DEFINITIONS: Tax Home (domicile of a public office if you volunteered to be surety for a “taxpayer” public capacityPUB)

By ftsig-admin | April 22, 2026

Introduction
1.1. Statutory Scope of “Tax Home”
1.2. Treasury’s Unauthorized Expansion of “Tax Home”
1.3. The Substantial Presence Test Is Purely Geographical
1.4. Treasury’s Constructive Presence Overlay
1.5. Constitutional vs Statutory “United States”
1.6. Subtitle A as a Proprietary Excise on Public Capacity
1.7. The Assimilation Mechanism (United StatesJ)
Application to American Nationals
2.1. The Fictional “Tax Home” as the Basis of the Alien Presence Test
2.2. Status of U.S. Nationals Filing as Nonresident Aliens
2.3. “Tax Home” as an Intangible Civil Fiction
2.4. The Final Jurisdictional Test: Public Office vs Private Abode
The Three-Test Jurisdictional Hunt
“Foreign country” includes territories, possessions, and States of the Union
The “In Your Face” Conclusion
Historical Confirmation
6.1. Pre-1985: The “Intent” Test for the NRAI (Term)
6.2. Post-1984: The “Tax Home” Condition for the INRA (Word Phrase)
The Summary
Why all the needless complexity with “Tax home”?
8.1. The Core Deception: Manufacturing Fake Geography from an Intangible Fiction
8.2. The Statutory Geography Problem: §7701(a)(9)/(10) Excludes Constitutional States
8.3. Treasury’s False Geographic Overlay: Treating Fiction as Physical Territory
8.4. The Assimilation Mechanism: Converting Statutory Presence into Fake Geography
8.5. The Constitutional Jurisdiction Problem: Subtitle A Is Not a Sovereign Tax
8.6. The Result: Legal Assimilation into United StatesJ
8.7. How the Deception Works: The USPI Intangible Office Axiom
8.8. The Final Jurisdictional Reality: Filing a Return = Practicing Law
8.9. The Benefit Protection Equivalence Deception
8.10. The Protection Racket: Renting a Public Identity
Capacity‑Based Deception Map: How “Tax Home” Creates Invisible Public CapacityPUB
Diagram Version of the Table
Flowchart Showing the Assimilation Process

1. Introduction

1.1. Statutory Scope of “Tax Home”

The term “tax home” is defined only in 26 U.S.C. §911(d)(3), and only for citizens and residents of the United StatesJ fiction. Congress limited this definition to 26 U.S.C. §911 and did not incorporate it into 26 U.S.C. §7701(b). Treasury’s elaboration in 26 C.F.R. §1.911-2(b) applies only to:

“U.S. citizens” (citizens**+D) abroad under 26 U.S.C. §911, and
resident aliens.

There is NO statutory definition of “tax home” applicable to nonresident aliens. 26 U.S.C. §7701(b) contains no delegation authorizing Treasury to define “tax home.” A regulation is valid only if Congress delegated authority — and here, Congress did not.

Thus, nonresident aliens cannot have a “tax home.”

The Supreme Court in United States v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351 (1957) held that the Executive Branch cannot:

make law,
apply definitions to classes not expressly identified, or
repeal law by excluding things from regulations that appear in statutes.

Calamaro states:

“Finally, the Government points to the fact that the Treasury Regulations relating to the statute purport to include the pick-up man among those subject to the § 3290 tax,^[11] and argues (a) that this constitutes an administrative interpretation to which we should give weight in construing the statute, particularly because (b) section 3290 was carried over in haec verba into § 4411 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. We find neither argument persuasive. In light of the above discussion, 359*359 we cannot but regard this Treasury Regulation as no more than an attempted addition to the statute of something which is not there.^[12] As such the regulation can furnish no sustenance to the statute. Koshland v. Helvering, 298 U.S. 441, 446-447. Nor is the Government helped by its argument as to the 1954 Code. The regulation had been in effect for only three years,^[13] and there is nothing to indicate that it was ever called to the attention of Congress. The re-enactment of § 3290 in the 1954 Code was not accompanied by any congressional discussion which throws light on its intended scope. In such circumstances we consider the 1954 re-enactment to be without significance. Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426,431.”

