any form or format, provided the summary produced contains the information required by Treasury Regulation § 301.6203-1. Acceptable copies of the record of assessment include, but are not limited to, Forms 4340 and MFTRA-X transcripts. Further, the Form 4340, MFTRA-X transcript, or other similar documents may be used in a collection due process proceeding to verify the validity of an assessment under section 6330(c)(1). The Service will challenge the claims of individuals who improperly attempt to avoid or evade their federal tax liability. CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES The position described above, that the Service must provide a taxpayer with a summary record of assessment, such as a Form 23C, before collection or must provide a Form 23C in any collection proceeding is a frivolous position under section 6702. The Service will challenge the claims of individuals who attempt to improperly avoid or evade their federal tax liability. In addition to liability for the tax due plus statutory interest, taxpayers who insist upon receiving a Form 23C before complying with their tax obligations face substantial civil and criminal penalties. Potentially applicable civil penalties include: (1) the section 6702(b) $5,000 penalty for submitting a specified
——————————————————————————–
Page 7
frivolous submission; (2) the section 6651(a)(3) addition to tax for failure to pay the tax owed; and (3) the section 6673 penalty of up to $25,000 if the taxpayer makes frivolous arguments in the United States Tax Court. Taxpayers relying on this frivolous position also may face criminal prosecution under section 7201 for attempting to evade or defeat tax, the penalty for which is a significant fine and imprisonment for up to 5 years, or prosecution under other federal laws as applicable. DRAFTING INFORMATION This revenue ruling was authored by the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure & Administration), Administrative Provisions and Judicial Practice Division. For further information regarding this revenue ruling, contact that office at (202) 622-7950.

>>>>>>
SUBJECT: ARE YOU WORRIED THE IRS IS GOING TO COME AFTER YOU?

If you are worried that the IRS is going to come after you, then worry NO MORE!

Have you exhausted all your administrative appeals under 26 U.S.C. 7433 as recommended by all the . . . AMATEUR IRS RESPONSE LETTER WRITERS?

I have created a . . . “NEW FOIA RELIANCE DEFENSE PACKAGE” . . . that basically allows you to ask for everything that you would normally have to wait until you are prosecuted in either a civil or criminal action to ask for in discovery.

Why wait until you are prosecuted?

Why don’t you do something now to prevent the IRS from coming after you in the first place?
Did you know that the IRS ANNOTATED CASE LAW specifically holds that if the IRS skips any of the administrative steps and procedures and/or violates your RIGHTS to the DUE PROCESS OF LAW and fails to give you NOTICE & OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND which includes any and/or all of the NOTICES & DEMANDS for taxes or money and/or fails to give you any of the NOTICES of your RIGHTS to a HEARING, that it voids the whole proceeding even if you owed the taxes and that you could sue the individual IRS agent for violating your rights under the TAX PAYER BILL OF RIGHTS?

Lets use the 1974 Privacy Act as codified at 5 U.S.C. 552a and the Freedom of Information Act as codified at 5 U.S.C. 552 and 26 CFR 601.701,  26 CFR 601.702 (c), 26 CFR 301.6203-1, 26 U.S.C. 6103, 26 I.R.C. 6103,  IRS Policy Statement P-6-13, Section 2 of 31 CFR Part 1,  Appendix B of Subpart C,  31 CFR Part 1, Subt. C.  Appx B Para. (d) and ask for and demand an administrative hearing pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556 (e) and demand that the IRS correct it’s records now!

At the end of each FOIA, let’s ask them for the ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING that we are entitled to under 5 U.S.C. 556 (e) that they are required to give us BEFORE they can invoke judicial process and come after us in either a civil or criminal action.

There are other amateur & beginner patriots and tax honesty groups and individual patriots who use FOIA and 26 U.S.C. 7433 with some minor success, but there are other much better remedies under other statutes.

This “NEW FOIA RELIANCE DEFENSE PACKAGE” helps set up the IRS for a future lawsuit or complaint that we can file under 5 U.S.C. 702 or 5 U.S.C. 556 (e) and/or we can demand that the Secretary remove the NOFTL if the IRS skipped any of the administrative steps or filed their lien prematurely pursuant to or 26 U.S.C. 6323 or 26 U.S.C. 6325.

Did you know that we can sue the INDIVIDUAL IRS AGENT for violating your rights pursuant to THE TAX PAYER BILL OF RIGHTS?
IF the IRS ever comes after you in either a civil or criminal prosecution for willful failure to file income tax returns and/or income tax evasion, after purchasing my NEW FOIA RELIANCE DEFENSE PACKAGE, then you could HIRE ME to write a PRE-TRIAL MOTION TO DISMISS on the grounds that the IRS FAILED TO EXHAUST ALL THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES.

