Tags, 상세검색
PJ 16CHAPTER 7REC #4 HATONN
TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1990 2:50 P.M. YEAR 3 DAY 307
ON THIS VERY DAY ON THE NEWS A BULLETIN WAS FLASHED AT EVERY EARLY MORNING BROADCAST OF THE NEWS. IT SAID IN PARAPHRASE., THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS INCREASING ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL TO GET THE 'TAX CHEATERS" AND ETC., ETC., TO "SHAPE UP THE TAXPAYERS" BECAUSE REVENUES ARE DRASTICALLY REDUCED. HALLELUJAH, HALLELUJAH!!! AMEN AND AHO! SOMEONES ARE LISTENING! WATCH NOW FOR INCREASED PRESSURE FOR THE CONVENTION. BE ALERT AND WARY FOR THE FOX IS ON THE PROWL AND REMEMBER--HE IS RUNNING FOR HIS SUPPER TICKET; YOU ARE RUNNING FOR YOUR LIFE!
THE W-4 FORM
Employers must learn full well that the revenue laws apply only to those who are engaged in revenue taxable activities. The employers must know full well that W-4 forms apply only to an individual, who: 1. as their employee, is engaged in a revenue taxable activity, AND 2. such employee is claiming some degree of statutory exemption; either partially or totally exempt.
The employers must know full well that any W-4 form, signed by an individual who is not engaged in a revenue taxable activity, IS NULL AND VOID!
The employers should already know these things and you must, furthermore, assume that they know these things. How do you know that they can know these things? Because the employers, through their attorneys as well as the taxing agencies, have access to the top legal minds of the nation. Of course they know. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for employers. Ignorance of the law is certainly not considered excuse for citizens and/or employees.
Nevertheless, almost all employers have exerted undue influence and coercion on their employees, whose jobs do not involve any revenue taxable activity, to fill out and sign W-4 forms and to provide Social Security numbers, when such employees are not subject to any income tax or any other revenue tax.
In almost all cases the employers have led their employees to believe that everybody is required by law to furnish a signed W-4 form relating to his employment. Also, almost all employers have made the signing of the W-4 form a condition of employment; causing double jeopardy and liability.
REQUIREMENTS FOR W-4 FORMS
Is everybody required to furnish a W-4 form as a condition of their employment? Is ANYBODY required to furnish a W-4 from as a condition of their employment? THE FACT IS, NOBODY IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO FURNISH A W-4 FORM AS A CONDITION OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT AND FORCING SUCH IS ILLEGAL AND UNLAWFUL AND DISCRIMINATORY IN NATURE OF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW.
Because of the widespread misrepresentations by employers, the following information is provided. Let us PROVE (you ones love Proof!) the following statements:
1. The laws do not require anybody to furnish an employer with a W-4 form as a condition of employment.
2. W-4 forms apply only to an individual who, as an employee, is engaged in a revenue taxable activity, and such employee is claiming some degree of exemption or allowance which is specifically authorized by statute.
3. The employer is not required to send any W-4 form to the IRS if the individual who submitted the form is not subject to the tax. (The law actually forbids the employer from sending such forms to the IRS).
4. There can be no voluntary agreement to withhold taxes unless the individual is subject to the law.
AHO!
PROOF!
In prior chapters we have utilized Supreme Court decisions to prove that an income tax is an indirect tax in nature of an excise. Also, these decisions were used to show that indirect taxes, including excise taxes, are taxes imposed upon the happening of events or activities which are taxable for revenue purposes, and most importantly, to show that the free exercise of the constitutionally guaranteed rights to exist and to sustain one's self, and to acquire property by lawful means, cannot be taxed for revenue purposes.