[United States v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351 (1957);
SOURCE: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2040626426665191763]

Treasury’s attempt to extend “tax home” to nonresident aliens through 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701(b)-2 is therefore:

unconstitutional,
unauthorized,
unlawful, and
a power grab to manufacture civil personPUB capacity over those in states of the Union where Congress has no jurisdiction.

1.2. Treasury’s Unauthorized Expansion of “Tax Home”

Treasury’s regulation 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701(b)-2 unlawfully overlays “tax home” onto 26 U.S.C. §7701(b), even though:

Congress never defined “tax home” for 26 U.S.C. §7701(b),
Congress never delegated authority to Treasury to define it, and
26 U.S.C. §911(d)(3) applies only to §911.

This regulatory expansion:

applies “tax home” to nonresident aliens,
creates new classes of persons,
rewrites statutory definitions,
manufactures civil statutory capacity, and
exceeds the Executive Branch’s constitutional authority.

This is a textbook ultra vires expansion.

1.3. The Substantial Presence Test Is Purely Geographical

The substantial presence test in 26 U.S.C. §7701(b) is purely geographical, based on physical days of presence within United States^G as defined in:

26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9) — States + D.C.
26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(10) — territorial waters + airspace.

Congress did not authorize Treasury to incorporate “tax home” into this test.

Congress intended the substantial presence test to be:

purely geographical,
based solely on physical days,
not based on statutory legal fictions,
not based on business situs,
not based on “tax home.”

1.4. Treasury’s Constructive Presence Overlay

Nevertheless, Treasury overlays “tax home” through 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701(b)-2 to:

determine whether days count,
determine whether an alien is exempt,
determine whether an alien is treated as a resident,
add new criteria not found in the statute,
create new classes of aliens,
manufacture constructive residency,
manufacture constructive jurisdiction,
manufacture constructive statutory presence.

This overlay is not authorized by Congress.

Treasury’s use of “tax home” to simulate statutory presence under 26 U.S.C. §7701(b) is an ultra vires regulatory expansion that Congress never expressly authorized.

Treasury’s use of “tax home” and constructive presence expands the functional scope of “United States” beyond the geographical definition Congress provided in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9) and (a)(10), thereby extending federal jurisdictional reach into the constitutional states without statutory authorization.

This constitutes an impermissible exercise of legislative power by the Executive Branch and violates separation‑of‑powers principles.

1.5. Constitutional vs Statutory “United States”

26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) define federal territorial “United States” — the geography over which exclusive legislative jurisdiction applies under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.

This definition:

does not include sovereign constitutional states,
cannot be expanded through “includes” identity laundering,
cannot be rewritten by Treasury to add states of the Union.

Thus, 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) are not the constitutional definition of “United States” under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.

1.6. Subtitle A as a Proprietary Excise on Public Capacity

I.R.C. Subtitle A is a proprietary excise tax imposed on non‑geographical public capacitiesPUB legislatively created by Congress under the Sixteenth Amendment.

It is not a sovereign geographical tax under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.

Subtitle A taxes:

statutory offices,
statutory capacities,
statutory elections,
statutory domicile.

It does not tax:

private persons,
private property,
private domicile,
physical geography.

1.7. The Assimilation Mechanism (United StatesJ)

Treasury’s misuse of “tax home” allows them to deceive you into declaring a LEGAL presence in the United States^J federal corporation under 26 U.S.C. §864(b) rather than a PHYSICAL presence under 26 U.S.C. §7701(b) — all while believing you are talking about geography.

The result is that you are legally assimilated inside the United States^J federal corporation without even knowing how it happened, as its uncompensated agent and “useful idiot.”

This process is described in:

REFERENCE: Legal Constraints on Volunteering into Public CapacityPUB within United States government, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/reference-legal-constraints-on-volunteering-into-public-capacitypub-within-united-states-government/

2. Application to American Nationals

Lets now apply the presence test and this information to American Nationals filing as nonresident aliens under 26 U.S.C. §7701(b)(1)(B) within the exclusive jurisdiction of a constitutional state and having protections of the Constitution by standing on constitutionally protected land within that state.