IF the IRS is already GARNISHING your PAYCHECKS, then I can also separately write a MEMORANDUM OF LAW showing your EMPLOYER that under STATE LAW that he or she cannot lawfully withhold any money from your paycheck unless authorized by STATE or FEDERAL LAW which the IRS does NOT cite in any notices or letters that they send your employer?

The IRS routinely just makes a phone call to your employer and “threatens” the employer over the phone that they will take the money out of his account if your employer fails to withhold and turn over your money to the IRS.

Did you know that both STATE STATUTES and FEDERAL STATUTES both clearly state that STATE LAW CONTROLS ALL JUDGMENT, GARNISHMENT AND COLLECTION PROCEEDINGS?

Yes, I have discovered a series of STATE STATUTES and FEDERAL STATUTES that specifically state that STATE LAW CONTROLS ALL JUDGMENT, ALL COLLECTION, ALL GARNISHMENT AND ALL LIEN & LEVY PROCEDURE and all of these statutes in combination absolutely REQUIRE that the IRS must have 1st obtained a CERTIFIED COPY of their JUDGEMENT and REGISTER it in a SUPERIOR COURT or COURT OF GENERAL JURISDICTION and/or a COURT OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION in your State or “within” your STATE!
Did you know that you could sue your employer for up to TRIPLE DAMAGES under STATE LAW if your employer continues to withhold any MONEY from your PAYCHECK after you have demanded in writing that they stop withholding any money from your paychecks, unless your employer can show you that the IRS has a CERTIFIED COPY and prove that the IRS REGISTERED A JUDGEMENT in a State Superior Court “within” your State?

This means that your EMPLOYER could end up paying all your taxes even if you really owed the taxes!

Plus, once we can prove that the individual IRS agent violated your rights by engaging in illegal collection activities, we can sue that individual agent later in the proceedings!

I must FIRST review ALL of your PAPERWORK before and prior to giving you a price quote or estimate of how much I will charge you to do anything for you!

I must first REVIEW ALL YOUR PAPERWORK BEFORE I can give you a PRICE QUOTE or ESTIMATE of how much my FOIA package will cost.

IF YOU ARE BEING PROSECUTED CRIMINALLY OR ABOUT TO BE PROSECUTED CRIMINALLY, YOU NEED MY FOIA PACKAGE, BUT FIRST YOU MUST HAVE ME REVIEW YOUR CASE, BECAUSE EVERY FOIA PACKAGE IS DIFFERENT AND CUSTOM – TAILORED FOR EACH CASE INDIVIDUALLY.  (Note: I do not sell boilerplate crap like most PATRIOT IRS LETTER WRITERS.)

If I can review your case and get your FOIA package in BEFORE they decide to prosecute, it may stop them dead in their tracks or delay them long enough to buy me the time I need to properly research and write Pre-Trial Motions to Dismiss your case.

If I can review your case and get your FOIA package in BEFORE YOUR DAY OF TRIAL, I can of your case and then set up an affirmative defense at the 11nth hour which will allow me to write a Pre-Trial Motion to Dismiss the IRS’s case for their failure to exhaust all their administrative remedies before bringing you to the judicial or the court for prosecution that the court will be forced to grant and even if the court denied this motion, by getting my FOIA in prior to the DAY OF YOUR TRIAL, I will have SET THE RECORD FOR A WIN ON APPEAL.

MY FOIA PACKAGE IS ONLY FOR SERIOUS INQUIRIES ONLY!

So if you are interested in STOPPING THE IRS BEFORE THEY COME AFTER YOU, send me an E-MAIL requesting more information and I will send you my Consulting Fees schedule.   402-957-2853
Under Construction.
>>>>>>
Posted in IRS | 4 Comments

IRS ASSESSMENT DEMAND, A MUST DO

Posted on October 4, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

The IRS CODE says that if the IRS wants to make a allegation that a tax is owed they must put it in writing, IF demanded by you, and then they must sign it.

One “X” IRS agent said; “95% of what the IRS does is bluff”.

Assessment, IRS
Must have on the face of the document the following:
Blue Ink signature of an IRS agent.
My name on it.
My address.
The years they are coming after me on it.
My S.S. number.
Must be a Certified Assessment.
If not all the above it is not an assessment. IRS will send you what looks like, sounds like, and eve
says it is, but it is not an assessment, we have not seen one in 20 years of asking for an certified
assessment.  Why?  Read on.
>>
Affirmative Defenses:
I was given no bill.  No Assessment.  IRS can not prosecute if assessment was demanded and not delivered.
IRS agent can not make an assessment unless you are a taxable entity, If he does and you are not it is
fraud/perjury. (jail, lose all benefits, lose pension, can not work for the government again, open to civil damages)
Obligation /  Law
Requirement / Statute  (Required to File?)
Regulation – Liability
>>
The below letter is an exact copy of a response, to a claim made by the IRS, that I owe $167K for just one of the listed year, so for that amount they should be quite aggressive. Stay tuned, this site will keep everyone informed of all actions by the IRS and Hansen’s responses.