Probably the first and foremost issue that should be discussed with an employer is whether the job description involves a revenue taxable activity. Is there something about the job activity that does not warrant constitutional protection, or that creates a liability to the public? If not, the employer has no valid reason to expect an individual to complete a W-4 form; a form that applies only to a person who makes himself liable by engaging in revenue taxable activities. Of course the employer is expected to know that the revenue laws relate only to "taxpayer(s)" as defined, and not to "NONTAXPAYERS". Certainly the employer knows that he cannot withhold a tax from someone who is not even subject to the tax. But what about the individual who IS subject to the tax? Is he required to furnish a W-4 form as a condition of employment?
Even in the case of the employee who is engaged in a "revenue taxable activity", which almost none of you are, and even though such activity is subject to withholding, such an employee is still NOT REQUIRED by law to furnish a W-4 form when he obtains his employment (you have just ‘ASSUMED' it to be required and followed blindly along with the show!).
You will see that there are even provisions in the Internal Revenue Code for the withholding of taxes in the event there is no W-4 form furnished by such "taxpayer" employee, but these provisions can only be legally applied to an individual who, as the employee, is engaged in a revenue taxable activity, for which almost none of you qualify, and if you do, you had better look again at that job. Now why would there be a law written as to what to do if there is not a form unless there is actually no law that requires it in the first place? Start watching the small print between the lines and you will save absolutely bundles of income.
If such an employee wants to claim some degree of exemption from withholding, he can do so by furnishing a W-4 form. (Note: if such a "taxpayer" employee has previously furnished a W-4 from, he can under certain circumstances be penalized by the government for failing to furnish a new W-4 form). Dear ones, why do you think the infamous Al Capone was convicted on income tax evasion when nothing of the criminal nature could capture-- BECAUSE HE WAS AN AUTHENTIC, DASTARDLY AND QUALIFIED 'TAXPAYER" UNDER THE DEFINITION OF THE LAW!!
If such an employee is claiming some degree of statutory exemption, such exemption is to be claimed by furnishing a W-4 form to the employer. If such an employee is not claiming some degree of statutory exemption, there is no need for any W-4 form. Even a "taxpayer" employee cannot be required to apply for exemptions. The employers know that the Internal Revenue Code provides direction in case the employee, who, in the course of his employment is engaged in a revenue taxable activity, fails to furnish a W-4 form. The employer is simply to withhold on the basis of single with zero exemptions--now, how about that?
The employers also know (or better know) that there is no place in the code that requires employers to refuse to hire an individual who does not furnish a W-4 from. Nor is there any place in the code that requires the employer to dismiss or punish in any manner an employee who refuses or fails to apply for exemptions (or allowances) via a W-4 form.
Keeping in mind the fact that the revenue laws relate only to 'TAXPAYERS" and not to NONTAXPAYERS, let's see how the law applies to a "taxpayer" employee; that is, an employee who is engaged in a revenue taxable activity (which almost NONE of you are). The Internal Revenue Code sections are cited only to demonstrate how the revenue laws have been misapplied, and most importantly to show that the employer cannot, as a condition of employment, require their employees to furnish any W-4 form. 26 U.S.C. 3402(f)(2)(A) reads:
Sec. 3402(f) Withholding exemptions
(2) Exemption certificates
- (A) On commencement of employment
On or before the date of the commencement of employment with an employer, the employee shall furnish the employer with a signed withholding ex-emption certificate relating to the NUMBER of withholding exemptions which he claims, which shall in no event exceed the number to which he is entitled. 26 U.S.C. 2402(f)(2)(A)"
Since he shall furnish a W-4 form relating to (showing) the number of exemptions claimed, if he claims no exemptions there is no requirement for him to furnish a W-4 form in the first place. He is merely entitled to furnish a W-4 form, if he so chooses. But what is the employer to do if such employee does not furnish a W-4 form? 26 U.S.C. 3402(§) reads in part as follows:
Sec. 3402(§) Determination and disclosure of marital status.
(1) Determination of status by employer
For purposes of applying the tables in subsections (a) and (c) to a payment of wages, the employer shall treat the employee as a single person unless there is in effect with respect to such payment of wages a withholding exemption certificate furnished to the employer by the employee after the date of the enactment of this subsection indicating that the employee is married.
