Digging Deeper
INTRODUCTION: “Deeming provisions” in tax law are frequently abused to allow those not subject to tax to consent to do so anyway, and to do so INVISIBLY as a method of INVISIBLE CONSENT in many cases. This line of questions highlights their use. You see the abuse of this tactic in 26 U.S.C. §3402 where…
INTRODUCTION: More on this subject at: QUESTION 1: The I.R.C. defines “domestic” in 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(4) as “created or organized in the United States”. 1. The fact that they used the words “created or organized” is essential to establish the civil status it created as propertyPUB. 2. The thing created is not referring to anything…
INTRODUCTION: The Public Interest Doctrine and the Public Rights Doctrine of the U.S. Supreme Court and their relationship to each other and to you are very important to understand because: This series of questions examines how all the above are implemented and how to challenge all the above processes in a court of law. It…
INTRODUCTION: The W-4 is the WRONG form for All Americans who don’t work for the national government as described in 26 U.S.C. §3401(c). This site mandates that those using it may not consent to ANYTHING the government wants, and the W-4 is a vehicle for said consent. A better approach is to use the following…
INTRODUCTION: More information on this subject at: QUESTION 1: When did the term “private” transition from being defined as absolute ownership under common law principles to shared ownership through the personPUB usufruct under the civil statutory law? ANSWER 1: Great clarification — you’re asking specifically about the juridical shift in the meaning of “private”: from…
QUESTION 1: For those wishing to PREVENT the type of equivocation between PUBLIC and PRIVATE you have consistently demonstrated throughout this interchange, precisely WHAT predicate “fact pattern” would you suggest included in each new series of questions to completely eliminate all such equivocation? Below is our attempt at doing so, but I’m sure you can…
INTRODUCTION: This series of questions establishes that: More on this subject at: QUESTION 1: Would it be accurate to say that Mainstream conventions: 1. Only recognize lawfully elected or appointed officers of the United States as “public officers”. 2. Do not recognize as “public officers” those subject to civil statutory law even though though they…
INTRODUCTION: This series of AI discovery establishes that: More on this subject at: QUESTION 1: What authorities can you present which prove that comity implemented as privileges/franchises cannot be used to destroy the constitutional separation of powers: 1. Between the States and the Federal Government. 2. Between various branches within the government: Executive, Legislative, and…
INTRODUCTION: This series of questions demonstrates the symbology for representing Presence as explained below and consistently used throughout this website: Writing Conventions on This Website, FTSIGSection 9: Types of CIVIL Legal Presence https://ftsig.org/introduction/writing-conventions-on-this-website/#9._Types You can see that the symbology is CORRECTLY and PERFECTLY applied, explained, and understood as applied to the three most famous tax…
INTRODUCTION: This interchange defines where IRS sits as far as PUBLIC or PRIVATE. The VP/IP symbology referred to here is: Writing Conventions on This Website, FTSIGSection 2: Two Contexts for Legal Informationhttps://ftsig.org/introduction/writing-conventions-on-this-website/#2._Two VP means VOLUNTARY Protection and includes civil statutes and franchises. IP means INVOLUNTARY Protection and includes only the common law, the constitution, and…