FROM:
Paul John Hansen
c/o 1548 N 19th street
Omaha, Nebraska (by 68110-2452)

Mailed to the IRS on July 18, 2007

TO:
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue
P. O.  Box 149338
Austin, TX 78714-9338

RE: Proposed Individual Income Tax Assessments for Tax Years 2003 and 2004.

To get a copy of this exact letter in WORD format order below for 15$.  It has stopped them cold for thirteen (13) years now, even though I was making 15K$ each month that they were fully aware of.  (I have not filed since the year of 2001.)

NOTICE – 3-24-14 – Due to recent difficulties with Paypal send all payment by mailing money orders payable to Paul John Hansen, mailing address 1548 N 19, Omaha, NE 68110.

As of 02-24-2014- I have received nothing from the IRS in any form.  The IRS does have a lien recorded in Douglas County that has shown up on my credit report. (AS SEEN BELOW)  This is not a problem for no lien without a court order accompanying it has any force and effect of law, and I can assure you they have no such ORDER.

Now remember I own 28 houses, so do not think they have nothing to come after, if they had written law on their side, which they do not.

DOUGLAS COUNTY RECORDER  Docket# 2009117043
H02 CIVIC CENTER
OMAHA , NE 68183
(402) 444-7159 Type: Federal Tax Lien / Court Type:
Recorder Of DeedsDate Filed:

10/2009

Responsibility:

Individual

Amount:

$166,810.00

>>> With the 15$ order you will be linked to a perpetual Dropbox that will have ongoing information on the application of this type of notice.

 

Posted in IRS, IRS / Assessment / 6203, IRS 6203 Demand | Leave a comment

Declaration / Notice To All / Standing

Posted on October 2, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

I would make some changes to this if I were to do another, I really see little value of this document in most cases.  A free inhabitant gains nothing by filing “public notices” with the US system.  I consider this a wast of 35$.  Your best defense against government is as follows:

“””STAY OUT OF THEIR COURTS””” and convene a English common law process.

1. Personal Jurisdiction Challenge;

2. Subject Matter Jurisdictional Challenge;

3. Territorial Jurisdictional challenge.

Declaration and Public Notice of a Private Writing

A Ninth Amendment Proclamation

This document is the solemn declaration of domicile of choice of the undersigned, pursuant to the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America.

Know All Men By These Present:

I, ______________________________, hereby do swear/affirm (yea be yea, and nay be nay) by solemn declaration that I am a de jure Citizen of the United States, domiciled within the territorial boundaries of ____________________________ county, ___________________________ state, thereby a member of the Posterity of We, the People, with UNALINABLE rights, privileges and immunities that are guaranteed by organic law, secured by the constitution for the United States of America (1789) and INALIENABLE civil liberties that are guaranteed by the Constitution for the state of _________________________ (___), and are to be executed with specific performance pursuant to the Statutes of Fraud and Perjuries.

This declaration hereby establishes and distinguishes affiant as a freeholder in the American sense and as a nonresident of “this state” (STATE OF ____________________ ) or any other (de facto) forum state with a “body politic or corporate” repugnant to the above.  Affiant’s free exercise of religious belief and accountability to the universal laws of nature and of nature’s god, as originally embodied upon the adoption of the Constitution, includes the natural sense of an inherent moral duty toward mankind.

This proclamation, duly of record within ____________________________ county, ________state, establishes the status of affiant, and is conclusive evidence to any and all conditional presumptions by any and all quasi/constructive/implied consent(s) to any and all foreign jurisdictions inapposite to affiant’s asylum home state of domicile as secured by the supreme law of the land.

TO BE SUBSRIBED AND SWORN, I declaring under penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States that the forgoing is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge.

State of ________________  )

) ss:

County of ______________  )

Signature ________________________________________

Subscribed and sworn to me this ________ day of _____________________, 2010.

____________________________________

Notary Public, State of _________________

Commission expires:  __________________

Declaration and Public Notice of a Private Writing

A Ninth Amendment Proclamation

This document is the solemn declaration of domicile of choice of the undersigned, pursuant to the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America.

Know All Men By These Present:

I, Paul John Hansen, hereby do swear/affirm (yea be yea, and nay be nay) by solemn declaration that I am a de jure Citizen of the United States, domiciled within the territorial boundaries of Douglas county, Nebraska state, thereby a member of the Posterity of We, the People, with UNALINABLE rights, privileges and immunities that are guaranteed by organic law, secured by the constitution for the United States of America (1789) and INALIENABLE liberties that are guaranteed by the Constitution for the state of Nebraska (statehood-March 1, 1867, 37th), and are to be executed with specific performance pursuant to the Statutes of Fraud and Perjuries.