(2) Disclosure of status by employee
An employee shall be entitled to furnish the employer with a withholding exemption certificate indicating he is married....
The "taxpayer" employee doesn't even have to indicate he is married. If he doesn't, the employer is to treat him as if he were single. But if the "taxpayer" employee wants to indicate he is married, he is entitled to do so by way of a W-4 form according to 26 U.S.C. 3402 (§).
Furthermore, the "taxpayer" employee doesn't even have to claim any exemptions. Sub-section 340I(e) provides:
Sec. 3401(c) Number of withholding exemptions claimed
For purposes of this chapter, the term "number of withholding exemptions claimed" means the number of withholding exemptions claimed in a withholding exemption certificate in effect under section 3402(f), or in effect under the corresponding section of prior law, except that if no such certificate is in effect, the number of withholding exemptions claimed shall be considered to be zero. 26 U.S.C. 3401(e).
If the employee is engaged in a revenue taxable activity and fails to furnish his employer with a W-4 form, the above subsections provide direction for the employer to withhold on the basis of single, with zero "number of exemptions claimed". But, before the employer decides to withhold anything, he had better know that the employee, in respect to his employment, is engaged in a revenue taxable activity and thus subject to withholding.
Sec. 3402(§)(1) clearly states "For the purposes of applying the tables...", and Sec. 3401(e) clearly states "For purposes of this chapter. . ." The tax tables and all chapters of the code apply only to those who are subject to a revenue tax (which almost NONE of you are). Your employer can certainly be expected to know whether or not he has hired someone to engage in a revenue taxable activity.
Unless the "taxpayer" employee has previously furnished a W-4 form and his status changes so that he is no longer entitled to the number of exemptions or exempt status originally claimed, there is NO REQUIREMENT for ANYBODY to furnish a W-4 form.
If, however, an individual is employed in a revenue taxable activity and has previously furnished his employer with a W-4 form and his status changes so that he qualifies for less than the number of exemptions previously claimed, he is now required by law to furnish a new W-4 form to indicate his new and correct status.
26 U.S.C. 3402(f)(2)(B) provides:
(B) Change of status
If, on any day during the calendar year, the number of withholding exemptions to which the employee is entitled is less than the number of withholding exemptions claimed by the employee on the withholding exemption certificate then in effect with respect to him, the employee shall within 10 days thereafter furnish the employer with a new withholding exemption certificate relating to the number of withholding exemptions which the employee then claims, which shall in no event exceed the number to which he is entitled on such day. (In part)
You see, they surely don't encourage you to add exemptions if you have them pop up. It surely doesn't read "more"; it definitely reads "less".
Have you actually been told by your employer that the law required you to furnish a W-4 form or was it ASSUMED? Did you question the procedure? Did you disclaim desire to fill out the form? Well, I ask that you carefully take a look at the last sentence of the following Treasury regulation. In part, Treasury Regulation 31.3402(f)(2)-1(a) reads:
(a) On commencement of employment...
The employer is required to request a withholding exemption certificate from each employee, but if the employee fails to furnish such certificate, such employee shall be considered as a single person claiming no withholding exemptions.
Now, don't go crazy. Settle down and you will begin to see what you can do--correctly. You do want to get those taxes back which they have unlawfully withheld, don't you? Then be patient and do it right! Oh, you aren't a lawyer? Well, if you have a job that could even be half-way considered to erroneously make you a "taxpayer" (which almost NONE of you are)--then you can COPY NUMBERS, CAN'T YOU? One step at a time and you will learn to walk very well indeed without stumbling over inept feet. Further, you will also keep thine feet from out thine mouth!
Can anything be more clearly stated than the above quote? The employer is only required to request a W-4 form. Of course, even this regulation applies only to those employees who are subject to that indirect excise tax which is called an "income tax" and is set up for "taxpayers" (which almost NONE of you are).