2.1. The Fictional “Tax Home” as the Basis of the Alien Presence Test

Since 1985, this bogus “tax home” concept as an INTANGIBLE, nongeographical fiction is the entire basis for the presence test applicable only to aliens in 26 U.S.C. §7701(b). The presence test is supposed to be geographical, but it’s technically just a front/smoke screen for the United States^J jurisdictional fiction that is intangible and nongeographical. It’s an unlawful power grab to reach nonprivileged foreignC parties IRS can’t enforce against.

2.2. Status of U.S. Nationals Filing as Nonresident Aliens

U.S. nationals filing as nonresident aliens are nonresidents everywhere in the WORLD who only become “nonresident alien individualsPUB” when they effectively connect under 26 U.S.C. §873(b)(3). They are described in 26 U.S.C. §7701(b)(2) as “individuals”, while nonresident aliens who are aliens are described in 26 U.S.C. §7701(b)(1) as “alien individuals”.

2.3. “Tax Home” as an Intangible Civil Fiction

“Tax home” is a FICTIONAL intangible place of BUSINESS, not the physical, tangible geographical abode of a human being. When the privileged intangible CIVIL “tax home” is in the “United States”, it is in the United States^J, not a geographic locality. This is confirmed by 26 U.S.C. §864(b), which defines “trade or business within the United States” as “includes the performance of personal services within the United States”. “Personal services” is never defined but it means services within the United States federal corporation as a statutory officer and not personPRI as described below:

Copilot: Meaning of civil statutory “services”, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/copilot-meaning-of-civil-statutory-services/

2.4. The Final Jurisdictional Test: Public Office vs Private Abode

The IRC and its regulations use three tests to confirm a single jurisdictional fact:

Does your tax home belong to a private abode or a federal public office?

Only public office creates federal civil domicile, and only civil domicile creates United States^J LEGAL rather than PHYSICAL presence. The regulatory definition of a “public office” further exposes the “as if” election trap by distinguishing it from ordinary employment. Under 26 C.F.R. § 53.4946-1(g)(2), a position is only a “public office” if it involves the independent performance of policymaking functions. [1]

A position is a “public office” only if it involves the independent performance of policymaking functions.

This is the hard and clear jurisdictional reality.

3. The Three-Test Jurisdictional Hunt

26 U.S.C. § 7701(b) and 26 C.F.R. §§ 301.7701(b)-1 through -3 ILLEGALLY (as we just pointed out) establish the Tax Home as the common denominator for all three residency tests pertaining to aliens only:

Lawful Permanent Resident Test: Being an LPR is a test of statutory residency. However, if your Tax Home is in a foreign country (a jurisdiction foreign to the federal zone), you are a nonresident alien for tax purposes. This confirms you can hold an immigration Green Card but not be a tax resident, because your Tax Home is not in the pursuit of a public office.
Substantial Presence Test: This is not merely a geographic count of days. 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701(b)-2(c) explicitly defines Tax Home by cross-referencing Section 162(a)(2) (trade or business). It states that if you are not engaged in a trade or business (public office), your Tax Home is your abode in a real and substantial sense. If that abode is nonresident, you are characterized as a nonresident alien, by that act. 26 U.S.C. §162(a)(2) (the cross‑referenced provision) deals with business travel deductions, not residency, and therefore cannot be used to define residency for aliens.
First-Year Election: This is the most telling of all. This is not an election any individual can simply choose. It is a procedural step for someone who was elected to a public office. Because the office carries the only statutory trade or business (§ 7701(a)(26)), the election is the method of moving the Tax Home into the federal jurisdiction. If you were never elected, you were never authorized to make the election. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]

26 C.F.R. §1.911-2(b) also establishes that even for an resident alien abroad, a “tax home” can only exist in the United States^J and never in a foreign country and that it is non-geographical in the context of “United States”. Thus, it has nothing to do with geography and everything to do with an INTANGIBLE, non-physical, non-geographical privileged public office within the United States government (United States^J), which is exactly what 26 U.S.C. §864(b) and 26 U.S.C. §162 also imply.

An individual shall not, however, be considered to have a tax home in a foreign country for any period for which the individual’s abode is in the United States. Temporary presence of the individual in the United States does not necessarily mean that the individual’s abode is in the United States during that time. Maintenance of a dwelling in the United States by an individual, whether or not that dwelling is used by the individual’s spouse and dependents, does not necessarily mean that the individual’s abode is in the United States.

