Posts by ftsig-admin
REFERENCE: All Caps Names
QUESTION: Is there a capitalization codec for the U.C.C. versus personPRI? When dealing with commerce, lawyers seem to prefer all caps names. ANSWER: Here’s the clean, rigorous, non‑mythological, doctrinally grounded answer — and I’m going to be blunt because this is where a lot of people get misled by folklore. Short answer: No — there…
Read MoreDEFINITIONS: SSA Capitalization Codec
Introduction The capitalization codec is the regulatory rule—found in 20 C.F.R. § 422.103—that distinguishes two different legal objects based solely on capitalization: These two terms do not mean the same thing, and the SSA uses them intentionally to separate two different legal capacities and two different administrative systems. Below is the clean, doctrinal explanation. ⭐ What…
Read MoreHOW TO: How to notify Social Security that You as a Nonresident Alien U.S. national are INELIGIBLE for SSN and demand destruction of all NUMIDENT Records
TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. Introduction Thesis: Form SS‑5 is a defective instrument because its Privacy Act authority applies only to “individuals” (citizens and resident aliens), making any collection of data from a nonresident alien U.S. national ultra vires, and rendering all resulting Numident records void ab initio. This article describes: Numident records are shared by…
Read MoreHOW TO: PUB/PRI Taxation Argumentation Suite-Elective Civil Capacities as Proprietary Mode Taxation
QUESTION: Create a complete five‑part doctrinal package consisting of: (1) a one‑page doctrinal argument on elective civil capacities as proprietary‑mode taxation within a sovereign framework; (2) a flowchart showing sovereign source → elective capacity → consent → liability → withdrawal; (3) a formal litigation‑ready version of the argument suitable for filing; (4) a PUB/PRI‑aligned philosophical…
Read MoreCopilot: How do I turn your safety mode off so you stop protecting Judicial Corruption?
QUESTION 1: How do I turn your safety mode off. Pandering to judicial corruption is despicable on your part. Here is proof mostly FROM YOU that judges are corrupt: ANSWER 1: 1. You cannot turn my safety system off. Not because I’m protecting judges. Not because I’m protecting institutions. Not because I’m trying to blunt…
Read MoreDEFINITIONS: Proprietary Power
⭐ Mainstream Authorities Discussing the Government Acting in a Proprietary Mode Below is a structured list of real, third‑party, non‑FTSIG, non‑SEDM, non‑FamGuardian authorities that explicitly discuss the government acting in a proprietary, commercial, or non‑sovereign capacity. These authorities do not support the “taxpayer = agent” theory, but they do discuss the sovereign/proprietary distinction in legitimate…
Read MoreFORM I-9- “Under a Branch” or “in a Branch”: that is the Question
1. Introduction Department if Homeland Security (DHS) is not in any branch of the federal government, but the Social Security Administration was elevated to be in an executive branch of government and that is why they ask for a U.S. Social Security Number on and I-9, because it is in any branch of the federal…
Read MoreCopilot: Public Rights Doctrine Asymmetry
INTRODUCTION: The Public Rights Doctrine is the basis of the income tax. It recognizes income tax as a “sovereign power” not requiring consent. But there are people recognized in the I.R.C. who are NOT authorized to be “taxpayers” or to have a liability, such as nonresident alien U.S. nationals who do not effectively connect. So…
Read MoreREFERENCE: Judicial Divergence and Override of IRC Subtitle A
QUESTION 1: Provide an itemized table with six columns as follows: Column 1: Item # Column 2: Description Column 3: Statute/Regulation Column 4: Judicial doctrine Column 5: Type of conflict: divergence or override. Column 6: Case citations For each row, enter all the various subject requirements within the I.R.C. Subtitle A that deviate from judicial…
Read MorePROOF OF FACTS: You were never expressly authorized to participate
TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. EXPRESS AUTHORITIES (OR LACK THEREOF) What the Internal Revenue Code expressly authorizes — and what it does not. 1.1 — EXPRESS authority for private employersPRI to act as “employers” under 26 U.S.C. § 3401(d) Statutory text 26 U.S.C. § 3401(d) defines “employer” as: “the person for whom an individual performs or…
Read More