There is simply NO EXCUSE to refuse to hire someone on the ground that he/she refuses to furnish a signed W-4 form. This is especially true when the revenue laws, rules and regulations apply only to those dastardly behaving "taxpayer(s)" as defined. NONTAXPAYERS are without the scope of such laws, rules and regulations (and THIS is where almost ALL of you fit).
THE DASTARDLY "$500.00 PENALTY"
This leads us to the $500.00 penalty which payroll offices have so willingly deducted from their workers pay because of a "Notice of Levy" for the so-called false or fraudulent W-4 forms. Who was it that sent that danged fool W-4 form to the IRS in the first place? Who had the responsibility of knowing which employees, if any, were engaged in revenue taxable activities? Who was it that insisted W-4 forms be furnished by the employee when he first obtained the job?
On a wholesale basis many employers send the IRS the W-4 "Exempt" forms, regardless of whether the individuals are subject to revenue taxation or not. This triggers the administrative machinery and the IRS treats all of these individuals as if they are "taxpayers" as defined by the internal revenue laws (not the laws--just the IR laws). Those who have furnished W-4 forms with EXEMPT written on them will well remember the letters and forms from the IRS requesting that the individual show why he is exempt. The IRS is merely an administrative agency. The IRS simply has been sent a W-4 form (which applies only to "taxpayers"), and the IRS is simply saying, "As a 'taxpayer', prove that you qualify for this exempt status." Remember, the IRS letters are addressed to "Dear Taxpayer" (which almost NONE of you are). The NONTAXPAYER now finds himself in a "catch 22" situation, all because the employer has made misrepresentations to the taxing agency indicating the employee was deriving income from a revenue taxable activity and was therefore a "taxpayer" as defined.
NOW, 26 U.S.C. 6682(A) SWEEPS INTO EFFECT BECAUSE THE IRS "THINKS" THEY ARE DEALING WITH A "TAXPAYER" (WHICH ALMOST NONE OF YOU ARE) AS DEFINED.
Sec. 6682. False information with respect to withholding
(A) Civil penalty
In addition to any criminal penalty provided by law, if--‑
(1) any individual makes a statement under section 3402 which results in a decrease in the amounts deducted and withheld under chapter 24, and
(2) as of the time such statement was made, there was no reasonable basis for such statement, such individual shall pay a penalty of $500 for such statement.
Well, this section, as well as the rest of the Internal Revenue Code, simply DOES NOT APPLY TO NONTAXPAYERS (WHICH ALMOST ALL OF YOU ARE). A NONTAXPAYER cannot have a decrease in amounts of taxes deducted and withheld. A nontaxpayer cannot have any taxes withheld. The employer started this problem when he led the taxing agency to believe that the NONTAXPAYER was a "taxpayer". The employer is thus responsible for any losses to the nontaxpayer which are the result of the misrepresentation.
EMPLOYER CLAIMS--SO BE IT
Yet, employers claim they are required to send all W-4 Exempt forms to the IRS. Don't you believe it, little chela NONTAXPAYERS. Don't let anyone tell you that because you filled out the form, the employer was therefore required to send the form to the IRS. The signing of the form does NOT change a non-taxable activity into a taxable activity, and also, the law absolutely prohibits the employer from sending a W-4 Exempt form to the IRS if it does not involve wages earned by one who is subject to the tax (which fits almost ALL of you). This prohibition is clearly and succinctly stated in the 'EXCEPTION' clause two (2) of Treasury Regulation 31.3402(f)(2)-1(g) which reads:
(g) Submission of certain withholding certificates--(1) General rule. An employer shall submit, in accordance with paragraph (g)(3) of this section, a copy of any withholding exemption certificate, together with a copy of any written statement received from the employee in support of the claims made on the certificate, which is received from the employee during the reporting period (even if not in effect at the end of the quarter) if the employee is employed by the employer on the last day of the reporting period and IF-‑
(i) The total number of withholding exemptions (within the meaning of section 3402 (f)(1) and the regulations thereunder) claimed on the certificate exceeds 14, or
(ii) The certificate indicates that the employee claims a status exempting the employee from withholding, and the exception provided by paragraph (g)(2) of this section does not apply.