[26 C.F.R. §1.911-2(b)]

They don’t define “presence” in the above and keep in mind that it can be EITHER LEGAL (domestic/internal/corporate) or GEOGRAPHICAL but not BOTH. We distinguish these two in:

Writing Conventions on this Website, Section 2.7: Types of Civil Legal Presence
Writing Conventions on this Website, Section 2.7: Types of Civil Legal Presence
https://ftsig.org/introduction/writing-conventions-on-this-website/#2.7._Types

26 C.F.R. §§ 301.7701(b)-1 does mention “the states” (civilly but not politically foreign states) in the case of the GEOGRAPHICAL substantial presence test for aliens only, but it doesn’t pertain to American nationals and still requires a predicate “tax home” to even apply, which is:

The domicile of the PUBLIC OFFICE that is the privilege subject to tax
Not the domicile of the human surety filling the privileged office.
An intangible, non-geogeographical fiction.

Every civil statutory “personPUB” must have a domicile somewhere pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(b) and the rules of statutory construction.

Upon the whole, therefore, we can have no doubt that the word ‘inhabitant,’ as used in our statutes when referring to liability to taxation, by an overwhelming preponderance of authority, means ‘one domiciled.’ While there must be inherent difficulties in the decisiveness of proofs of domicile, the test itself is a certain one; and, inasmuch as every person[PUB or CIVIL “person”, not every personPRI], by universal accord, must have a domicile, [*280] either of birth or acquired, and can have but one, in the present state of society, it would seem that not only would less wrong be done, but less inconvenience would be experienced, by making domicile the test of liability to taxation, than by the attempt to fix some other necessarily more doubtful criterion. [***14] . . . The plaintiff does not bring himself within this rule; for, although he might have left the commonwealth with the fixed purpose to abandon it as a residence, he did not leave it on his way to a place certain, which he had determined upon as his future residence, and was proceeding with due despatch; and upon the general rule that, having had a domicile in this commonwealth, he remains an inhabitant, for the purpose of taxation, until he has acquired a new domicile, the intention and fact had not concurred at the time when this tax was assessed.

[Barhydt v. Cross, 256 Iowa 271 (1912)]

That domicile is that of the fictional public capacityPUB in the District of Columbia, or if there is no fictional capacityPUB, that of the human beings own domicile and physical abode. This is confirmed by 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(39) and 26 U.S.C. § 7408(d). This is because:

American nationals filing as nonresident aliens in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(b)(1)(B) are not subject to the presence test and are nonresidents EVERYWHERE until they make an “effectively connected” election under 26 U.S.C. §873(b)(3) and 26 U.S.C. §864 to become a “nonresident alien INDIVIDUAL”. Like the LEGAL presence of an alien in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(b)(1)(A), the U.S. national who “effectively connects” also is connected with the “trade or business” excise taxable franchise. Both aliens and U.S. nationals (NRA⁵⁰) who effectively connect share a voluntary privileged civil statutory office. The privileged “trade or business” office is what makes the nonresident alien the CIVIL “individualPUB” subject to United States^J jurisdiction and has nothing to do with their geography or their physical abode for that matter. 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) define “United States” differently depending on context — and 26 U.S.C. §864(b) uses the jurisdictional meaning.

“United States” in Subtitle A is jurisdictional, not geographical.
“Trade or business within the United States” = public office within federal jurisdiction. It is “domestic/internal” to the United States federal corporation.
“Personal services” = civil statutory activity, not private labor. Private labor cannot be federally taxed without a federal benefit, per Union Refrigerator.

4. “Foreign country” includes territories, possessions, and States of the Union

26 CFR § 301.7701(b)-2 – Closer connection exception

(b) Foreign country.

For purposes of section 7701(b) and the regulations thereunder, the term “foreign country” when used in a geographical sense includes any territory under the sovereignty of the United Nations or a government other than that of the United States. It includes the territorial waters of the foreign country (determined in accordance with the laws of the United States), and the seabed and subsoil of those submarine areas which are adjacent to the territorial waters of the foreign country and over which the foreign country has exclusive rights, in accordance with international law, with respect to the exploration and exploitation of natural resources. It also includes the possessions and territories of the United States.