This declaration hereby establishes and distinguishes affiant as, at all times from as I being born, a freeholder in the American sense and as a nonresident of “this state” (STATE OF NEBRASKA) or any other (de facto) forum state with a “body politic or corporate” repugnant to the above.  Affiant’s free exercise of religious belief and accountability to the universal laws of nature and of nature’s god, as originally embodied upon the adoption of the Constitution, includes the natural sense of an inherent moral duty toward mankind.

This proclamation, duly of record within Douglas county, Nebraska state, establishes the status of affiant, and is conclusive evidence to any and all conditional presumptions by any and all quasi/constructive/implied consent(s) to any and all foreign jurisdictions inapposite to affiant’s asylum home state of domicile as secured by the supreme law of the land.

TO BE SUBSRIBED AND SWORN, I, declaring under penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States that the forgoing is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge.

State of Nebraska                   )

) ss:

County of Douglas                 )

Signature ________________________________________

Subscribed and sworn to me this ________ day of _____________________, 2010.

____________________________________

Notary Public, State of _________________

Commission expires:  __________________

Posted in Notices | 2 Comments

Registered Voter = Statutory ‘PERSON’

Posted on October 2, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

Anyone that is voting in today elections on any State or Federal issue is one who consented to be governed and has elected to walk away from the standing of “free inhabitant” as found in Article IV of the Articles of Confederation 1777 .

Such is electing to be governed by that political body.

All free inhabitants have only to answer to other free inhabitants provided they stay off USA owned Land (Fed Territory).      SEE         edrivera.com

Once you learn the truth, you will know why the statement, “you are a free person because you have the right to vote,” is a lie.

Your state will ask these questions of you before you can vote:                                               To be eligible to register in Nebraska, you must:

  • Military/Overseas Votersbe a U.S. citizen;
  • be a resident of the county;
  • be 18 years old (you may register at 17 years and 10 months);
  • not a convicted felon (unless a person’s sentence is completed, including any probation or parole)
  • not declared mentally incapacitated by a court of law

Why I do not vote: Being tax free.  A “free inhabitant” need not be governed other than by Gods parameters.     He who votes seeks to be governed.  He who seeks to be governed must pay for the benefit (expense) of being governed.  I do not vote, I pay no STATE,  no federal tax (D.C. tax).  I exempt myself, by Nebraska Revenue Form 13, with the retailers, for no sales tax (if over a few dollars).
I pay all corporate property tax (DOUGLAS COUNTY) under protest, ALL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES RESERVED.
Fundamentally you vote every day, every person or entity you hand money (or your labor) to is an individual vote.  Presently the average individual votes close to 50 to 70% of said votes (labor) for/to the government.     I chose not.

How I do vote:
Every time I part with my money, property, or labor I vote for some one or for some cause.
There are many governments in every community, a few are named below:
a. family
b. city
c. county
d. state
e. corporate CITY
f. corporate COUNTY
g. corporate STATE
h. church
i. Clubs and Associations such as Boy scouts, YMCA, Homeless Shelters, etc.
j. an individual person

No bullying government can force you to support their corporation/business, stand firm and learn the truth.
Never ever vote for something you do not wish to perpetuate, to do so is a cowardice act.

So essentially you vote every time you give a resource to anyone, or anything.

So as a free man you can make your vote count, you and you alone have liberty to do so.
(The only exception is when a de jure governor of the state (people) have an apportioned bill for the defense of the “confederation” of the 50 states, which has not been an issue since the early years of our country.)
You can vote for any, none, or all of the above, it is your choice “if” you are a free inhabitant.

P.S. free inhabitants never have to pay a corporate sales tax (See sales tax).
In court a Douglas County Prosecutor tried to get me to admit, under oath, that I was a registered voter to prove that I was a ‘statutory PERSON’ therefore subject to an administrative court and had no right to a trial by jury in common law as to Omaha Municipal Housing Codes.

Per Request:

TO: (Your current county voting commissioner.)

FROM:

Paul John Hansen    DOB ___________________,

1548 N 19th St.

Omaha, Nebraska ( 68110 )

402-671-0526

February 21, 2006

To whom it may concern:

It has come to my attention that participating in elections as a United States citizen generates an error pursuant to section 2 of the fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.  This Nebraska ‘free inhabitant’ was not informed of his participation at such a level during past registrations to vote.  This Nebraska born man does not want to be perceived to have an affiliation or contract with the Federal Government of the U.S. , or any of it’s subdivisions.  This Nebraska free inhabitant has no evidence in his possession that he is or was a United States citizen as found in the 14thamendment to the US Constitution.  I hereby formally DEMAND that my name, as it appears herein presented above, or any similar variation thereof, be removed from the voter registration roles forthwith ab initio.  Moreover, as this is at minimum,  a constructive fraud on part of the government, it is firmly asserted that culpable ignorance need not apply in this case, inasmuch as I consider all past participation in elections, as such “citizen”, void ad initio.  Please respond within ten (10) days of your receiving this demand, verifying the expungement of such registration and the manner in which it was executed.  Approximately 6 years ago I lived in Carter Lake, on Shoal Point, and I believe I was registered to vote in Pottawatomie County and I want to make sure my withdrawal is complete.