(2) Exception. A copy of the certificate shall not be submitted under paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section if the employer reasonably expects, at the time the certificate is received, that the employee's wages (under chapter 24 of the Code) from that employer shall not then usually exceed $200 per week.
Chapter 24 and the rest of the Code apply only to those who are engaged in revenue taxable activities (which almost NONE of you are). The employer has absolutely no reason to expect an employee to earn $200 per week from revenue taxable activities when the employee wasn't even hired to engage in revenue taxable activities. The employer does indeed have a choice, but all too often the employers choose to falsify public records at the expense of the individual who is merely exercising his natural and constitutionally guaranteed right to exist.
Dharma, allow us to leave this for a while. I would request that each of you readers fully understand each segment as we move along--thoroughly and completely. To handle this tedious matter ineptly can be costly indeed in many ways. KNOW THAT WHICH YOU DO AND THAT WONDROUS CONSTITUTION WILL SHIELD YOU--BLUNDER AND YOU SHALL DEARLY PAY THE CONSEQUENCES. IF I GIVE ADVICE IN ANY MANNER--IT IS TO PAY ATTENTION AND KNOW THAT WHICH YOU DO!
I shall move to stand-by. Hatonn to clear.
PJ 16CHAPTER 8
REC #2 HATONN
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 1990 8:08 A.M. YEAR 3 DAY 308
CORPORATE CAPACITY NOT A NATURAL RIGHT
This discussion is not to mislead you into thinking you need now worry your heads about corporations. We are pointing out some variances which need consideration and nothing more. Actually, the birth of a corporation is very little different from birthing a human--it is impacted by the laws of the state in which it is born. We will speak of corporations later--we are now speaking of "you" the person.
The activity of doing business in a corporate capacity is not a "natural" right. The activities of pushing drugs, practicing law, or issuing bank notes also are not "natural" rights. These must be performed by "people" just as a corporation can only function through "people". These activities are indeed taxable for revenue purposes, and can be and are taxed oppressively, unto actual destruction. This is why it is important in which state you take up birth-rights.
The federal government will allow breaks for corporations for as long as it stands the way it is because the cartel conspirators own corporations, banking corporations, etc. You will find that these corporations are birthed in Nevada mostly and only do business in other work states. They are also, in great numbers, birthed in Delaware where the laws were wondrous for corporations until recent years. They will also be found--as with the Cartels--to be birthed abroad, in Panama and so on. This is why the "Panama Invasion"--to gain absolute control of the corporate foundations and the banks. You see, it had nothing to do with Noriega who is a blood brother of the U.S. government or to free "those the people". It was solely for the conspirators to gain absolute control of the drug funds and banks--the competition was getting too hot to handle. It was, further, a Christmas present to the American people to show "how hard they were trying" to save your world from drugs. AND WORSE, YOU BOUGHT IT! Street drugs are more plentiful than ever before in history. Ask Bo Gritz about heroin in the Golden Triangle and who runs the drug trade! Surprise! Sickening, terrible surprise!! Ask Col. Gritz about the U.S./British/Mossad connection. Ask him about U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia, Richard Armetage. Ask about French Commander in Chief, General Raoul Salan and the Saigon connection--and Col. Edward Lansdale, U.S.A. Then ask him about the Kissinger connection and the refusal of Bush to even look at the proof when it was produced for him. Get your confirmation from someone human who has walked the path and stop doubting Hatonn--I am only "fill-in" until the real thing comes along, brothers. Then make sure that as many as possible get the Sutton letter. You are fed nothing but a stew of subterfuge and cover-up distractors, known as planted lies, cultivated and fertilized by every kook on the trail of distraction and deceit, ignorance and foolishness.
I apologize for I always get most passionate about this subject and become distracted myself. Back to corporations, etc. As regards the above subject of corporations please use these references for verification: Springer v. U.S., 102 U.S. 586; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, at 578-579; McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316; and Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall 533, 548. (No, I will not list them all for you--I will check the references made available to me for the best input in general
--YOU will do the rest if you care enough. No attempt will be made to list all revenue taxable activities).
