Vance E. Knudson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Nebraska state
c/o General Delivery
Hastings [zip code exempt]
NEBRASKA STATE
In Propria Persona
All Rights Reserved
without prejudice
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [sic], ) Case No. 4:CV96-3275
)
Plaintiff [sic], ) MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
) AUTHORITIES PROVING
v. ) THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF
) FEDERAL INCOME TAXES:
VANCE E. KNUDSON [sic], )
) Rules 201(d), 301, 302,
Defendant [sic]. ) Federal Rules of Evidence;
________________________________) Full Faith and Credit Clause
COMES NOW Vance E. Knudson, Sui Juris, Citizen of Nebraska state,
expressly not a citizen of the United States ("federal citizen"),
and Defendant in the above entitled matter (hereinafter
"Defendant"), to provide formal Notice to all interested
party(s), and to demand mandatory judicial notice by this
honorable Court, pursuant to Rules 201(d), 301, and 302 of the
Federal Rules of Evidence, of this, Defendant's MEMORANDUM OF
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES PROVING THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF FEDERAL
INCOME TAXES, particularly for all judges who may attempt, or be
assigned, to preside over proceedings before this United States
District Court ("USDC") in the instant case, in violation of
Defendant's fundamental guarantee to an independent and unbiased
judiciary at Article III, Section 1, in the U.S. Constitution.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 1 of 13
1. Evans v. Gore, 253 U.S. 245 (1920) is controlling,
notwithstanding the so-called 16th Amendment, because said
"amendment" never repealed Article III, Section 1. Repeals by
implication are not favored, on authority of the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals. See U.S. v. Hicks, [cite omitted] (9th Cir.,
1991). Evans has never been overturned (see Shepard's
Citations), notwithstanding a UCLA Law Review article which
alleges the contrary. See Vol. 24, No. 2, December 1976, p. 308.
2. The 16th Amendment was effectively demolished by
respondent's total silence in People v. Boxer, California Supreme
Court, case number S-030016, December 1992. This case was a
Petition for Writ of Mandamus compelling Senator-elect Boxer to
witness the material evidence which the plaintiffs had assembled
against the ratification of that proposal. The California
Supreme Court transferred the case to the Court of Appeals, for
an advisory opinion; that appellate panel denied the petition,
without explanation. However, respondent Boxer fell totally and
completely silent in the face of the affidavits of fact filed in
that case; those affidavits have now become the truth of the
case. Moreover, Boxer's silence is a fraud, pursuant to U. S. v.
Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977); and silence activates estoppel,
pursuant to Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932 (1906). See point 15.
3. Title 26, United States Code ("U.S.C."), has never been
enacted into positive law. Therefore, Title 1, U.S.C., and
Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") section 7851(a)(6)(A) both control;
specifically, the provisions of subtitle F have never taken
effect. Subtitle F contains all the enforcement provisions of
the IRC including, but not limited to, the grant of original
jurisdiction to enforce United States (federal government)
internal revenue laws. See 26 U.S.C. 7402 [sic]. There are no
regulations for this statute either, thus limiting its
application to federal officers, employees, and contract agents
of the United States (federal government), pursuant to 44 U.S.C.
1505(a). Title 44, U.S.C., has been enacted into positive law.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 2 of 13
4. As far as the federal income tax is concerned, the only
liability statutes anywhere in the IRC (as distinct from Title
26) are found in the provisions for withholding agents [sic].
See IRC 1441, 1442, 1443, 1461, and the statutory definition of
"withholding agent" at IRC 7701(a)(16). One does not become a
withholding agent until and unless said agent accepts a valid W-4
"Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate" (allowing
withholding). For many reasons like this, the federal income tax
is totally voluntary on compensation for services rendered.
5. The regulations at 26 CFR 1.1-1(a) thru (c) are overly
broad for imposing liabilities which are not authorized by
statute, specifically, on "citizens of the United States" [sic]
and on "residents of the United States" [sic]. The doctrine of
"implied legislative approval" cannot prevail against all the
points supra. See Old Colony R. Co. v. C.I.R., 284 U.S. 552, 557
(1932), for example. Authorities must be expressly enumerated.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury was never authorized by any
Act of Congress to extend liability for the federal income tax in
such an overly broad fashion, as is the case in said regulations.