Sincerely,

________________________________ February ____ 2006

________________________________ as a disinterested party has mailed this same document to the above address, postage paid, by United States Mail, on ________________ ____ 2006.

>>

Optional Letter:

I am a student of Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, America’s and the world’s greatest legal mind.  I am learning how to read and understand the written law, so that I can free myself from that system of law and the government it creates.  Once totally freed from temporal civil law, I plan to live a spiritual life using unwritten law.

An important step in freeing myself from written law requires that I renounce and reject any status of a registered voter and grand or petit juror.  I would like confirmation from your office that any voter registration in my name has be cancelled and revoked and that I have been stricken from any civil or criminal jury rolls.

If there is any question of my right or authority to cancel any voter registration or inclusion on any juror roll, please continue reading the explanation provided by Dr. Rivera or visit his website: www.EDRIVERA.com

Dr. Rivera teaches that the Constitution is written, so that every English speaking person can form a basic understanding of the government such a Constitution creates and the kind and extent of the laws that government can make.

Dr. Rivera teaches that all the fundamental law of the United States of America called the Organic Law must be known in order to better understand the fourth Organic Law, the Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence, the first Organic Law, freed Americans from all despotic government by making all governments subject to our individual consent.  The right to vote and the exercise of that right does not confer on government the power to govern all the people.  Unalienable rights are not subject to the legislative power of any government.

The second Organic Law, the Articles of Confederation, created the Confederacy of the United States of America, in which each state retained its “sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction and right.”  The retention of state’s rights precluded the government of the United States of America from making laws for the states or the taxation of the people or their property.

The strength of the perpetual Union created by the Articles of Confederation should have been obvious, as that Union was sufficient to defeat the British, the greatest military power of that time.   Unscrupulous historians have perpetuated the myth that the Constitution replaced or repealed the Articles of Confederation.

With independence, America had become the land of opportunity and the politicians quickly realized their opportunity by creating the now popular belief that federal elections of members of Congress can subject unalienable Rights to legislative change or subject them to taxation.   The federal elections scam was begun in the Northwest Territory, which would later become the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and part of Minnesota.

The Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, the third Organic Law of the United States of America, conferred upon the first five thousand free male inhabitants of that district of the age of majority the authority to elect representatives to a general assembly.   This authority was conferred by the United States, in Congress assembled, making voting and representational democracy a legislative grant or concession and not an attribute of individual freedom.

Federal voting rights are limited to matters involving federal territory and other issues pertaining to the government and property belonging to the United States of America. I have no issue or matter that can be resolved by the government of the United States, so please cancel my federal voter registration and remove me from the juror rolls.

Posted in Voting / Registered | 2 Comments

State Sales Tax, (A DUTY or not?) Legal Brief is Available.

Posted on October 2, 2010 by Paul John Hansen

CAUTION-Never state that you do not have a sales tax duty, always keep the burden on them to prove your duty!

Businesses where I do not pay STATE sales tax.

Menards
Walmart
Lowes
HomeDepo
Napa Auto Parts

To order my legal brief click the Buy Now below:

NOTICE – 3-24-14 – Due to recent difficulties with Paypal send all payment by mailing money orders payable to Paul John Hansen, mailing address 1548 N 19, Omaha, NE 68110.

“Opposition of Sales Tax Duty, Brief“.

Just pay 10$ and I’ll email you the information, and you will be joined to a Dropbox, “if you like”, so you can watch others all across America exercise their independence as well, it will pay for itself in just one purchase of $133.00 in Nebraska. Your friends will faint watching you walk out of stores saving hundreds of dollars.

>>>
Basically the corporate government (STATE OF NEBRASKA) is just that “a corporation’ and they can only tax (bill) those “in” the corporate structure.  Free Inhabitants, are not “in”, they are without(outside of).

They can only tax that which they ‘own’ (govern).

So being free from the government is really free, what a phenomenal concept.

So if the tax is $1.00 or more dollars I pull out a copy of the (Nebraska) FORM ‘N 13‘ and save the tax.
(Many stores have them on hand also, some have them online, or in house computer systems.)
The store managers go “wow”, I did not know that, then I give them a card with this site on it.

