Our monthly Oklahoma City meeting will be Saturday, Oct. 21, at Skyline Restaurant. I'm posting this announcement early as people from out of town might want to attend this one.
My intent is to give a reasonably thorough overview of the Federal tax system and the approach we've developed for securing administrative remedies since early this year.
This will be a repeat of the Sept. 29 program I gave in Tulsa. Those who attended the Tulsa meeting said it was the most comprehensive presentation I've made on the subject to date. We recorded the Tulsa meeting on audio and video and will record the Oklahoma City meeting.
The presentation should be between two and a half and three hours in length. Gail will go through both after the Oklahoma City meeting, then we will make the best of the two available on audio and/or videotape.
Skyline Restaurant is located approximately half a mile east of I-35 on Southeast 15th Street so there is easy access. The Southeast 15th Street exist is less than a mile south of the I-35 & I-40 junction. Normally we
congregate at about one for lunch & visiting, then get the program under way at about two. This time we will have to start punctually as the program will crowd us for time.
Our monthly meetings frequently focus on a subject or two then wander around as others ask questions and make contributions, but I knew we were going to have at least one important guest at the Tulsa meeting, my Federal probation officer. We have an open door policy, anyway, but it has been some time since we've had known people from courts and enforcement at the meetings so I decided to give an over-view, which includes a reasonably large exhibit package of over 40 pages. The extemporaneous presentation was considerably more comprehensive than I
anticipated.
I don'tintend to case aspersions. Brad is a pretty good sport, and like most people in the probation office, U.S. Marshals, and the like, is fully aware that there are problems with the system. The difficulty is finding the common ground of understanding.
The Tulsa presentation was structured with the notion of making the material comprehensible for someone who isn't versed in law and isn't convinced that the Federal tax system is fraudulently enforced. The approach wasn't particularly focused on Brad even though I built a snare
into it for his benefit: 26 CFR § 31.6001-1(d), which addresses social welfare taxes in Chapters 21-23 and the government personnel tax in Chapter 24 of the Internal Revenue Code, reveals that an "employee" isn't required to keep books and records. The regulation provided the opportunity to ask if Brad keeps books and records and files returns.
Of course he does. "But who told you that you have to keep books and records and file returns? This regulation says you aren't required to keep books and records."
Brad blamed his accountant, then Bob Miles, who is an accountant, chided him some.
I'm convinced that the chief difficulty people have had when attempting to administratively resolve state and Federal tax difficulties is shifting the burden of proof.
Am I required to prove I'm not liable for any given tax imposed by internal revenue laws of the United States or revenue laws of Oklahoma?
That's the crux of the matter. We've collectively been victimized because we didn't understand process, and because we didn't understand process, we didn't know how to challenge presumptions.
Who has ever received notice from IRS that includes disclosure of taxing and liability statutes in addition to identification of the source or activity subject to tax?
Any time we deal with government agencies, two elements have to be addressed: Facts and law. Facts are specific. In a manner of speaking, they are historic events. Law is also specific. Where state and Federal tax systems are concerned, specific taxing and liability statutes must
positively apply to the source or activity the produces "income".
Five subtitles in the Internal Revenue Code impose Federal taxes of various sorts. Until we know which tax is at issue, any presumption of liability is simply that. It is a presumption.
Thanks to Richard Cornforth, Pat Patton, Tim Richardson and various others, we've come to terms with what does and what doesn't constitute evidence, testimony, etc., and how to use substantive (constitutionally secured) rights to shift the burden of proof.
We've also broadened the scope of what we address from the gross income "source" position advanced by Thurston Bell, Larken Rose and others. In my opinion, the gross income "source" position covers Subtitle A & B "income" taxes where Subtitle C includes social welfare taxes that are geographically applicable to territory and possessions of the United States, and the government personnel tax in Chapter 24, the various excises in Subtitles D & E, and import duties in Title 19.
While we aren't ready to trot everything we're doing out for general use, the exhibit package includes the three basic "discovery" initiatives we're using.
The first is a focused FOIA to district disclosure officers, which they're still trying to avoid; the second is a direct request for assessment certificates and support documents sent to regional service center assessment officers; and the third, added in late September, is a "Request for Notification and Access" requesting original liens and civil litigation documents from district directors.
Pat Patton deserves credit for originally focusing requests: Per Pat's excellent research, which is published in his book released in early 1999, there is no liability unless or until there is a procedurally proper assessment executed by an assessment officer. Until there is a
proper assessment, any and all administrative collection initiatives are unlawful.
Does whatever return someone files constitute self-assessment? The short answer is "no."
There may be exceptions in the "income tax" category. That is, social welfare taxes in Chapters 21-23 and government personnel tax in Chapter 24 may not have to be assessed against the individual "taxpayer". However, these taxes are concerned, the social welfare taxes are limited
to the "geographical" United States, and there is a small problem with the government personnel tax in that the Treasury Financial Management Service and the General Accounting Office have primary responsibility for administration and enforcement of the tax, not the Internal Revenue Service.
The meeting is open, with no attendance fee.
Dan Meador
SLOJON be there or b square