Revenue taxable activities are any activities which are UNLAWFUL, NON-INNOCENT and HARMFUL! NONTAXABLE income is anything LAWFUL, INNOCENT and HARMLESS.
However, the free exercise and enjoyment of the constitutionally guaranteed right to lawfully acquire property or compensatory income, by lawfully contracting one's own labor in innocent and harmless activities for lawful compensation, cannot be, and therefore has not been, taxed for revenue purposes. The employers are expected to know this.
Even if a company clerk accepted a W-4 form by mistake, someone within the employing organization is expected to know which, IF ANY, of their employees are engaged in revenue taxable activities, and to know that any "taxpayer" form completed by a nontaxpayer is NULL and VOID!
IF ANYONE WITHIN MY TROOPS BREAKS THESE LAWS I FULLY INTEND TO CUT YOUR WAGES! LET'S SEE NOW, NOTHING FROM NOTHING--WELL, PERHAPS I SHALL THINK OF OTHER PUNISHMENT FITTING THE OFFENSE.
With the above facts in mind, let's review the so-called "criminal penalties" for the so-called "false or fraudulent" W-4 forms. 26 U.S.C. 7205 reads:
Sec. 7205. Fraudulent withholding exemption certificate for failure to supply information.
Any individual required to supply information to his employer under section 3402 who willfully supplies false or fraudulent information, or who willfully fails to supply information thereunder which would require an increase in the tax to be withheld under section 3402, shall in lieu of any other penalty provided by law (except the penalty provided by section 6682), upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $1000, or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both (26 U.S.C. 7205). Jolly good of them, eh what?
So, who is required to furnish information on a W-4 from? It is only the employee who:
1. Is employed in a revenue taxable activity (which almost NONE of you are), and also,
2. Has previously furnished a W-4 form claiming some degree of EXEMPTION to which he is no longer entitled to claim. (If you have done this, you better get it undone for you became a criminal when you first did it)!
Any employee who is engaged in a revenue taxable activity (which almost none of you are) is subject to withholding. If such employee, when required to supply information, proceeds to willfully supply false and fraudulent information (which, if you are not eligible as a "taxpayer" would be), he obviously is going to be subject to the penalties of 26 U.S.C. 7205: $1000, prison and/or both.
Who do these penalties apply to? The individual who, as an employee, has not been engaged in a revenue taxable activity? OF COURSE NOT! If his activity is not taxable, he is not subject to the tax, and is not subject to the internal revenue laws in any manner whatsoever, and therefore he is not a "taxpayer" as defined. HE IS A NON TAXPAYER!
"The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. THEY RELATE TO TAXPAYERS, AND NOT TO NONTAXPAYERS. The latter are without their scope. NO PROCEDURE IS PRESCRIBED FOR NONTAXPAYERS, and NO attempt is made to ANNUL any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the SUBJECT nor of the OBJECT of the revenue laws".
Long v. Rasmussen, 281 F. 236, 238. (1922); also, Economy Plumbing and Heating v. U.S., 740 F. 2d 585, 589. (1972) [Ah, a fairly new one for you skeptics!]
As you can see, nobody is required to furnish a W-4 form as a condition of employment, but only when relating to (showing) the number of exemptions claimed, if any. Of course, W-4 forms only apply to those who make themselves liable by engaging in revenue taxable activities (which almost NONE of you do). Furthermore, W-4 forms shall not be submitted to the IRS if the individual is "neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue tax" (and you employers better understand this clearly!). (See the "Exception" clause two (2) of Treasury Regulation 31.3402(f)(2)
-1(g); and also the Economy Case, supra.