6. The term "citizen of the United States" has its
statutory origin in the 1866 Civil Rights Act, and its
constitutional origin in the so-called 14th Amendment [sic],
which was never lawfully ratified, rendering section 4 of that
alleged amendment null and void ab initio, and permitting federal
judges, and all other federal employees, to question the validity
of the public debt. See the First Amendment; Dyett v. Turner,
439 P.2d 266 (1968); State v. Phillips, 540 P.2d 936 (1975).
Section 4 of the so-called 14th Amendment is one of the least
litigated provisions in the entire U.S. Constitution, unlike
other sections of that so-called amendment.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 3 of 13
7. The only basis remaining for taxing the compensation of
federal judges is the Downes Doctrine, which cannot be extended
into the state zone, nor to the judges who preside on federal
courts established for the state zone, i.e. the DCUS. The Downes
Doctrine is obsolete and unconstitutional, because Justice Harlan
was correct in his eloquent dissent in Downes v. Bidwell, 182
U.S. 244 (1901), paraphrasing now: the limitations of the
Constitution extend to the farthest reaches of the known
universe, as far as United States (federal government) employees
are concerned. The Downes Doctrine has permitted a serious tear
to rip the fabric of Our constitutional Republic, as manifested
by the controversy now swirling about the proper distinction
between United States District Courts ("USDC") and the District
Courts of the United States ("DCUS"), their respective subject
matter(s), and their respective territorial jurisdiction(s).
8. The Downes Doctrine was attacked properly In re Grand
Jury Subpoena Served on New Life Health Center Company, USDC
Arizona, Tucson, case number #GJ-95-1-6, but U.S. District Judge
John M. Roll exceeded his discretion in that case by failing to
rule on numerous proper and timely motions which were before him,
including a formal challenge to the constitutionality of the
Downes Doctrine. Judge Roll committed over 112 felonies in that
one case alone, and a proper judicial complaint has been filed
against Judge Roll, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 372(c). See Ninth
Circuit docket number assigned to that complaint, available from
the Clerk of the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, California
state. All pleadings, exhibits, and related documents filed in
that case are incorporated here by reference, as if set forth
fully herein, pursuant to Rule 201(d) of the Federal Rules of
Evidence, and the Full Faith and Credit Clause. See Supremacy
Clause; Seventh Amendment; FRCP Rule 38.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 4 of 13
9. Title 31, U.S.C., has been enacted into positive law,
pursuant to Title 1, U.S.C., but the "Internal Revenue Service"
[sic] is not listed in the organizational structure of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury. The only mention is an authority for
the President to appoint the General Counsel for the "Internal
Revenue Service" [sic]. This mention is insufficient to identify
the true organizational situs of the "Internal Revenue Service"
(hereinafter "IRS"). See "The Cooper File" filed separately.
10. The IRS has now been proven to be an alias for Trust
#62, which is domiciled in Puerto Rico under the Federal Alcohol
Administration ("FAA"), but the FAA was declared unconstitutional
in the year 1935 by the U.S. Supreme Court. The FAA had its
historical roots in Prohibition, which was motivated by the goal
of monopolizing automotive fuels for the benefit of the petroleum
cartel. See the Volstead Act and the attached Affidavit of
author Paul Andrew Mitchell, summarizing this motive; said
Affidavit is incorporated by reference as if set forth fully
herein. See also "The Cooper File," filed separately and
concurrently by Defendant in the instant case.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 5 of 13
11. Taxing the compensation of federal employees creates an
unnecessary and deceptive bureaucracy, the primary purpose of
which is to skim money from the U.S. Treasury, for the benefit of
foreign banks and their alien owners. Congress should advertise
the "real" compensation paid to federal employees, and exempt
them from filing returns and from paying taxes on an "inflated"
salary, only a part of which the federal employee ever sees. For
this reason, the Public Salary Tax Act should be repealed,
because its deceptive purpose is unconstitutional.
12. The court of original jurisdiction to enforce United
States (federal government) internal revenue laws is defined in a
statute which is found in subtitle F. See 26 U.S.C. 7402.
Subtitle F has never taken effect because Title 26 has never been
enacted into positive law. For this reason alone, criminal
prosecutions of alleged IRC violations are legally impossible,
and they create a massive tort liability for the United States
(federal government). See People v. United States et al., DCUS,
Billings, Montana state, as a foundation for quantifying the real
damages which have already been done by the IRS and the U.S.
Department of Justice to untold numbers of American Citizens
(read "Citizens of ONE OF the States united").
13. All United States (federal government) actions, civil
and criminal, which were done under authority of the Secretary of
the Treasury during Lloyd Bentsen's tenure in that office, were
ultra vires because he violated the U.S. Constitution when he
voted to increase the pay for that office, as a U.S. Senator, and
then he vacated his Senate seat to claim the office of Secretary.