I have friends that have been doing this for years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Nebraska Department of Revenue – Form 13 http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:IWbmS6jJkagJ:www.revenue.ne.gov/tax/current/f_13.pdf+nebraska+sales+tax+form+13&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESi5t-Q3B1c7Wbuff7bZVUho4IXYx9NYQLScFQ0eYrGmJWUgIStC2k316QEt9h40nVw

qxigZxJV2EzuQLmN1SLH3HPcF38ltKCiHh6YvCNxbJ61oAzWEMFmgaJp8IF–mT28ZkoF&sig=AHIEtbRVFp5bWr4JkKg3LY3fXlTmkERxGg

NOTICE: As a free inhabitant pursuant to Article 4 of the Articles of Confederation, the form below is really not for you.  How could a form be required if on is free from their governing structure.  But none the less it works.  If they refuse contact me and we can give them legal notice by notary presentment as to their misapplication of their written law, and if they continue you can go for triple damages.

>>  Basic N 13 form below”

NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF PURCHASER
Name Paul John Hansen
Street or Other Mailing Address – 1548 N 19,
City – Omaha.
State, Nebraska, without the United States.
(I leave the zip code off.)

SECTION “B” Nebraska Exempt Sale Certificate

category 2

Description of Item(s) Purchased “ Personal”

Intended Use of Item(s) Purchased – For free inhabitant, private use only.

sign here>  Paul John Hansen, Date – 23 day of October 2008

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Stores that you frequent will give you a pass or log you in at the desk, so it takes 1 minute the first time and seconds after that.

Some stores have computer entry so you can not put in lower case, upper will work in that situation.

It may not work if you use a postal service address. Use of a government service is a presumption (possibly a contract) of a taxable entity/activity.

You see ‘residents’ have ‘addresses’ within the UNITED STATES INC., a resident (US citizen, non-free inhabitant) is a taxable entity.

A sovereign has a mail call location without the US.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I have never been turned down. The store owners call their lawyer, and the lawyers say the man is right, and gives the go-ahead on a tax free sale.
The store owner then often turns to me and says; “do you have any info I can read about this on the internet or something, this is very interesting, I have been here for twenty years and I have never seen this exception stuff.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

