1. Introduction

During the return filing process, we suggest the following provision on the tax return:

CHOICE OF LAW AND TERMS OF COMMERCIAL USE OF IDENTIFYING INFORMATION:

Pursuant to the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C., Chapter 21B, no benefit or privilege of any domestic civil statutory status, definition, or remedy “created or organized” by any government under 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(4) or otherwise may be inferred or lawfully enforced against me in the context of my interactions with you or any other government.  Exclusions claimed herein are not privileges but statutory and regulatory recognition of private rights under principles of equity pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §7422 and 26 C.F.R. §1.6012-1(b)(1)(i)(c). Amounts reported and received by the United States, as indicated in this filing, have been nonconsensually taken and falsely characterized as “tax” and “withholding” by the payer and are claimed for refund.  All rights reserved. In the event of a legal dispute over the equitable refund claimed herein, the entire contents of https://ftsig.org is incorporated by reference into my administrative record for all past, present, and future filings and correspondence.  All disclosures or commercially beneficial uses of my identifying information are unauthorized beyond this direct interaction.

[Effect of Definitions Upon OWNERSHIP and CONTROL of Property
Section 10: Administrative and litigation tactics to prevent violations of these concepts
https://ftsig.org/how-you-volunteer/effect-of-definitions-upon-ownership-of-property/#10._Administrative]

But why do we take this approach? Here is the logic:

1. You can’t ask for a return of unlawful withholding unless you’re the owner.
2. If you’re the owner, their rules don’t apply. Constitution Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2.
3. The fact that the reporting or withholding was in error and that there was a mischaracterization through false reporting can only be rebutted if its private property.
4. Once you establish you’re the owner using the above, if they don’t disagree, they agree. The fact that you aren’t “effectively connecting” is proof that you didn’t relinquish that ownership in exchange for a privilege.
5. And if they want to disagree, they have to prove how that ownership was acquired so that their civil statutes apply. Don’t help them!
6. They can NEVER satisfy that burden of proof if you made no elections such as “effectively connecting”. Elections are the only mechanism to convert the property from PRIVATE to PUBLIC.
7. Thus federal preemption can’t operate and there is no USPI.

Thus, you FORCE them to admit, through acquiescence at least, that they are in wrongful custody of private property and that you are the owner if they say NOTHING. All the above are implied by their conduct from mere silence. A failure to deny is an admission. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(b)(6). That gives you standing to sue in equity later. And because you remain in equity, the full payment rules and none of the I.R.C. applies.

Once the litigation gets into state court, the feds may try to remove the case to federal court. That litigation will follow the format of a common law trover action. Keep in mind though, that this posture makes that much more difficult because:

1. Feds can’t move the property to federal court without a proven property interest that would make it a federal question.
2. The owner is the only one who can define the choice of law. Otherwise, the feds are stealing. You as the owner must consent to the removal if its private property:
   Choice of Law, Litigation Tool #01.010
   https://sedm.org/Litigation/01-General/ChoiceOfLaw.pdf

Judges are completely silent on this mechanism for removal because if they spilled the beans, the whole thing would collapse. So you just have to know this and call them out on it and set a trap like this one beforehand. Choice of law and the ability to define both travel together and depend on ownership. Therefore, you should establish ownership at the earliest possible point and demand that they prove otherwise.

2. AI Validation

Below is a Microsoft Copilot description of a common law trover:

---

QUESTION:

What is a common law trover action?

ANSWER:

A common‑law trover action is one of the classic forms of action in early English and American common law. It sits inside the family of torts protecting personal property, and it has a very specific purpose and structure.

Below is the clean, doctrinal definition you can plug directly into your ontologies.

Common‑Law Trover — Core Definition

Trover

A common‑law action for money damages brought by a person who has the right to immediate possession of personal property and alleges that the defendant has wrongfully converted that property to their own use.

In short: Trover = remedy for conversion, measured by the value of the chattel.

Essential Elements

A plaintiff had to show:

1. Ownership or right to immediate possession of the chattel.
2. Defendant’s wrongful act amounting to conversion (e.g., refusal to return, destruction, sale).
3. Value of the chattel at the time of conversion.

Trover did not seek the return of the item. It sought money damages equal to the value of the property, plus incidental losses.

How Trover Differs from Related Actions

Action	Purpose	Remedy	Key Distinction
Trover	Conversion of personal property	Value of the chattel	Treats the property as if sold to the defendant
Replevin	Wrongful taking or detention	Return of the chattel	Focus is recovery, not value
Detinue	Wrongful detention	Return or value	Older, more technical pleading
Trespass to chattels	Interference short of conversion	Actual damages	Lesser interference than conversion

Trover became the dominant remedy because it was procedurally simpler and avoided the messy issue of physically recovering the item.