However, Lloyd Bentsen was not eligible for that office until the
end of his last Senate term. See Article I, Section 6, Clause 2.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 6 of 13
A FOIA request for a list of all civil and criminal cases
which were brought under his watch has not been answered to date.
This, again, has created a massive tort liability for the United
States (see point 12 above). Failure to answer this FOIA is
tantamount to fraud and obstruction of justice, not to mention a
host of other criminal torts. See IRC 7401 for the implications;
see also U.S.A. v. One 1972 Cadillac Coupe De Ville, 355 F.Supp.
513, 515 (1973). Failure to place proof of requisite
jurisdictional facts in the court record, when specifically
denied, is fatal to any court action. However, IRC 7401 is also
found in subtitle F of the IRC (see discussion at point 3 supra).
14. Lloyd Bentsen was unable to delegate any authority
downwards during the period in which he claimed to occupy the
office of Secretary of the Treasury. This disability has meant
that all tax assessments which were made by the IRS (as opposed
to voluntary taxpayer self-assessments) were ultra vires per
force during said term, because the assessment officers could not
exercise any delegated authority. See U.S. v. Brafman, 384 F.2d
863, 867 (5th Cir. 1967) for a court authority holding that
assessment officers must sign assessments before they can be
valid; without delegation of authority, the signatures are not
those of assessment officers. Lex non cogit impossibilia.
The IRC defines the term "Secretary" to mean the "Secretary
of the Treasury or his delegate"; without delegation, there can
be no delegates. Without an authorized officer to head the U.S.
Department of the Treasury, there can be no Secretary of the
Treasury, and hence no Secretary whatsoever, under any
circumstances. Delegation was, therefore, impossible.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 7 of 13
15. Janet Reno is now unable to delegate any authority
downwards either, due to her failure to produce certified
evidence of her requisite Oath of Office and related credentials,
upon receipt of a proper request for same, submitted under
authority of the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"); upon
receipt of a proper appeal for same, submitted under authority of
the FOIA; and upon receipt of an additional 10-day courtesy
notice for same, the latter of which is not required to exhaust
administrative remedies under the FOIA.
This failure has meant that all civil and criminal actions
brought to enforce U.S. internal revenue laws during her alleged
term were ultra vires per force, because IRC 7401 requires prior
authorization of the Attorney General or her delegate; without
delegation, there can be no delegates. Without an authorized
officer to head the U.S. Department of Justice, there can be no
Attorney General, and hence no law enforcement authority
whatsoever, under any circumstances. Delegation was, therefore,
impossible. Janet Reno is now estopped from producing her
requisite credentials, pursuant to Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932
(1906), and her continued silence is a fraud upon all American
People, pursuant to U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977).
16. The Appointment Affidavits signed by IRS employees are
unconscionable contracts, because they express the employees'
contractual commitment to support the U.S. Constitution;
however, it is quite simply impossible for Citizens to enforce,
and it is also impossible for public employees to obey, their
solemn oaths to support the U.S. Constitution, if the weight of
material evidence now proves that the exact provisions of that
Constitution are still in doubt, for any reason. See discussion
of 14th and 16th amendments [sic] supra; also People v. Boxer
supra. This question concerning the equitable nature of Oaths of
Office was specifically raised in People v. Boxer.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 8 of 13
17. Again, the respondents In re Grand Jury Subpoena supra
properly and timely raised this objection, when the first
Appointment Affidavit was produced by the "Special Agent" ("SA")
[sic] in that case, in response to a proper request brought under
the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"); but U.S. District Judge
John M. Roll abused his discretion by failing to rule on that
motion, and decided instead to commit over 100 felonies,
including but not limited to 28 counts of obstructing mail, 28
counts of jury tampering, 28 counts of obstruction of justice,
and 28 counts of conspiracy to commit all of the above.
Judge Roll did, however, rule that the USDC is not the
proper forum to bring a request under the Freedom of Information
Act ("FOIA"). See 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B). If the USDC is not the
proper forum to bring a request under the FOIA, then neither is
it the proper forum for prosecuting any criminal violations of
Title 18, U.S.C. See 18 U.S.C. 3231, and rules of statutory
construction in Title 1, U.S.C. Singular and plural refer to the
same entity always. Title 1, U.S.C., has been enacted into
positive law. See Supremacy Clause. The Administrative Office
of the United States Courts has alleged, in writing, that U.S.
District Judge John M. Roll is an Article III judge.