State Sales Tax BRIEF
There are few forms of taxation that are more misunderstood than sales tax! We hope this article will help clear matters up.
The first thing that should be considered about sales tax, is the specific nature of the tax. Sales tax is an “excise” tax. An excise tax is a “privilege” tax. How do we know that it is an excise? Because (depending on the state) it says so right in the sales tax statute:
California Revenue and Taxation Code, section 6051:
“For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers…”
As can clearly be seen by the use of the “privilege”, the tax is based upon the exercise of a privilege. So why do we say that sales tax is an “excise” tax? Because the federal courts tell us that the two words (“privilege” and “excise”) represent the same form of tax.
“The term ‘excise tax’ and ‘privilege tax’ are synonymous. The two are often used interchangeably.”
American Airways v. Wallace, 57 F.2d 877, 880
Now that we know the tax is an excise, we must determine who is exercising the privilege. Only in this way can we determine who is actually and lawfully liable for the tax. But wait…reread the California statute shown above. The State has done our work for us by telling us plainly who the tax is imposed upon [which is the person “made liable” for the tax]. The statute says the tax is “…imposed upon all retailers…” Did you get that? The tax is upon “retailers”. The tax is not, and never has been, imposed on you.
O.K., now we know that the tax is imposed upon the retailer. So what is the privilege being exercised by the retailer? That question is the key to who is a “retailer” and who is not. Even if you sell products “at retail”, you are still not the “retailer” spoken of in the statute unless you are also exercising a privilege in the course of selling your goods at retail. Let’s explore this issue a bit.
California writes some of the most vague laws in the nation. The intention of the California legislature is not usually made clear in the text of the law, nor is there usually any sort of preface that explains its intended purpose. Other states generally don’t do much better because they often attempt to copy California’s lead. However, some do a tad better.
The Minnesota sales tax statute is an example of legislative language that at least tips us off to a few things!
Here’s how the State of Minnesota imposes their sales tax:
297A.62 Sales tax imposed; rates.
“…a sales is imposed on the gross receipts from retail sales in this state by a person who is required to have or voluntarily obtains a permit under section 297A.83, subdivision 1”.
The Minnesota statute tells us that there are “persons” who are required to have a resale permit, and others who may acquire the permit on a purely voluntary basis. Minnesota law never reveals which “person” is required to have the permit, nor does California law. So how do we distinguish between the person who has to have a permit and those who don’t? That distinction will also tell us who is the “retailer” and who is not.
It would be nice if the legislative draftsmen who write these statutes would just come right out and tell us who is required, but that would cost a state such as California billions of dollars in lost revenue in just a single year, so the legislative draftsmen are not allowed to be that straightforward. If the legislative draftsmen were allowed to tell us plainly who is “required”, then we would also know just as plainly who is not required because they wouldn’t be on the “required” list.
Let’s be frank – to withhold a clear definition of who the tax is imposed upon in order to create an environment in which people will collect and pay a tax, out of ignorance, for which they are not liable, is criminal conduct – if not legally, certainly morally. Unless or until the culprits (your elected state legislators) vote to amend the law to clarify matters [fat chance!], we are left with what is written, and that is what we must examine for answers. Since the State will not allow any plain language to be used, the legislative draftsmen are left to write the law in such a way as to rely solely on contextual framework to determine who is required and who is not.  Let’s explore the contextual framework of the “person” upon whom the tax is imposed.
Although the tax is actually imposed based upon the occurrence of certain events (i.e. “selling at retail”), the responsibility for collecting and paying over the tax rests upon a “person”. A typical definition of “person” in a statute usually looks something like this:
Person – The term person includes an individual, partnership, joint venture, limited liability company, association, cooperative, corporation whether or not organized for profit, estate, or trust.
The first thing that is important to note about that definition is that other than the word “individual” (which we will discuss in a moment), every one of the entities listed is clearly a “statutory legal fiction”. A statutory legal fiction is a legal entity (called a “person”) that exists because the legislature has allowed it to come into existence by passing a law that authorizes its creation. The most commonly recognized “statutory fiction” is a corporation. We would suggest that you re-read the bold-print sentence as many times as is necessary, and let it sink in. [A quick and easy test to determine if something is a legal fiction is this: If it can sue you in court, but it has no flesh and blood, it’s a legal fiction.]
Because statutory fictions are created by the State, they are subject to absolute regulation by the State solely on the basis of “public policy” considerations. [In this article we will only be addressing statutory fictions. There are non-statutory fictions, such as Common Law Trusts, which are not generally subject to State regulation as are statutory fictions.] Once again, we would suggest that you re-read the bold-print sentence above as many times as necessary to lock it in your mind.
Some corporations are referred to as “private corporations”. This phrase is misleading. A “private corporation” is not “private” in the way most people use that word. In law, the phrase “private corporation” is merely a way of distinguishing a corporation as not being listed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for “public trading” of its shares on a stock exchange. Because corporations (and all other statutory fictions) are created by the State, they are never “private” in the way most people understand and use the word “private”.
Since all of the words used within the definition of “person” appear to be “legal fictions”, how then should we view the word “individual”? And remember, we are ascertaining the proper meaning and application of a tax statute through context.
The first question that we would ask is whether or not an “individual” is a Citizen. [See the Citizenship page within this site for details on “Citizen”.] Since a Citizen of a state of the Union is definitely not exercising a privilege when buying or selling his own property in a private transaction, then a Citizen cannot be the “individual” in a definition dealing with an excise [privilege] tax – at least not in his private capacity. But what if the “individual” is a man (Citizen or not) who holds a position of authority and responsibility within one of those legal fictions (such as a corporate officer)? Let’s see if that theory holds water!
Chapter 75 of the Internal Revenue Code specifies various criminal tax offenses. The term “person” is used in virtually every section of the chapter. After all, since a “legal fiction” can’t be put in jail, there has to be someone that the government can ultimately hold accountable for wrongdoing.
So what is the definition of “person” for IRS tax crimes?
26 USC §7343:
Person – The term ”person” as used in this chapter includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
Ah…so when a real-live-flesh-and-blood person (known in law as a “natural person”) is held accountable for criminal non-compliance with the law, he is held accountable only in his capacity as the officer or employee, under a duty to perform, on behalf of the “legal fiction”.
