Overview at the scheme

Government is a business that only delivers ONE product: Protection. The purpose of establishing government is to protect private property and private rights, which are also property. Thus, in effect, they function as a “security guard” for your property:

“As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1]  Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts. [2]   That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves. [3]  and owes a fiduciary duty to the public. [4]   It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5]   Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual [PRIVATE] rights is against public policy.[6]”

[63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247 (1999)]

The JUSTICE delivered by the government as a security guard for your PRIVATE property DEPENDS entirely on your fully informed consent as the owner, according to the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness [PRIVATE PROPERTY].–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

[Declaration of Independence, 1776;
SOURCE: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript]

The FIRST step in the business of protecting private property is to ensure that it is not converted to PUBLIC property without the express fully informed consent of the owner. This is how business is done in the private world and MUST therefore be done by government under the concept of equal protection and equal treatment that are the foundation of justice itself. After all, would you hire a security guard called “government” to protect your property who insisted on surrendering or signing away any aspect of ownership or control over the property before they would agree to protect it? NOT!

Therefore, any attempt to do any of the following is a corruption of the purposes for which governments are established and the reason this page has the word “scheme” in its title:

1. Refusing to satisfy the burden of proving exactly when and how your consent to convert the PRIVATE status of yourself or your property to PUBLIC status that can be regulated or taxed was obtained. Without proof of that consent on the record of any proceeding, everything beyond that point is either theft or criminal identity theft. A mere PRESUMPTION of consent is a violation of due process and a tort. See:
   Separation Between Public and Private Course, Form #12.025
   https://sedm.org/LibertyU/SeparatingPublicPrivate.pdf
2. Not informing you that you have a choice. Choices are called “elections” in the Internal Revenue Code but the implications of the choice and how to avoid the obligation that compelled the choice are never fully explained. This puts private property and private rights at risk and often compels you to surrender both to eliminate the risks that would result from not doing so.
3. Bundling consent to ONE thing with consent to any number of OTHER things. For instance, conditioning issuance of driver licenses or passports with:
   3.1. Paying child support.
   3.2. Paying parking tickets.
   3.3. Paying income taxes.
   3.4. Participation in Social Security (by the mandate of providing an SSN on the application).
   3.5. A civil domicile within the venue issuing the identification. States don’t issue NONRESIDENT ID.
   This process we call “weaponization of government”. It violates what the U.S. Supreme Court calls the Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine and makes every government service into the beachhead to destroy ANY and EVERY constitutional liberty there is for the sake of mere “expedience”. It makes any and all government “civil service” into an unconscionable adhesion contract. See:
   Website Definitions: 30. Weaponization of Government, FTSIG
   https://ftsig.org/advanced/definitions/#30._Weaponization
4. Making your consent INVISIBLE by triggering it based on an ACTION rather than EXPRESS signed declaration. This is called IMPLIED consent. If you own yourself, ONLY YOU can define HOW your consent can be procured and it should ALWAYS be in a writing signed by TWO parties which also emphasizes that there is no penalty for non-consent. Implied consent is used, for instance:
   4.1. In the case of imputing or enforcing the consequences of a civil domicile.
   4.2. In making an election to be treated as a CIVIL/DOMICILED Citizen**+D by filing a 1040 instead of the more proper 1040NR.
5. Baking consent into a statutory status that people falsely believe they have no choice in acquiring such as “citizen of the United States”. This is done by referring to those with the obligation using a statutory status that falsely appears to be a consequence of things beyond their control, such as an act of birth. This is done in 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1(a).
6. Confusing the POLITICAL status of “citizen*” with the CIVIL/DOMICILED status of “citizen**+D” by not explaining which context applies when the term “citizen” is invoked. The first is INVOLUNTARY. The SECOND is voluntary.
7. Equivocating the statutory geographical “United States” in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9) with the United States as a federal corporation and a fiction under 28 U.S.C. §3002(15)(A). Thus:
   7.1. You are unable to determine WHICH of the two United States you are “within” or receiving earnings from that might be taxable.
   7.2. You cannot rationally determine how to legally disassociate with the national government and thereby exercise your First Amendment right to disassociate and your right to not contract with them under a franchise.
8. Creating the original tax obligation with a regulation rather than the statute it implements. This causes people to inadvertently volunteer to work for the head of a department in the government as a subordinate of that person. This is done in the case of 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1.
9. Falsely labeling a statute as a liability statute that in fact merely implements an aspect of the common law relating to the return of property owned by another that was acquired by mistake. See:
   9.1. 26 U.S.C. §6012.
   9.2. How American Nationals Volunteer to Pay Income Tax, Form #08.024, Section 11
   https://sedm.org/Forms/08-PolicyDocs/HowYouVolForIncomeTax.pdf
10. Defining “person” as someone who owes an obligation but not disclosing HOW that obligation is acquired and what act of consent causes it to be acquired. This is done in 26 U.S.C. §6671(b) and 26 U.S.C. §7343.
11. Using the word “liable TO” rather than “liable FOR” to make it falsely appear that no election is possible and that the obligation exists WITHOUT an election. This is done in the case of 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1.
12. Calling people “frivolous” who insist that the government satisfy the burden of PROVING your consent to a status before the obligations attached to the status may lawfully be enforced. This is called “crazymaking” in the field of psychology.
13. Saying things like “Death and taxes are unavoidable.”
14. Interfering with or penalizing your attempts to define words on forms in a way that WITHDRAWS consent or avoids statuses that come with obligations.
15. Creating so many contexts for the definition of a term that it is virtually impossible to discern whether you fall within the definition. For instance, the term “beneficial owner”. See:
    15.1. Which “Beneficial owner” Are You?, SEDM
    https://sedm.org/which-beneficial-owner-are-you/
    15.2. Website Definitions: 34. Beneficial Owner
    https://ftsig.org/advanced/definitions/#34._Beneficial