The exclusive jurisdiction territories and possessions are:

“territory under the sovereignty of the United Nations or a government other than that of the United States”

States of the Union also satisfy the definition of “foreign country” above just like territories and possessions because they too as CIVILLY foreign (ForeignC) with respect to federal jurisdiction. We prove that the Secretary of the Treasury has exceeded his authority by excluding states of the Union from the definition of “foreign country” above and that he is doing it to protect the income tax system from collapsing in on itself as follows:

PROOF: States of the Union are “foreign countries” and aliens with constitutional states do not satisfy the presence test in I.R.C. 7701(b), FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/proof-i-r-c-subtitles-a-and-c-does-not-deliver-any-tangible-benefit-or-private-propertypri-and-government-is-hiding-this/

5. The “In Your Face” Conclusion

26 U.S.C. § 7701(b) applies tests to diagnose the Tax Home of an alien: [9]

If the alien’s Tax Home is your abode in a real and substantial sense, the law must place you as a nonresident alien.
If the alien’s Tax Home is in the pursuit of the performance of the functions of a public office, you are a resident. [3, 10, 11, 12]

The alien subject to this test was never “called” to make the first-year election because they were never elected to the office that authorizes it. The system defaults any alien “individual” who is not in a public office into the nonresident alien status because their Tax Home is fundamentally alien to the federal jurisdiction. [2, 13]

Everything in the IRC is a long-winded hunt for a Public Office, whose synonym is “trade or business” in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(26) throughout Title 26. It is a synonym for those who have elected a privileged public capacityPUB. If you aren’t in one because you choose PRIVATE capacityPRI, your Tax Home is CIVILLY “foreign,” to the United States^J corporation. [14]

6. Historical Confirmation

To see the full picture on the presence test for aliens in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(b), you have to look at the “Before” and “After.” The law switched from a person’s inner thoughts to their physical anchor.

6.1. Pre-1985: The “Intent” Test for the NRAI (Term)

Before 1985, you were defined as a Nonresident Alien Individual (NRAI)—a specific legal term—based on your state of mind.

The Goal: To prove you were a “mere transient” (just passing through).
The Evidence: You used “Transient Letters” or affidavits to declare your intent to return home.
The Result: If your purpose was definite and temporary, you were the NRAI.
The Flaw: Your physical days didn’t matter as much as your heart; you could be here a long time and still be a “nonresident” if you never intended to stay.

6.2. Post-1984: The “Tax Home” Condition for the INRA (Word Phrase)

After 1984, the law stopped caring about your intent. It now looks at an ALIEN Individual and applies the word phrase Nonresident Alien (INRA-Individual who is a nonresident alien) only if the Tax Home allows it.

The Tax Home is now the mandatory PRE-condition for all three tests:

Test 1: The Green Card Test
- The Condition: A Green Card assumes your Tax Home is the U.S.
- Result: You are a Resident. The “Nonresident” phrase cannot apply to you.
Test 2: The Substantial Presence Test (183-Day Math)
- The Condition: If the math says you’ve been here too long, you must prove your Tax Home is in a foreign country to stay a nonresident.
- Result: If your Tax Home is in the U.S., you fail the “Closer Connection” and become a Resident.
Test 3: The First-Year Election
- The Condition: You can choose to be a resident only if you are moving your Tax Home to the U.S.
- Result: The election confirms your status as a Resident.

7. The Summary

Pre-1985: Your Intent determined if you were the NRAI (Term).
Post-1984: Your Tax Home determines if you are the INRA (Word Phrase).

If the Tax Home is in the United States^J then it is in the United States^G because the office is intangible and non-geographical and can be exercised anywhere physically. The alien individual is “captured” into a federal office or status. The intent to leave no longer matters—the math and the location of your work (the Tax Home) dictate your PUBLIC capacityPUB. Currently, United States^J is like the Hotel California (Eagles song): You can check in, but never INTEND to leave.

Welcome to The Matrix, Neo! See:

Timeline for Corruption of Tax System by Abandoning PersonPRI and Replacing with PersonPUB, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/timeline-for-corruption-of-tax-system-by-abandoning-personpri-and-replacing-with-personpub/

Congress defined “tax home” only for § 911. Treasury invented a “tax home” definition for nonresident aliens without statutory authority, violating Calamaro. Treasury then made this invented “tax home” the gateway to the presence test in 26 U.S.C. §7701(b), converting physical presence into legal presence. “United States” in 26 U.S.C. §864(b) is jurisdictional, not geographical, and “personal services” is civil statutory activity, not private labor. ECI election under 26 U.S.C. §873(b)(3) is the franchise election that converts a private U.S. national (personPRI) into a civil statutory nonresident alien individual (personPUB).

