How to Reject All Privileges in a Tax Return Filing
SOURCE: 1040-NR Attachment, Form #09.077, Section 2, Form 1;https://sedm.org/Forms/09-Procs/1040NR-Attachment.pdf
FORM 8275 ADDENDUM AND LEGAL NOTICE
Recipient of the enclosed IRS Form 8275 is forewarned that:
1. I as the submitter of this communication shall be the only Merchant offering property or services of any kind for sale or purchase under U.C.C. §2-104(1).
2. You as the government recipient of this communication are the only Buyer procuring said property pursuant to U.C.C. §2-103(1)(a).
3. Per the U.S. Supreme Court in Munn v. Illinois, 95 U.S. 113 (1876), I, like the government, have an equal right to offer my property and services to the government under terms and conditions that only I as the absolute owner of said services and property can specify and define.
“The State in such cases exercises no greater right than an individual may exercise over the use of his own property when leased or loaned to others. The conditions upon which the privilege shall be enjoyed being stated or implied in the legislation authorizing its grant, no right is, of course, impaired by their enforcement. The recipient of the privilege, in effect, stipulates to comply with the conditions. It matters not how limited the privilege conferred, its acceptance implies an assent to the regulation of its use and the compensation for it.”
4. If a refund amount is indicated on the return attached to this submission, you are hereby put on notice that you are in wrongful custody of my absolutely owned private, constitutionally and not statutorily protected property STOLEN from me under DURESS that must be “returned” under principles of equity without the need to invoke the privileges of the I.R.C. franchise. The SOLE bailment agreement controlling your “beneficial use” of said property I am the absolute owner of is as follows. Only the absolute owner, which is me, can make such rules. Please provide proof of absolute ownership of my PRIVATE property in your possession within 10 days if you think YOUR I.R.C. bailment agreement applies instead. An estoppel and laches applies if you don’t.
| Injury Defense Franchise and Agreement, Form #06.027 https://sedm.org/Forms/06-AvoidingFranch/InjuryDefenseFranchise.pdf |
5. I hereby reject any and all offers of government property or services, also called “privileges”, available from the you the recipient, including but not limited to:
5.1. Privileged “U.S. person” (26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(30)) and POLITICAL citizen* who is “of the United States**** (federal corporation) status under 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1(a) and working for the Secretary of the Treasury as required by under 5 U.S.C. §301, which says the Secretary can ONLY write regulations to command people and property in his own DEPARTMENT and NOT in other departments and certainly not among PRIVATE non-consenting people protected by the constitution. Nor can the Secretary lawfully CREATE a liability in the regulation at 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1 that does not EXPRESSLY appear in the statute it implements unless he is commanding ONLY officers in his own department who work for him VOLUNTARILY.
5.2. Any and all benefits and privileges associated with the “U.S. person” franchise civil status such as stimulus payments (26 U.S.C. §6428 to 26 U.S.C. §6428B), Affordable Care Act benefits, etc.
5.3. Alien status.
5.4. “Effectively connected” status and the deductions it produces under 26 U.S.C. §162. I don’t need deductions since all my earnings are EXCLUDED anyway.
5.5. The use of government identifying numbers issued under the authority of any statute. Any identifying numbers I might give you are not statutory numbers but property and a license to you under the above bailment agreement.
5.6. All civil statutory statuses, including but not limited to “person”, “taxpayer”, “citizen”, “resident”, etc. Any connection to such statuses by you is hereby agreed by all parties concerned as criminal identity theft (18 U.S.C. §912), private business activity, a satisfaction of the Minimum Contact Doctrine by you, a waiver of official, judicial, and sovereign immunity, and consent to the above bailment agreement. I am ONLY a CONSTITUTIONAL “person” under the Bill of Rights and not a STATUTORY “person” in relation to you.