All of the above “psyops” techniques:

1. Are exhaustively described in:
   Legal Deception, Propaganda, and Fraud, Form #05.014
   https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/LegalDecPropFraud.pdf
2. Interfere with exercise of your ownership and control over yourself and your property, and thus work a purpose OPPOSITE of establishing government.
3. Hide or obfuscate how your consent is procured. See:
   Invisible Consent, FTSIG
   https://ftsig.org/how-you-volunteer/invisible-consent/
4. Make income taxation falsely appear as INVOLUNTARY for the average American.
5. Cause or compel a nearly universal surrender of PRIVATE constitutional rights in exchange for civil statutory PUBLIC rights in an almost total surrender of personal liberty.
6. Implement in effect LEGAL PROPAGANDA designed to convert all PRIVATE property to PUBLIC property. This combination of LEGAL PROPAGANDA and the resulting state/collective ownership of all property fits the legal definition of COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, and COLLECTIVISM in every particular as described in:
   6.1. Socialism: The New American Civil Religion, Form #05.016
   https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/SocialismCivilReligion.pdf
   6.2. Collectivism and How to Resist It Course, Form #12.024
   https://sedm.org/LibertyU/Collectivism.pdf

Anyone who claims to represent a government that does any or all of the above is what we call a “de facto government” because they is doing things that violate the purpose of establishing government in the Declaration of Independence and thus delegitimizes government. That de facto government is described in:

De Facto Government Scam, Form #05.043
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/DeFactoGov.pdf

The above tactics of deceit and human trafficking collectively are the main mechanisms used to recruit statutory “taxpayer” franchisees in the Internal Revenue Code. They manifest themselves in many forms, but the most important two forms are listed below:

1. Deceiving you into manifesting IMPLIED consent to convert YOUR status from PRIVATE to PUBLIC. This is done by deceiving you into declaring “U.S. person” civil status rather than your proper default status as an American National, which is “nonresident alien”.
2. Deceiving you into converting the status of your PRIVATE PROPERTY from PRIVATE to PUBLIC. This is called:
   2.2. “Effectively connecting” your INCOME on the 1040NR form.
   2.2. Making an “election” to convert the status such as that under 26 C.F.R. §1.871-10 to convert PRIVATE real property into a PUBLIC USRPI under FIRPTA in 26 U.S.C. §897.
   2.3. Connecting the property to a “trade or business” by using an SSN or TIN to open a bank account. See 26 C.F.R. §301.6109-1(b).

