FAQ: Questions About the U.S. Person Status
More on the subject of the U.S. Person status at:
U.S. Person Position, Form #05.053
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/USPersonPosition.pdf
QUESTION1:
When it comes to the U.S. person status, what domicile is in effect—the agent’s or that of the status?
ANSWER 1:
The domicile of the office or status, which is that of its creator, is in effect. 4 U.S.C. §72. The office and its creator are synonymous because it is property of the creator and its government/public creator is just a collection of property. Every public right under the CIVIL law must be tethered to a specific locality/geography in order that choice of law provisions may be implemented as indicated in 28 U.S.C. §1652 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17.
QUESTION 2:
Agreed. So…briefly….in two letters, the effective domicile of the U.S. person “taxpayer” is DC.?
ANSWER 2:
Yes, But ONLY so long as there is a CONSENSUAL connection between the office and the officer. If that connection is not lawfully established, the officer changes to the SOURCE of duress.
The COMPELLED officer is an AGENT of the SOURCE of the duress and ceases to be surety for the office. Hence, IDENTITY THEFT. See:
Identity Theft Affidavit, Form #14.020
https://sedm.org/Forms/14-PropProtection/Identity_Theft_Affidavit-f14039.pdf
QUESTION 3:
So…another rhetorical question. Why then is it “citizen” of the “United StatesG” and not “citizen” of the District of Columbia in the tax code?
ANSWER 3:
1. Because United States means THE GOVERNMENT officers/quasi contractors serving within a specific geography, and doing so in VIOLATION of 4 USC §72 in most cases.
Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.)
§ 9-307. LOCATION OF DEBTOR.(h) [Location of United States.]
The United States is located in the District of Columbia.
[SOURCE: https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9/9-307]
2. Those who owe a quasi-contractual obligation as a “taxpayer” are the “debtor” spoken of above.
QUESTION 4:
Agreed. It’s just that when we are trying to discuss focused points, it’s helpful if you just stay on point and not add a bunch of superfluous stuff.
So, I am going to ask the same question. For $100, answer this question very briefly:
Why then is it “citizen” of the “United StatesG” and not “citizen” of the District of Columbia in the tax code?
ANSWER 4:
1. They don’t want you to realize what you are consenting to (invisible consent).
2. They have to make it LOOK like a Constitutional tax under 1:8:1, even though its really just a donation program implemented as a franchise. See:
How American Nationals Volunteer to Pay Income Tax, Form #08.024
https://sedm.org/Forms/08-PolicyDocs/HowYouVolForIncomeTax.pdf
3. They have to confuse/equivocate the OFFICE with the OFFICER to make you think they are the same so that consent appears unnecessary and invisible.
4. They don’t want you to know you’re being tricked out of your property in violation of their oaths of office to protect private property.
5. They want to make the tax LOOK like a tax on geography instead of the tax on property that it is.
If they acknowledged how your consent was procured, you would withdraw it.
QUESTION 5:
Great. Now answer the question.
What is the justification for using “citizen” of the “United StatesG” instead of “citizen” of D.C.?
What is the SINGLE logical explanation?
ANSWER 5:
1. They can’t make it a tax on the municipality, because D.C. has a tax of its own and behaves like a state tax, as indicated in Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901).
2. Federal preemption is needed to change the choice of law to a different venue so that D.C./municipal law doesn’t apply under 28 U.S.C. §1652.
3. The separation of powers would be violated if they didn’t do it this way. See:
Government Conspiracy to Destroy the Separation of Powers, Form #05.023
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/SeparationOfPowers.pdf
THEIR RESPONSE:
I believe it is this:
USPI is domestic1 EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD. But it is broken down into being either:
Within United StatesG; or
Without United StatesG
Since it is not without, it is within.
It is that simple. A “citizen” clothed in a domestic1 public interest within United StatesG.
Is that splitting hairs or irrelevant? What say you?
OUR RESPONSE:
None of what we have discussed is irrelevant, unless you’re a pseudo-intellectual who doesn’t want to look behind the curtain, lives inside the franchise matrix, and never rattles their cage.
Your explanation is way too abstract. Mine is more concrete and provable. A whole new layer of terminology, definitions, and law has to be constructed and explained before people will understand what you are saying. Keep It Simple, Stupid (KISS). Stick to what is easily and directly provable using readily available authorities.
THEIR RESPONSE:
Says the guy who has written 1,000,000 pages. 🙂
It is what it is.
USPI is always domestic—no matter where it is located.
It is located either in United StatesG or without.
The “citizen” who clothes himself and is within is a “citizen” of United StatesG.
A “citizen” without United StatesG is covered in 26 U.S.C. §911(d)(3).
It doesn’t get easier or clearer than that.
People cannot even articulate what a state or country is. That’s the problem.
OUR RESPONSE:
Chief Justice Roberts recently said that the rule of law is imperiled because schools don’t teach civics anymore and don’t understand how their government works.
In other words, lack of legal education results in nationwide anarchy.
https://sedm.org/its-important-to-teach-civics-and-law-to-the-american-people/
OR, you could say that everyone has become “Idiots” as described in the following article:
Are You an “Idiot”?, SEDM
https://sedm.org/are-you-an-idiot-we-are/
In our mind, being the above type of “idiot” is not a bad thing.
QUESTION 6:
Whereas the 50 States and the District of Columbia collectively comprise the domestic locality of the Federal government. Explain why a resident alien is regarded as a U.S. resident for tax purposes even though said resident alien might be a resident of the State of Texas.
ANSWER 6:
A resident alien is regarded as a U.S. resident for tax purposes because the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) defines residency based on specific criteria, including:
Substantial Presence Test
- Physical presence: The individual has been physically present in the United States for a certain number of days during the current and preceding years.
Green Card Test
- Lawful permanent residence: The individual is a lawful permanent resident of the United States, holding a valid green card.
Tax Residency vs. State Residency
- Federal tax purposes: The IRC’s definition of residency applies specifically to federal income tax purposes, regardless of the individual’s state of residence.
- State residency: An individual’s residency in a particular state, such as Texas, is determined by state laws and regulations, which may differ from federal tax residency rules.
Conclusion
As a result, a resident alien can be considered a U.S. resident for federal tax purposes, even if they reside in a specific state like Texas. This means they are subject to federal income taxation on their worldwide income, similar to U.S. citizens.
QUESTION 7:
But specifically explain why the alien would be called a U.S. resident rather than a Texas resident (for example). Is it because the alien individual falls under the civil jurisdiction of the United States per U.S. Constitution, art. I, sec. 8, cl. 4 and said alien’s civil status is federally preempted?
ANSWER 7:
The term “U.S. resident” is used because the alien’s status is determined by federal law, specifically the Internal Revenue Code, which is a federal statute. The federal government has authority over immigration and taxation, and the IRC’s definition of residency is applied uniformly across the country.
Federal Jurisdiction
- Article I, Section 8, Clause 4: The Constitution grants Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, which includes laws governing the status of aliens.
- Federal preemption: Federal law preempts state law in areas like immigration and taxation, ensuring consistency and uniformity.
Terminology
- “U.S. resident”: This term reflects the alien’s status under federal law, specifically for tax purposes.
- “Texas resident”: This term would refer to the alien’s residency in the state of Texas for state-specific purposes, such as state income taxation or state residency requirements.
Conclusion
The use of “U.S. resident” emphasizes the federal nature of the alien’s status, which is determined by federal law and applies uniformly across the country, rather than being specific to a particular state like Texas.
A key to understanding “United StatesG” seems to be a uniformity of laws in the locality.