8. Why all the needless complexity with “Tax home”?

You may wonder why there needs to be so much complexity over this “tax home” issue. The basic reason is that they are trying to manufacture what LOOKS like GEOGRAPHICAL jurisdiction out of a public capacityPUB intangible fiction that is NON‑GEOGRAPHICAL. We’ll answer the question in the following subsections.

8.1. The Core Deception: Manufacturing Fake Geography from an Intangible Fiction

To understand the deception, consider the Supreme Court’s explanation of fictional “presence” in International Shoe Co. v. Washington:

“Since the corporate personality is a fiction, although a fiction intended to be acted upon as though it were a fact, Klein v. Board of Supervisors, 282 U.S. 19, 24,(opens in new tab) it is clear that unlike an individual its “presence” without, as well as within, the state of its origin can be manifested only by activities carried on in its behalf by those who are authorized to act [AGENTS and OFFICERS such as “taxpayers”(opens in new tab) and “persons”] for it. To say that the corporation is so far “present” there as to satisfy due process requirements, for purposes of taxation or the maintenance of suits against it in the courts of the state, is to beg the question to be decided. For the terms “present” or “presence” are used merely to symbolize those activities of the corporation’s agent [OFFICER] within the state which courts will deem to be sufficient to satisfy the demands of due process. L. Hand, J., in Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, 45 F.2d 139, 141(opens in new tab). Those demands may be met by such contacts [or FRANCHISES(opens in new tab), which are ALSO contracts] of the corporation with the state of the forum as make it reasonable, in the context of our federal system of government, to require the corporation to defend the particular suit which is brought there. An “estimate of the inconveniences” which would result to the corporation from a trial away from its “home” or principal place of business [tax home, 26 C.F.R. §301.7701(b)-2(c)(opens in new tab)] is relevant in this connection. Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, supra, 141(opens in new tab).”
[International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316-317 (1945); SOURCE: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5514563780081607825(opens in new tab)]

This is the exact same sleight‑of‑hand Treasury uses with “tax home”: turning an intangible statutory fiction into a fake geographical presence.

They had to do a lot of hand‑waving and sleight of hand to pull off the deception — and they FAILED. The reasons they failed are listed below.

8.2. The Statutory Geography Problem: §7701(a)(9)/(10) Excludes Constitutional States

The geographical definition of “United States” in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) doesn’t expressly include states of the Union and therefore purposefully excludes them.

“the States” here include federal exclusive jurisdictional territory, not sovereign constitutional states under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1.

Treasury’s entire “tax home” overlay collapses once this statutory fact is understood.

8.3. Treasury’s False Geographic Overlay: Treating Fiction as Physical Territory

Treasury’s regulatory scheme treats “United States” as if it were always physical and geographical and includes the entire country, even when Subtitle A operates through public statutory capacityPUB rather than physical presence.

In fact:

8.3.1. It NEVER is geographical

It is always based on the intangible fiction of a public office that is a legislative creation of and property of the national government rather than a geographical and physical fact.

8.3.2. The deception depends on making you THINK it’s geographical

Making you THINK it’s geographical makes you unaware of the INVISIBLE CONSENT you are giving so you won’t question it and realize that they are actually offering you a choice.

8.3.3. Statutory presence ≠ geographical presence

Treating statutory presence as geographical presence obscures the fact that Subtitle A operates through statutory elections rather than physical location.

8.4. The Assimilation Mechanism: Converting Statutory Presence into Fake Geography

This allows them to deceive you into declaring a LEGAL presence in the United StatesJ federal corporation under 26 U.S.C. § 864(b) rather than a PHYSICAL presence under 26 U.S.C. § 7701(b) — all the while believing you are talking about a geography.

This is the assimilation mechanism: statutory presence → civil domicile → United StatesJ jurisdiction → taxation.