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 9 of 13
18. U.S. Rep. Barbara Kennelly has admitted, on House
stationery transmitted through the United States Postal Service
("USPS"), that the term "State" at IRC 3121(e) is restricted to
the named territories and possessions, and does not include the
several states of the Union. She put this admission in writing,
after first consulting with "experts" in the office of the
Legislative Counsel, and also in the office of the Congressional
Research Service. Rep. Kennelly's admission provides absolutely
stunning support for the main (and highly controversial) thesis
of a book entitled "The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of
Internal Revenue." Not long after publication of the printed
first edition in 1992, the Supreme Court of the United States
utilized the term "federal zone" as a household word in their
sweeping decision in U.S. v. Lopez, 115 S.Ct. 1624 (1995),
Kennedy concurring. The term "federal zone" now has a permanent
place in the history of American constitutional jurisprudence.
19. In 1953, Mr. Dwight E. Avis, head of the Alcohol and
Tobacco Tax Division of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, made the
following remarkable statement to a subcommittee of the Committee
on Ways and Means in the House of Representatives:
Let me point this out now: Your income tax is 100 percent
voluntary tax, and your liquor tax is 100 percent enforced
tax. Now, the situation is as different as day and night.
[Internal Revenue Investigation]
[Committee on Ways and Means]
[Feb. 3 thru Mar. 13, 1953, emphasis added]
20. In 1971, the following quote was found in the IRS
instruction booklet for Form 1040:
Each year American taxpayers voluntarily file their tax
returns and make a special effort to pay the taxes they owe.
[emphasis added]
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 10 of 13
21. In 1974, Donald C. Alexander, Commissioner of Internal
Revenue, published the following statement in the March 29 issue
of The Federal Register:
The mission of the Service is to encourage and achieve the
highest possible degree of voluntary compliance with the tax
laws and regulations ....
[Vol. 39, No. 62, page 11572]
[emphasis added]
22. One year later, in 1975, his successor, Mortimer Caplin
authored the following statement in the Internal Revenue Audit
Manual:
Our tax system is based on individual self-assessment and
voluntary compliance.
[emphasis added]
23. In 1980, yet another IRS Commissioner, Jerome Kurtz
(their turnover is high) issued a similar statement in their
Internal Revenue Annual Report:
The IRS's primary task is to collect taxes under a voluntary
compliance system.
[emphasis added]
24. Even the Supreme Court of the United States has held
that the system of federal income taxation is voluntary:
Our tax system is based upon voluntary assessment and
payment, not upon distraint.
[Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145]
[emphasis added]
The dictionary defines "distraint" to mean the act or action of
distraining, that is, seizing by distress, levying a distress, or
taking property by force.
25. IRS Publication 21 is widely distributed to high
schools. It acknowledges that compliance with a law that
requires the filing of returns is voluntary. At the same time,
it suggests that the filing of a return is mandatory, as follows:
Two aspects of the Federal income tax system -- voluntary
compliance with the law and self-assessment of tax -- make
it important for you to understand your rights and
responsibilities as a taxpayer. "Voluntary compliance"
places on the taxpayer the responsibility for filing an
income tax return. You must decide whether the law requires
you to file a return. If it does, you must file your return
by the date it is due.
[emphasis added]
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 11 of 13
VERIFICATION
I, Vance E. Knudson, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty of
perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without
(outside) the "United States", that the above statements of fact
and law are true and correct, to the best of My current
information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
Dated: ______________________________
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Vance Knudson
_____________________________________
Vance E. Knudson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Nebraska state
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 12 of 13
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, Vance E. Knudson, Sui Juris, hereby certify, under penalty of
perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without
the "United States," that I am at least 18 years of age, a
Citizen of ONE OF the United States of America, and that I
personally served the following document(s):
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
PROVING THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF FEDERAL INCOME TAXES:
Rules 201(d), 301, and 302, Federal Rules of Evidence;
Full Faith and Credit Clause
by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first
class United States Mail, with postage prepaid and properly
addressed to the following:
SALLY R. JOHNSON
Office of U.S. Attorney
487 Federal Building
100 Centennial Mall North
Lincoln [zip code exempt]
NEBRASKA STATE
ROBERT D. METCALFE
Trial Attorney, Tax Division
U.S. Department of Justice
c/o POB 7238, Ben Franklin Station
Washington [zip code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Dated: __________________________________
/s/ Vance Knudson
__________________________________________
Vance E. Knudson, Sui Juris
Citizen of Nebraska state
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
[See USPS Publication #221 for addressing instructions.]
Memo of P & A on Voluntary Nature of Federal Income Taxes:
Page 13 of 13
# # #
Return to Table of Contents for
U.S.A. v. Knudson