If the I.R.C. really created an express CIVIL LIABILITY in my case and was actually positive law, you wouldn’t need ANY of the above DEVIOUS “fund raising” methods to in effect BRIBE me with my own money to exchange my constitutional rights for statutory privileges just like when Essau sold his birthright to the Biblical Jacob for a bowl of pottage. Gen. 25:29-34. “For thus says the Lord: ‘You have sold yourselves for nothing, And you shall be redeemed without money.’” [Isaiah 52:3, Bible, NKJV]. It is also a violation of the First Amendment prohibition against compelled LEGAL association and the Thirteenth Amendment prohibition against involuntary servitude to compel me into a CIVIL legal relation with YOU as a FOREIGN corporation by joining you or accepting privileges from you to then BECOME a CIVIL STATUTORY “person”, “taxpayer”, “citizen”, etc. Further, the result is an unconscionable adhesion contract since there are NO constitutional limitations upon the price you can charge for your MONOPOLY property and services and no Sherman Antitrust Act limitations upon your monopoly power in offering those services. Those who choose, whether purposefully or unconsciously, to become a “customer” (“taxpayer”) of anything you offer are therefore SCREWED, BLACK AND BLUED, and TATTOOED for life and liberty becomes impossible as a result. No thank you to your offer to volunteer. It’s naïve of you to believe people will fall for your springe as the PREDATOR and not PROTECTOR your employer has become. And for those wise enough not to volunteer, the result of compelling them to participate is literal criminal identity theft. For a description of the ill societal effects and treasonous consequences of the choice by me to volunteer and why I refuse to make it, see:
| How Scoundrels Corrupted Our Republican Form of Government, Family Guardian Fellowship https://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Evidence/HowScCorruptOurRepubGovt.htm |
The constitution does not EXPRESSLY authorize you to offer ANY of the above PRIVILEGES within the borders of a constitutional state.
“With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creator.”
“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”
“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.”
[James Madison. House of Representatives, February 7, 1792, On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties]
Thus, all such activities constitute an INVASION in violation of Article 4, Section 4 of the United States Constitution pursued for private, non-governmental, COMMERCIAL gain that benefits you personally in violation of 18 U.S.C. §208, 28 U.S.C. §144, and 28 U.S.C. §455. That conflict of interest on your part in enforcing payment for any of the above privileges makes it impossible to follow the laws protecting private property in the Bill of Rights or to follow your oath of office faithfully and objectively in doing so.
6. I am NOT a tax protester, and I insist on living responsibly and paying my way for everything that I ask for and use. I want to HELP you keep the public purse balanced by never being a public charge. If there are any privileges beyond the above which I both ASKED for AND am IN RECEIPT AND DIRECT BENEFIT of and have not ALSO rejected, please inform me now what they are so that:
6.1. They TOO can be rejected . . AND
6.2. You can timely be reimbursed for said property or services separate and apart from the I.R.C. franchise under principles of equity and to prevent unjust enrichment.
In the absence of your PROMPT presentment of a list of such things within 10 days, I shall reasonably conclude there are no such property, benefits or services that I both REQUESTED and RECEIVED that I have any obligation whatsoever to pay for.
7. Also under principles of equity, my voluntary execution of the previous step is conditioned on your EQUAL acceptance and obligation of reimbursing ME for any and all money or OTHER PRIVATE property in your TEMPORARY possession as my IMPLIED involuntary TRUSTEE:
7.1. BELONGING to me but sent to you by third parties without my consent in the form of usually involuntary or illegal withholding over the time period covered by this tax filing. Foreign person withholding under 26 U.S.C. §1441 and 26 C.F.R. §1.1441-1 does NOT apply to American nationals and only applies to ALIENS which I am not. I AM NOT a “foreign person” but I am “foreign”
7.2. That you obtained through administrative tax collection in the form of liens, levies, etc. at any time in the past. Tax collection activity is UNLAWFUL against anything but instrumentalities of the national government which I am NOT and never have been in the context of taxation. See:
| Challenging Jurisdiction Workbook, Form #09.081 https://sedm.org/Forms/09-Procs/ChalJurWorkbook.pdf |
In the absence of an IMMEDIATE refund of all the above PRIVATE PROPERTY in your possession, you are not eligible for my voluntary compliance in being reimbursed, are proceeding with “unclean hands”, and are in a PRIVILEGED state by virtue of possessing property that does not belong to you and must be “returned” under principles of equity, with or without a statute requiring you to do that. The EXERCISE of that privilege is controlled by:
| Injury Defense Franchise and Agreement, Form #06.027 https://sedm.org/Forms/06-AvoidingFranch/InjuryDefenseFranchise.pdf |
8. It is my right under principles of equity to reject any and all privileges and benefits in order to preserve my liberty and autonomy.