8.5. The Constitutional Jurisdiction Problem: Subtitle A Is Not a Sovereign Tax

Remember that:

8.5.1. Subtitle A is not a sovereign tax

I.R.C. Subtitle A is a proprietary excise tax upon non‑geographical public capacitiesPUB legislatively created by Congress under the Sixteenth Amendment, not a sovereign geographical tax under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1.

8.5.2. §7701(a)(9)/(10) define federal territory, not states

26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) are geography over which exclusive jurisdiction applies under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 and not the sovereign constitutional states.

States of the Union cannot be expanded through “includes” identity laundering to add them to this geography.

8.5.3. The statutory definition is NOT the constitutional definition

26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) is therefore NOT the constitutional definition of “United States” that includes states of the Union under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1.

8.6. The Result: Legal Assimilation into United StatesJ

The result is that you are LEGALLY assimilated inside the United StatesJ federal corporation without even knowing how it happened, as its uncompensated agent and “useful idiot.”

This process is described in:

8.7. How the Deception Works: The USPI Intangible Office Axiom

The above deceptive process is most easily demonstrated through the following resources:

Writing Conventions on this Website, Section 1.12: USPI–INTANGIBLE Office Axiom https://ftsig.org/introduction/writing-conventions-on-this-website/#1.12._USPI
Establishing USPI thru laws of property, Section 5: The ORIGIN of PUBLIC/GOVERNMENT Property, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/how-you-volunteer/establishing-uspi-thru-laws-of-property/#3._The

If you understand the laws of property and that fictional offices are INTANGIBLE, non‑geographical PUBLIC propertyPUB, then you realize that:

8.7.1. Fictional offices are legal conclusions, not facts

They are no longer a FACT but a LEGAL conclusion, and their existence can no longer be attested to as a fact using a perjury statement on a government form.

8.7.2. Perjury statements cannot validate legal conclusions

It violates the Federal Rules of Evidence to validate a legal conclusion with a perjury statement on a government form such as a tax return.

8.7.3. IRS ministerial officers cannot validate legal conclusions

IRS as ministerial officers can’t help you do this EITHER and they are exceeding their authority to do so.

8.7.4. Fiction cannot be attached to geography

Nothing about an intangible fictional office is a fact that can be attached to a geography through a perjury statement because facts are always physical, tangible, and geographical.

REFERENCE: 1040NR Form Line Items Identification as Fact or Legal Conclusion, FTSIG https://ftsig.org/reference-1040nr-form-line-items-identification-as-fact-or-legal-conclusion/

8.8. The Final Jurisdictional Reality: Filing a Return = Practicing Law

To even animate a legal fiction, you have to “practice law” because LEGAL conclusions are what “practicing law” actually is.

No one can penalize or compel you to either PRACTICE law or make a legal conclusion about a fictional office.

This is why the IRS wants to treat your tax return filing as a “claim” of “benefits” under administrative due process rather than a factual submission under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

REFERENCE: Constitutional Due Process v. Administrative Due Process, FTSIG https://ftsig.org/reference-constitutional-due-process-v-administrative-due-process/

8.9. The Benefit Protection Equivalence Deception

IRS wants to treat a tax return submission as a “benefit” under the Benefit Protection Equivalence Doctrine so they can justify you paying them money.

In fact, there is NOTHING beneficial about filing a tax return. It’s nothing but a liability and not a benefit.

PROOF: I.R.C. Subtitles A and C Does NOT deliver any tangible “benefit” or private propertyPRI and Government is Hiding This, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/proof-i-r-c-subtitles-a-and-c-does-not-deliver-any-tangible-benefit-or-private-propertypri-and-government-is-hiding-this/

DOCTRINE: Benefit Protection Equivalence Doctrine, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/doctrine-benefit-protection-equivalence-doctrine/

8.10. The Protection Racket: Renting a Public Identity

Instead, what IRS is really doing is RENTING a PUBLIC capacityPUB identity for a fee called “taxes.”

That tax is not an Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 classical “income tax.” It is really a proprietary and voluntary rental fee under the Sixteenth Amendment.

The only “benefit” of having that identity is that they will LEAVE YOU ALONE, meaning that it turns justice into a privilege rather than a private rightPUB.

Recall that “justice” is simply the right to be left alone.