Does it not then seem reasonable that the “individual” listed in the sales tax statute is simply a natural person who is under a duty to perform, or not perform, an act regarding the tax being imposed upon the legal fiction?
Of course under the Minnesota sales tax statute it is entirely likely that “individual”, as used within the definition of “person”, is also anyone who voluntarily acquired a resale permit, thus entering into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, thereby making himself an “individual” (as such word is used within the definition of “person”). Although the California statute does not specifically mention the person who would obtain a resale permit voluntarily, the same principle applies in that state. Got a headache yet? Too bad – we’re not done!
Who else might the word “individual” include? Could it include an alien residing in this country? Of course. This can easily be seen by the fact that aliens legally entering this country must receive written permission from the Immigration and Naturalization Service in order to work in this country. [Still not done!]
Who else might the word “individual” include? Let’s see what Black’s Law Dictionary has to say. After pointing out that the word “individual” can mean a “natural person as distinguished from partnership, [or] corporation” [See a theme here?], it goes on to say;
“…but it is said this restrictive signification is not necessarily inherent in the word, and that it may, in proper cases, include artificial persons.”
Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.
In case you’re wondering, an “artificial person” is simply another way of saying, “a legal fiction”! Boy, these lawyers are a tricky bunch aren’t they?
So now we have three probable meanings for the word “individual” as it is used within the definition of “person” (concerning the imposition of an excise tax):
A natural person under a duty as an official of a corporation or other fiction.
A natural person who created liability through an agreement with the State.
A non-specified form of legal fiction, not otherwise appearing in the definition.
Given varying circumstances, “individual” may mean one or more of those definitions, but one thing is for sure – in a statute involving an excise tax, the word “individual” never means a private Citizen buying or selling his own private property in the course of a private transaction. Why? Because a private Citizen has an “unalienable right” to acquire, possess, and dispose of his private property without interference from the government.
So…if we know what “individual” does and does not mean, we now have a better understanding of what “person” means! Since we know that every other entity (except “individual”) is a legal fiction, and we know what “individual” does and does not mean, we now know that “person” (when applied to an excise tax) does not mean a private Citizen buying or selling his own private property in the course of a private transaction.
So let’s tie this back into the issue of context, which is where we started three pages ago when we first found that the statute does not specify who is exercising the taxable privilege!
Because a private Citizen who is buying or selling his own private property must be excluded from the word “individual” on Constitutional grounds, the contextual framework has been staked out; after having excluded a Citizen, the law may properly be applied to those who do not have unalienable rights to violate. So we find that “person” means:
Any statutory fiction of law (not exempt by statute).
An “individual”.
We have found that “individual” means:
. A natural person under a duty as an official of a corporation or other fiction.
. A natural person who created liability through an agreement with the State.
. A non-specified form of legal fiction, not otherwise appearing in the definition of “person”.
It should be remembered that this discourse pertains exclusively to excise taxes and may not be applicable in other unrelated matters.
We hope that this has not only educated you as to the contextual framework of excise taxes, but may also have demonstrated a general approach to making sense of convoluted and/or vague statutes. Context is always a fundamental element.
In closing, we should bring one additional issue to your attention. The State of California and many other states assert that for proper administration of sales tax the State may operate under the presumption that everyone is a retailer and owes sales tax.
California Revenue and Taxation Code, §6091:
For the purpose of the proper administration of this part and to prevent evasion of the sales tax it shall be presumed that all gross receipts are subject to the tax until the contrary is established.
It should be noted that only “persons” have “gross receipts“, not Citizens in the pursuit of their private affairs – even if such private affairs include the buying and selling of goods or services. It should also be noted that “all” presumptions are rebuttable by affidavit, sworn testimony, or other evidence. The State’s presumption can never operate lawfully upon a Citizen (unless he has a resale permit) because such a presumption would conflict with our nation’s fundamental principle of “innocent until proven guilty”, and would reverse the standard that the government has the “burden of proof”. The State’s presumption can only operate against “persons”, who have no unalienable rights to offend.
[For assistance with proper rebuttal, click on Original Intent Services or Contact Us]
And finally, many Citizens make some serious mistakes in reference to sales tax, which winds up causing them significant legal and financial heartburn later. These mistakes are:
Not collecting or paying over the sales tax while in possession of a valid resale permit.
Allowing the resale permit to merely “expire” as opposed to properly canceling it. [For assistance in properly canceling a resale permit, click on Original Intent Services or Contact Us.]
Filing other State tax returns that require you to declare “gross receipts” or “gross income” under penalty of perjury. [The “class of person” who owes State income tax is the same “class of person” who is required to get a resale permit!]
Filing federal income tax returns. [The “class of person” who owes federal income tax is the same “class of person” who is required to get a resale permit!]
Collecting sales tax (with or without a resale permit) and not paying it over to the State – or – returning it to the person from whom it was collected.
Summary
Sales tax (in every state) is an excise tax.
. Excise taxes are taxes that are levied upon the exercise of a privilege.
. A privilege is an activity that you do not have a right to engage in as a Citizen.
. Private Citizens have an unalienable right to buy and sell their own private property without interference from state.
. Sales tax is imposed upon a “person” who is exercising the privilege of selling at retail; i.e. “the retailer”.
. The term “person” generally means entities that are fictions of law.
. The term “person” can include an “individual”.
. An “individual” can be a natural person who holds a position within a legal fiction, which requires him to act in relation to the tax imposed upon the fiction. An “individual” can be an alien.
. An “individual” can be a Citizen who has created liability that would not otherwise exist by entering into an agreement with the state; i.e. voluntarily obtaining a resale permit.
. Many states assert the presumption of liability, but this presumption cannot operate upon a Citizen who is not a “person” for sales tax purposes.
We hope this article has provided some assistance in better understanding the law relating to sales tax, as well as various other peripheral issues. If you enjoyed this article and found it to be of value, please pass this page along to friends and associates.

[http://www.originalintent.org/edu/salestax.php]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Also one can study territorial (proprietary) jurisdiction as for the government only has authority to tax (govern) activity that occurs on Land that they own.  See  edrivera.com a lawyer of 40+ years, dedicated to telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth on all aspects of said jurisdictions.

 

Posted in Taxes / Sales / State | Leave a comment