8.1. “Potest quis renunciare pro se, et suis, juri quod pro se introductum est. A man may relinquish, for himself and his heirs, a right [statutory privilege] which was introduced for his own benefit. See 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 83.” [Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856; https://famguardian.org/Publications/BouvierMaximsOfLaw/BouviersMaxims.htm]
8.2. “Quilibet potest renunciare juri pro se inducto. Any one may renounce a law [including a CIVIL FRANCHISE statute] introduced for his own benefit.” [Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856; https://famguardian.org/Publications/BouvierMaximsOfLaw/BouviersMaxims.htm]
9. Rules of equity definitely apply to our interactions because:
9.1. Lawful money is no longer in circulation and it has been replaced with fiat currency. See:
| The Money Scam, Form #05.041 https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/MoneyScam.pdf |
9.2. Equity only applies where lawful money is not involved.
9.3. Principles of equity and unjust enrichment are frequently used in the enforcement of the tax laws, and especially when presenting to juries.
9.4. If I can’t approach the government as a co-equal, then there is no law and no legitimate government, because law is BASED on equality of treatment. Government then becomes a pagan deity and religion that in effect owns EVERYTHING and makes CIVIL STATUTORY FRANCHISE rules for everyone as compelled members of a state-sponsored church.
10. Because I accept no privileges from you then
10.1. I have NO obligation to pay you anything:
“It is only where some right or privilege [which are GOVERNMENT PROPERTY] is conferred by the government or municipality upon the owner, which he can use in connection with his property, or by means of which the use of his property is rendered more valuable to him, or he thereby enjoys an advantage over others, that the compensation to be received by him becomes a legitimate matter of regulation [AND by implication taxation]. Submission to the regulation of compensation in such cases is an implied condition of the grant, and the State, in exercising its power of prescribing the compensation, only determines the conditions upon which its concession shall be enjoyed. When the privilege ends, the power of regulation [and taxation] ceases.”
[Munn v. Illinois, 94 U.S. 113 (1876) ]
10.2. Justice itself DEMANDS that you leave me alone and not disturb, regulate, or tax me. Justice, after all, is nothing more than the right to be LEFT ALONE, and ESPECIALLY by YOU. Would you hire a security guard with “taxes” who insists on stealing your property or converting it from PRIVATE to PUBLIC without your consent?
| What is “Justice”?, Form #05.050 https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/WhatIsJustice.pdf |
10.3. Any and every attempt to assert a tax obligation on your part devolves into an EXTORTION and not a “tax” in any sense of the word:
“If the taxing power be in no position to render these services, or otherwise to benefit the person or property taxed, and such property be wholly within the taxing power of another state, to which it may be said to owe an allegiance, and to which it looks for protection, the taxation of such property within the domicil of the owner partakes rather of the nature of an extortion than a tax, and has been repeatedly held by this Court to be beyond the power of the legislature, and a taking of property without due process of law. Railroad Company v. Jackson, 7 Wall. 262 ; State Tax on Foreign-Held Bonds, 15 Wall. 300; Tappan v. Merchants’ National Bank, 19 Wall. 490, 499 ; Delaware &c. R. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 198 U.S. 341, 358 . In Chicago &c. R. Co. v. Chicago, 166 U.S. 226, it was held, after full consideration, that the taking of private property [199 U.S. 203] without compensation was a denial of due process within the Fourteenth Amendment. See also Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U.S. 97, 102; Missouri Pacific Railway v. Nebraska, 164 U.S. 403, 417; Mt. Hope Cemetery v. Boston, 158 Mass. 509, 519.”
[Union Refrigerator Transit Company v. Kentucky, 199 U.S. 194 (1905)]
More like the above at:
| PROOF OF FACTS: Authorities on Privileges and Benefits, FTSIG https://ftsig.org/proof-of-facts-authorities-on-privileges-and-benefits/ |
11. This submission therefore does NOT constitute a request for or an acceptance by me of any part of the Internal Revenue Code commercial franchise quasi-contract as identified by the U.S. Supreme Court in Milwaukee v. White, 296 U.S. 268 (1935) (“the obligation to pay taxes is not penal. It is a statutory liability, quasi contractual in nature, enforceable, if there is no exclusive statutory remedy, in the civil courts by the common-law action of debt or indebitatus assumpsit.”). Because this communication is NOT an acceptance, it therefore becomes:
11.1. A counteroffer. . . AND
11.2. A definition of what constitutes an acceptance of my offer. . .AND
11.3. A complete definition of the terms of my offer which are the ONLY terms governing our relationship.