123 Main Street
Any City 12345
ANY STATE, USA
FROM: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator
and qualified Federal Witness
DATE: December 3, 2004 A.D.
SUBJECT: IRS Form W-9 and allowable substitutes
The Supreme Law Firm has been retained by another counsel to your worker, Mr. John Q. Doe, to document our professional observations concerning IRS Form W-9, and the allowable substitutes for this Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification.
After 14+ years of difficult research and litigation, my office is now in a position to provide you with a clear and verifiable summary of the IRS “problem.” Much additional documentation is also enclosed, if you wish to conduct a deeper study of the many issues that arise in this context. Everything is also readily available from the Internet.
Without having a copy of the Form W-9 which you routinely present to your company’s workers, in the analysis that follows we have used the version of that Form which is available at the IRS Internet website and also archived at the following URL in the Supreme Law Library:
Missing OMB Control Number
In 1980, Congress enacted the Paperwork Reduction Act for the stated purpose of reducing the paperwork burden imposed upon private American Citizens by the federal government. That Act was somewhat unique for enlisting the assistance of all Americans to enforce its provisions. Whenever any federal government form attempts to collect information, it must exhibit an OMB-approved control number and expiration date in the upper right-hand corner of the first page. If it does not exhibit a current OMB control number there, Congress has instructed Americans to ignore the form as a “bootleg request”.
IRS Form W-9 (Rev. January 2003) fails to exhibit any OMB-approved control number or expiration date and, as such, it constitutes a “bootleg request” which you, your company, and all of its co-workers can and should ignore, for violating the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Part II with a heading of “Certification” contains the following important legal language:
Under penalties of perjury, I certify that: ...
3. I am a U.S. person (including a U.S. resident alien).
We now draw your attention to this Certification Section, because the penalties for the crime of perjury can be severe, particularly if one is encouraging someone else to commit perjury for any reason. In the latter case, the crime is called “subornation of perjury” and it is expressly prohibited by the federal criminal statute at 18 U.S.C. 1622 (a federal felony). In the present context, you and your company could be liable under that criminal statute if you attempted to compel any workers to certify IRS Form W-9 when they are not U.S. persons. Clearly, then, this legal term must be fully understood before anyone can honestly certify the statements being made on that Form.
Meaning of “United States person”
The best place to begin an explanation of this term is to examine the title on IRS Form 1040: “U.S. Individual Income Tax Return”. Many people understand this title to refer to a return of taxes on an individual’s income. However, this understanding is not entirely correct and is mostly misleading. The title of Form 1040 actually refers to a return of taxes on the income of “U.S. Individuals”. So, what is a “U.S. Individual” in this context?
The answer to this question can be found at section 7701(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”). At subsection 7701(a)(1), the general term “person” is expressly defined to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation. Thus, “person” refers to both living and artificial entities. An “individual” is the only living entity to which the term “person” refers; all other entities mentioned in that definition are artificial or fictitious entities, like corporations and trusts. Therefore, the term “U.S. Individual” on IRS Form 1040 refers only to the individual variant of “U.S. person” and not to any of its fictitious variants.
At IRC subsection 7701(a)(30), the term “United States person” is also expressly defined to mean both living and artificial entities. Here, the only living entities embraced by that definition are “citizens and residents of the United States”. If one has never been exposed to the terms “citizen of the United States” and “resident of the United States” then what follows may be the most difficult lesson to learn from this memorandum. Nevertheless, it is a lesson that is absolutely essential, if one is to appreciate the full extent of the frauds and deliberate deceptions that are incorporated into the IRC.
By reviewing all of the additional documents which are attached, you will hopefully come to learn that there are two (2) classes of citizens under American laws never repealed, not one (1) class.
These two classes are now uniquely identified as State Citizens and federal citizens. After much difficult research and litigation, my office has now proven conclusively that the term “citizen of the United States” is legally synonymous with federal citizen. The term “resident of the United States” is less difficult to understand, because it refers to the status of a RESIDENT ALIEN as that text appears on green cards, i.e. an individual human being who has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence in America, but is not a citizen of either class.
For reasons that will become more obvious to you as you study and master the enclosed documents, we have chosen to utilize the term “federal citizen” because it is not so easily confused with the primary class of Citizens of ONE OF the United States of America. Federal citizens are individuals who are subject to all the local statutes, rules and regulations which Congress has authorized when legislating in its capacity as the Legislature for places like D.C., Guam, Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Puerto Rico. These are places that are not States of the Union, because they have no Governors, no State courts, no State legislatures, no U.S. Representatives and no U.S. Senators. They are not stars on the American flag; they are in the blue field on the American flag.
Strictly speaking, federal citizenship is a federal municipal franchise that is domiciled in the District of Columbia and, as such, it subjects all federal citizens to the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Congress (where there are no State governments).
Purposes of Form W-9
With this correct understanding of the key legal terms that are used on IRS Form W-9, the stated purposes of that form now make a lot more sense. Specifically, under the heading “Purpose of Form” on our reference W-9 we find:
U.S. person. Use Form W-9 only if you are a U.S. person (including a resident alien) to provide your correct TIN to the person requesting it (the requester) ...
Foreign person. If you are a foreign person, use the appropriate Form W-8 (see Pub. 515, Withholding of Tax on Nonresident Aliens and Foreign Entities) [underlined emphasis added]
Here, it is essential to observe that Form W-9 is expressly intended for use only by “U.S. persons” and, as far as individuals are concerned, this term includes only federal citizens and resident aliens (with green cards). In this context, the term “U.S. person” does NOT embrace or refer to any Citizens of the 50 States, because the latter superior class of State Citizens are not subject to the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Congress. They are only subject to the laws which Congress enacts whenever it legislates in its capacity as the Legislature for the entire nation. State Citizens are not subject to any federal municipal laws.