VOLUNTARY WITHHOLDING *??*
Can there be a voluntary agreement to withhold a tax IF THE INDIVIDUAL IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE TAX? In error, many of you have viewed Internal Revenue Code Section 3402(p) as a means of voluntarily paying a "tax" which was not owed in any manner whatsoever--you just wanted to be "one of the crowd" of volunteer contributors to the efficient and altruistic government manager criminals (who would qualify nicely as "taxpayers").
However, a closer inspection with sounder reasoning, reveals this is not the case. 3402(p) reads in part:
"Sec. 3402(p): Voluntary withholding agreements
The Secretary is authorized by regulations to provide for with- holding--[what if you have no secretary?]
(1) from remuneration for services performed by an employee for his employer which (without regard to this subsection) does not constitute wages, and
(2) from any other type of payment with respect to which the Secretary finds that withholding would be appropriate under the provisions of this chapter...."
(In part)
Regardless of what does, or does not, constitute wages within the meaning of the internal revenue laws, let us look at that regulation to see what type of payment the Secretary finds appropriate [what if she/he is a really underpaid, stupid fink?], or better yet, let's see what the Secretary of the Treasury finds is not appropriate. [Oh Golly; they must have meant the Secretary of the Treasury; couldn't they just say so?] Treasury Regulation 31.3402(p)-1(a) reads in part:
"Sec. 31.3402(p)-1 Voluntary withholding agreements.
(a) In general. An employee and his employer may enter into an agreement under section 3402(b) to provide for the withholding of income tax upon payments of amounts described in paragraph (b)(1) of 31.340(a)-3, made after December 31, 1970 [Whew, Economy Plumbing just made it under the wire in 1972]. An agreement may be entered into under this section ONLY WITH RESPECT TO AMOUNTS WHICH ARE INCLUDABLE IN THE GROSS INCOME OF THE EMPLOYEE UNDER SECTION 61, AND MUST BE APPLICABLE TO ALL SUCH AMOUNTS PAID BY THE EMPLOYER TO THE EMPLOYEE".
The point? YOU CANNOT ENTER INTO ANY VOLUNTARY WITHHOLDING AGREEMENT UNLESS IT IS IN RESPECT TO AMOUNTS WHICH ARE INCLUDABLE IN THE "GROSS INCOME" UNDER SECTION 61 WHICH IS UNDER "INCOME TAX" OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE (WHICH ALMOST NONE OF YOU ARE QUALIFIED), WHICH IS AN EXCISE TAX WHICH IS A TAX IMPOSED ONLY UPON REVENUE TAXABLE ACTIVITIES (NOT PEOPLE OR PROPERTY), AND OF COURSE IS NOT IMPOSED UPON FREE EXERCISE OF THE CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHT TO EARN YOUR LIVING IN INNOCENT AND HARMLESS ACTIVITIES.
Everything reverts right back to the term "taxpayer" as defined in the internal revenue laws. It is the very front door of the Internal Revenue Code. Only by
engaging in revenue taxable activities or events (which almost NONE of you do) does one become liable for and subject to the internal revenue laws.
Employers are acting in a fiduciary capacity. They hold positions of trust. It is not the employee's job to teach the employer the law. The employers, as a matter of law, are expected to KNOW THE LAW as it applies to the withholding of taxes and the proper payment of contracted wages. Yet, it seems most employers have contumaciously refused to recognize the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in regard to the true nature of a so-called "income tax" and they continue ad nauseam to withhold illegally, under the guise, pretext, sham and subterfuge of withholding taxes!
How many times have the employers been advised that the individuals were merely exercising their constitutional right to work and were not subject to the income tax???
How many times, do you suppose, have the employers been advised that the income tax is an indirect tax, and in its nature an excise???
How many times have the employers been advised of cases such as Pollock, Flint, Brushaber and Stanton???
How many times have they had the opportunity to obtain knowledge about the true nature of the income tax???
"Culpable ignorance is that which results from a failure to exercise ordinary care to acquire knowledge, and knowledge which could be acquired by the exercise of ordinary care is by law imputed to the person and he is held to have constructive knowledge. Luck v. Buffalo Utkes, Tcx.Civ.App., 144 S.W.2d 672, 676". BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 5th Ed., page 672....!!!!