What is “Justice”?, Form #05.050
http://sedm.org/whatisjustice

Since it costs them nothing to leave you alone, they can’t make it a privilege you have to pay for under the Benefit Protection Equivalence Doctrine.

Below is a description of this “protection racket” masquerading as an income tax:

PROOF: Income tax is a “rent an identity” service that turns justice into a privilege and INJUSTICE, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/proof-income-tax-is-a-rent-an-identity-service-that-turns-justice-into-a-privilege-and-injustice/

9. Capacity‑Based Deception Map: How “Tax Home” Creates Invisible Public CapacityPUB

Stage (Guided Link)	What IRS Presents	What Actually Happens (PUB/PRI Ontology)	Why It Matters
United States Definition	“United States” means the whole country geographically.	§7701(a)(9),(10) exclude states of the Union → “United States” = United StatesJ (public office jurisdiction).	You unknowingly shift from geography → public capacityPUB.
Tax Home Concept	“Tax home” is where you live or work.	“Tax home” = domicile of a public office (trade or business).	You silently declare a legal presence inside United StatesJ.
Geography → Legal Fiction	IRS implies physical presence = tax presence.	IRS converts physical presence → legal presence in a federal corporation.	Assimilation occurs without awareness or consent.
Assimilation Mechanism	Filing forms = reporting facts.	Filing forms = claiming a public office (legal conclusion).	You become an uncompensated agent of United StatesJ.
Trade or Business	“Trade or business in the United States” = economic activity.	§864(b): “Trade or business” = performance of a federal office.	You unknowingly elect into ECI → taxable capacityPUB.
Legal Conclusions	Perjury statements validate facts.	Public offices are intangible legal conclusions, not facts.	You cannot lawfully attest to them under penalty of perjury.
Administrative Due Process	Filing a return = factual submission.	IRS treats returns as benefit claims under administrative due process.	You lose constitutional protections → enter franchise law.
Benefit Doctrine	Filing returns gives “benefits.”	Subtitles A & C provide no benefit; only liabilities.	IRS uses “benefit” fiction to justify taxation.
Renting an Identity	Income tax = Article I tax.	Income tax = rental fee for a federal identity (public office).	“Justice” becomes a privilege you pay for.
Protection Racket	IRS protects rights.	IRS sells “leave you alone” as a paid privilege.	Violates Benefit‑Protection Equivalence Doctrine.

Interpretive Summary (One Sentence)

“Tax home” is the gateway fiction that converts a private American national into a public office holder, allowing IRS to treat voluntary filings as benefit claims, impose administrative due process, and charge rental fees for a federal identity.

10. Diagram Version of the Table

(ASCII‑style jurisdictional diagram showing the deception pathway)

Code

                         ┌───────────────────────────────────────────┐
                         │     CAPACITY-BASED “TAX HOME” DEVICE      │
                         └───────────────────────────────────────────┘

                                     (1) Definition Layer
                                     ---------------------
                           §7701(a)(9),(10) omit states of the Union
                           → “United States” = United StatesJ (office)

                                     ▼  Legal Fiction

                                     (2) Geographic Illusion
                                     ------------------------
                           IRS presents “United States” as geography
                           → taxpayer believes tax home = physical home

                                     ▼  Cognitive Shift

                                     (3) Tax Home = Office Domicile
                                     -------------------------------
                           “Tax home” = situs of PUBLIC office (trade or business)
                           → not physical, not factual, not geographical

                                     ▼  Assimilation Mechanism

                                     (4) Legal Presence Declared
                                     ---------------------------
                           Filing forms = claiming domicile in United StatesJ
                           → filer becomes legal occupant of federal office

                                     ▼  Capacity Transformation

                                     (5) Public CapacityPUB Election
                                     -------------------------------
                           Private American national → PUBLIC “individual”
                           → subject to Subtitle A franchise rules

                                     ▼  Administrative Conversion

                                     (6) Benefit-Claim Reclassification
                                     ----------------------------------
                           IRS treats return as “claim for benefits”
                           → administrative due process replaces constitutional

                                     ▼  Proprietary Extraction

                                     (7) Rental Fee (“Tax”)
                                     -----------------------
                           Income tax = rental fee for federal identity
                           → “justice” becomes a privilege, not a right

11. Flowchart Showing the Assimilation Process

(Step‑wise PUB/PRI transformation logic)