Now comes perhaps the most difficult lesson to be learned from this memorandum. The term “internal” in the IRC is legally synonymous with the term “municipal”. Municipal laws are those laws which a lawmaking body enacts to govern the internal affairs of a State or nation. Because the District of Columbia is not a State of the Union, there is no separate State Legislature for D.C., and Congress is responsible for governing that limited area. The Internal Revenue Code, then, is really a Municipal Revenue Code. Full details proving this stunning conclusion can be found in the book entitled “The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue” which this writer first published in the year 1992 A.D. The eleventh edition is available for free at this Internet URL:
Whenever Congress enacts such laws, they are called municipal laws, and the respective municipal laws of each Union State are legally “foreign” with respect to D.C. and to each other. As far as their internal affairs are concerned, the 50 States are legally foreign with respect to each other, as each is legally foreign with respect to D.C. The term “foreign” also has a different meaning, one which is more widely understood to refer to foreign countries like France and Russia. However, that is not the correct legal meaning of “foreign” whenever municipal laws are being discussed. To illustrate, on IRS Form 2555 the term “foreign earned income” refers to income earned inside the 50 States of the Union by “U.S. persons”.
With this important lesson in mind, it is now comparatively easy to prove that State Citizens who are not also federal citizens necessarily fall into the category of “foreign persons” as that term is used on IRS Form W-9. As such, they are correctly instructed to utilize the appropriate Form W-8 -- Certificate of Foreign Status -- instead of Form W-9. See Treasury Decision 2313 (enclosed) for proof.
It is very interesting to note, in this context, that Form W‑8 is the only IRS form which permits substitutes to be signed and certified. In simple terms, a proper substitute Form W-8 is also a Certificate of Foreign Status: it certifies that your worker does not live or work within any area that is subject to federal municipal jurisdiction; but, it does not certify that the worker originates in a foreign country like France, because such is not the correct legal meaning of the term “foreign” in this context. Your company must accept a substitute Form W-8 in lieu of the IRS version of Form W-8.
To reiterate a point we made above, IRS Form W-9 is very clear where it provides a warning of possible criminal penalties for falsifying information, to wit: “Willfully falsifying certifications or affirmations may subject you to criminal penalties including fines and/or imprisonment.” And, anyone who would suborn perjury by someone else is guilty of subornation of perjury –- another federal offense! Thus, if behooves you and your co-workers to achieve mastery of the key legal terms that are being used on Form W-9 and that are also being widely misunderstood by many Americans, due to deliberate fraud on the part of the Internal Revenue Service.
Taxpayer Identification Numbers
As far as individuals and not fictitious entities are concerned, Congress has already authorized the use of Social Security Numbers as Tax Identification Numbers (“TIN”). There is no real debate about that particular authorization. The debate that is currently raging concerns with the original intent of the Social Security Act, and its long-term consequences for people who volunteered to participate in that system (whether or not they are citizens of either class) but are not yet eligible to receive benefits from it, e.g. the Baby Boom.
For our purposes here, it is essential to appreciate that the original Social Security Act of 1935 contained no provisions which expressly required participation by anyone in that federal government program. Also, what is less well known about Social Security is that the original Act of 1935 was also federal municipal law (see above). In that Act of Congress the term “State” was expressly restricted to those areas that are within the federal zone. The famous letter which Congresswoman Barbara Kennelly received from the “legal experts” in federal statutory construction confirms its municipal character:
Perhaps the single most important feature of Social Security is that it has now been correctly identified as a Ponzi Scheme, or pyramid scheme. As such, Social Security violates the laws of many States that prohibit insurance fraud. Social Security is identified in federal laws as the Federal Insurance Contributions Act or “FICA”: the “I” obviously means “Insurance”. In the summer of 2000 A.D., in an anonymous editorial (enclosed) The Wall Street Journal correctly identified Social Security as a Ponzi Scheme. For this reason alone, State Citizens who are striving to obey the law, and to avoid any involvement in fraudulent Ponzi Schemes, have every right to withdraw completely from all participation in the Social Security system.
In this context, therefore, even if a worker was at one time assigned a Social Security Number (“SSN”), that assignment was most probably made on the basis of false and rebuttable premises, e.g. the worker was a minor not old enough to consummate valid contracts; the SSN was presented as mandatory and not voluntary; the municipal nature of the system was never disclosed or explained; and so on.
Public Law 93-579 also reinforces these important revelations. Here, Congress has mandated that all federal government agencies must disclose the specific statutes by which they claim any authority to deprive people of any rights, benefits or privileges solely because they decline to disclose a SSN. If no such statute exists to mandate its disclosure, then disclosure of an SSN cannot be required. Furthermore, the federal statute at 42 U.S.C. 408(a)(8) makes it a federal felony to compel disclosure of a Social Security Number in violation of any laws of the United States (like P.L. 93-579).
In summary, therefore, your company may “request” an SSN, but such a request does not create any obligation in a worker to provide one.
Please feel free now to review all of the supporting documents which we have enclosed for your information, and especially for you to confirm what we have now summarized above.
If there is any further assistance we can provide, please direct your questions first to Mr. Doe’s counsel.
Thank you for your consideration.
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
qualified Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
copy: Counsel to John Q. Doe (in triplicate)