Can the employers now say, "Oh gosh, we didn't know"? If the employers had any doubts, they should have submitted the job descriptions of their various employees to a KNOWLEDGEABLE professional so that an official opinion could have been obtained to determine whether the nature of the job actually involved any activity that is taxable for revenue purposes. NOTE: I DID NOT SAY "LAWYER" FOR LAWYERS KNOW ZILCH, VOID, ZERO AND WORSE, ABOUT THE LAW! THEY ARE IN THE BUSINESS WHICH WOULD ALSO QUALIFY MOST EFFECTIVELY AS 'TAXPAYERS" FOR THE PRACTICE OF UNLAWFUL, NON-INNOCENT AND HARMFUL ACTIVITIES. I SHALL TAKE THAT UP WITH EUSTACE MULLINS JUST AS SOON AS WE FIND THE TIME TO CONVICT THE "RAPERS OF JUSTICE", AIDED AND ABEFFED BY THE LEGISLATURES, CONGRESS AND THE COURT UNJUSTICES AT ALL LEVELS OF SLAUGHTER OF JUSTICE.
Instead of the above, employers arbitrarily and unlawfully submit the names of all of their employees as if they are all engaged in revenue taxable activities (which almost NONE of you are).
If any employers believe they have been deceived by an attorney, a CPA, or someone within the taxing agencies (oh God forbid), then their action is properly against the individual(s) they believe deceived them. However, the employers are still responsible for any damages and restitution they have created for the nontaxpayer. THEY ARE STILL LIABLE!
Yes, I AM going to give you a sample letter--later. This, so that you do not bungle the job. I also take the "hold-harmless" stance of the rest of your justice system qualifiers
--I do not practice law, take this at your own risk, I shall hold my name, rank and serial number in secret and leave you to dangle on the hangman's noose all alone. Well, "someone" went forth "to prepare a place for you". So be it.
Well, why don't you just "dare" a little! If you set yourself up properly in advance, what would you have to lose? Get that house OUT OF YOUR NAME AND INTO A CORPORATION BIRTHED IN NEVADA ALONG WITH THE REST OF YOUR ASSETS AND GO FOR IT! DO IT RIGHT! You may be labeled "crackpot", "gone bonkers", "troublemaker", "nerd" and "rat fink". So what, you will have your money that you always bitch, moan and groan over every April 15th or so. Which do you want? Your money and win? or--your ego and no attention sheep-nik? You decide and when you do, we'll move on.
YOU WHO HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING A DAMNED THING ABOUT YOUR MESS--GET OFF HERE! YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT HAVE ANOTHER CHANCE FOR 'THEY" PLAN TO CLOSE THE LAWS AROUND YOU -- THIS YEAR AND CERTAINLY NO LATER THAN "GLOBAL PLAN YEAR 2000"! The "assumed" law shackles will tighten and tighten until you won't even know the difference, my friends. The noose is already gagging you into unconsciousness, or at least, something is keeping you unconscious. Can't you throw the money changers out of YOUR TEMPLE--THE MASTER DID! HIT THESE SUCKERS IN THE JUGULAR WHERE THE LIFE FLOW WILL STOP SUSTAINING THEM! BUT, YOU MUST HOLD YOUR CONSTITUTION UNALTERED AND YOU MUST BEGIN FULL ACTION--NOW!
Dharma, allow for a break please. We will enter into the wondrous but unholy world of the Social Security which you will find are equally unlawful as just more indirect taxes, for which almost NONE of you are qualified in which to participate.
May we have a wondrous day in friendship and may we awaken unto the grand and glorious experience of which this journey of experience represents. You all are bored out of your minds that you can only watch Trump and baseball--let's play some REAL games and get some life into your nation--some patriotism back into your blood streams. Let us save this nation, indivisible, under God---YOU CAN DO IT IF YOU WANT TO!
SALU, HATONN TO CLEAR, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