The above processes can be diagrammed so that they can more easily be understood. An example is that is found in:

Property View of Income Taxation, Form #12.046 (OFFSITE LINK)
https://sedm.org/LibertyU/PropertyViewOfIncomeTax.pdf

Those who VOLUNTEER for or ELECT NOTHING remain PRIVATE and FOREIGN and protected ONLY by the constitution (Bill of Rights), equity, common law, and the criminal law and NEVER the CIVIL law. Those who make any of the above “elections” convert either themselves or their property from PRIVATE to PUBLIC. A synonym for PUBLIC on this website is DOMESTIC. This website will focus EXCLUSIVELY on making yourself and all your property PRIVATE and FOREIGN.

Lastly, we know what the origin of all this treachery and chicanery is, which is a fiat currency system that is unconstitutional, is a product of continuing emergency powers, and which is certain to eventually self-destruct. The income tax is the main vehicle for regulating the supply of this fiat currency in order to maintain stable prices. That unconstitutional fiat currency system is thoroughly documented in the following free memorandum of law:

The Money Scam, Form #05.041
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/MoneyScam.pdf

__________________

FOOTNOTES:

[1] State ex rel. Nagle v Sullivan, 98 Mont 425, 40 P.2d. 995, 99 A.L.R. 321; Jersey City v Hague, 18 N.J. 584, 115 A.2d. 8.

[2] Georgia Dep’t of Human Resources v. Sistrunk, 249 Ga. 543, 291 S.E.2d. 524. A public official is held in public trust.  Madlener v. Finley (1st Dist) 161 Ill.App.3d. 796, 113 Ill Dec 712, 515 N.E.2d. 697, app gr 117 Ill Dec 226, 520 N.E.2d. 387 and revd on other grounds 128 Ill.2d. 147, 131 Ill.Dec. 145, 538 N.E.2d. 520.

[3]Chicago Park Dist. V. Kenroy, Inc., 78 Ill.2d. 555, 37 Ill.Dec. 291, 402 N.E.2d. 181, appeal after remand (1st Dist) 107 Ill.App.3d. 222, 63 Ill.Dec.134, 437 N.E.2d. 783.

[4] United States v. Holzer (CA7 Ill) 816 F.2d. 304 and vacated, remanded on other grounds 484 U.S. 807, 98 L.Ed.2d. 18, 108 S.Ct. 53, on remand (CA7 Ill) 840 F.2d. 1343, cert den 486 U.S. 1035, 100 L.Ed.2d. 608, 108 S.Ct. 2022 and (criticized on other grounds by United States v. Osser (CA3 Pa) 864 F.2d. 1056) and (superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in United States v Little (CA5 Miss) 889 F.2d. 1367) and (among conflicting authorities on other grounds noted in United States v. Boylan (CA1 Mass) 898 F.2d. 230, 29 Fed.Rules.Evid.Serv. 1223).

[5] Chicago ex rel. Cohen v Keane, 64 Ill.2d. 559, 2 Ill.Dec. 285, 357 N.E.2d. 452, later proceeding (1st Dist) 105 Ill.App.3d. 298, 61 Ill.Dec. 172, 434 N.E.2d. 325.

[6]Indiana State Ethics Comm’n v. Nelson (Ind App) 656 N.E.2d. 1172, reh gr (Ind App) 659 N.E.2d. 260, reh den (Jan 24, 1996) and transfer den (May 28, 1996).