Modern Status

In modern U.S. law:

• Trover has been merged into the tort of conversion.
• The remedy remains the fair market value of the property at the time of conversion, plus consequential damages.

Doctrinal Architecture (for your Logseq ontology)

Trover

• Type: Common‑law tort
• Parent Doctrine: Protection of personal property
• Core Wrong: Conversion
• Remedy: Money damages (value of chattel)
• Historical Form of Action: Yes
• Modern Equivalent: Conversion (Restatement (Second) of Torts § 222A)

If you want, I can map trover into your broader property‑tort ontology or contrast it with equity’s handling of wrongful possession.

3. The proper attitude

Electing to be a “taxpayer” whore and offering Uncle Sam or corrupt judges a bribe in doing so in order to have your case even heard and not censored or unpublished is an immoral and criminal event. 18 U.S.C. 208, 28 U.S.C. 144, 28 U.S.C. 455. Judges should never be in a position to be bribed to begin with. If the District of Criminals had stuck to only allowing “U.S. persons” abroad to be “taxpayers” as the constitution and even the Bible requires, that bribe would be IMPOSSIBLE and the integrity of the system would return.

Real law would not even permit this criminal financial conflict of interest, to hide it, or to pretend that its not happening or allowing people like you to make the crime happen.

There is no “moral high ground” in approaching the government as a “taxpayer” who owes anything, if in fact you don’t owe anything and consume no “privileges”.

You need to look at this issue beyond your own commercial concerns to see clearly for what it is. Its not about you. Its NEVER been only about you or your “benefit” or even your personal safety. Its about having INTEGRITY to the word and law of God.

The battle belongs to the LORD, and NOT you. HE is the only one who should get credit for any of this.

You seem to want to do it YOUR way, instead of GOD’s way. That’s what Satan insisted on as well.

The Character of Those Who May Dwell with the Lord

A Psalm of David.

Lord, who may abide in Your tabernacle?
Who may dwell in Your holy hill?

He who walks uprightly,
And works righteousness,
And speaks the truth in his heart;
He who does not backbite with his tongue,
Nor does evil to his neighbor,
Nor does he take up a reproach against his friend;
In whose eyes a vile person is despised,
But he honors those who fear the Lord;
He who swears to his own hurt and does not change;
He who does not put out his money at usury,
Nor does he take [or OFFER] a bribe against the innocent.

He who does these things shall never be moved.

[Psalm 15, Bible, NKJV]

By “dwell in” and “abide in”, God means “be domiciled” in His Virtual Kingdom with HIM as your King and CIVIL protector, rather than Caesar and thus to be TRULY foreign in a theological and legal and even CIVIL sense. The term “holy hill” is a metaphor for “political kingdom” and “legal jurisdiction”, just like the way Uncle Sam uses “in the United States”. Their system is a counterfeit of God’s.

You don’t EVER want to walk into court as a man-pleaser (friend of the world, James 4:4) who pays bribes like King Saul, rather than as the truly foreign stranger and full time officer of Heaven that God calls you to be.

Conflict of interest and bribery to overcome judicial misconduct can never truthfully be described as “brilliance”. Satan was brilliant and devious, but he was unrighteous

The only real “brilliant one” is the Lord. If you walk into court claiming to be an agent and trustee of the only Brilliant One, and claiming that the government as interfering with your role as God’s trustee and your right to covenant/contract. the First Amendment is the only thing you need.

If you are in fact God’s property, like the Heavens and the Earth (Psaml 89:11), that’s the only realistic approach you can take that is consistent with his word, which, like the constitution and the government corporation it implements, is a trust indenture.

Delegation of Authority Order from God to Christians, Form #13.007
https://sedm.org/Forms/13-SelfFamilyChurchGovnce/DelOfAuthority.pdf

If you don’t believe that, we question whether you really are a Christ follower. You’re either:

1. Domestic to Caesar and foreign to God
2. Domestic to God and foreign to Caesar.

You can’t be both. Matt. 6:24, Luke 16:13. Apostle Paul confirmed this when he said:

The New [FOREIGN] Man

 This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the [DOMESTIC] Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind,  having their understanding darkened [by “words of art”], being alienated from the life of God, because of the [LEGAL] ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

But you have not so learned Christ, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus:  that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.

[Eph. 4:17-24, Bible, NKJV]

Our approach is as follows:

“Now therefore, fear the Lord, serve [ONLY] Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve the Lord! And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve [ONLY] the Lord.”

[Joshua 24:14-15, Bible, NKJV]