Time: Thu Mar 27 07:51:06 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA28343; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 14:35:12 -0700 (MST) id QAA26578; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 16:25:10 -0500 (EST) id QAA26562; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 16:25:07 -0500 (EST) id AA07106; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 16:25:06 -0500 by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA11597; Thu, 27 Mar 1997 14:24:13 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 07:16:15 -0800 To: conchr-l@xc.org From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SNET: Are You Going to Pay? (or File) -> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List See, in particular, IRC 7851(a)(6)(A): General rule. "The provisions of subtitle F shall take effect on the day after the date of enactment of this title ...." The title has never been enacted, however, and subtitle F contains ALL the enforcement provisions, including filing requirements, and penalties for failing to file, etc. Furthermore, the ONLY liability statutes for Subtitle A income taxes are those which are listed in the definition of "withholding agents" at IRC 7701(a)(16). (The IRC and Title 26 are not one and the same, until such time as the title is enacted.) Withholding agents are, simply, those who accept valid W-4 Employee Withholding Allowance Certificates. They withhold money which belongs to the United States, so they (the withholding agents) are the ones who are liable to pay it. Until they do pay it, they remain liable. See Treasury Decision 2313 for proof. I am making a very deliberate, and careful, distinction here between statutes and regulations. Regulations are those rules which are published in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is considered a supplement to the Federal Register. The regulations which define a liability for federal income taxes are overly broad for creating a liability where no statutory authority exists for same (i.e. "citizens of the United States" and "residents of the United States"). Without a valid W-4, "employers" are not authorized to withhold ANYTHING from an "employee's" pay. For elaboration of this point, read IRC 3402(n): Certificate of Exemption from Withholding in lieu of W-4. I recommend that People execute, instead, an Affidavit of Exemption from Withholding in lieu of W-4, using whatever proven historical facts they feel are relevant. /s/ Paul Mitchell At 12:39 PM 3/27/97 PST, you wrote: > >Ron Harper wrote: >> Come on - can ya blame them?! The same government that gunned down a >> boy and a mother holding an infant (weavers) all over a set-up gun >> "violation" is in charge of collecting taxes. No one in their right >> mind - especially Paul! - is going to make any announcement as such >> over the internet where it is know to have FBI informants. > >If it is as *legal* as *they* claim it is, then I don't see a problem >announcing if they do it themselves. That's their point - they say it >is perfectly legal to not pay/file. > >These are fantastic claims and since no one can or will show me any proof >it works, I'm led to believe that it's just a bunch of hooey. > >Dave Eubanks >--------------------------- >David A. Eubanks >daeubank@naa.bna.boeing.com >------------------------------------------------------ >You can unsubscribe from this conference at any time. >Just send the command: unsubscribe conchr-l to <HUB@XC.ORG> > > ======================================================================== Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this ======================================================================== -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com -> Posted by: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail