Time: Wed Sep 03 00:12:31 1997
	by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA12117;
	Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:50:07 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 21:50:06 -0700
To: liberty-and-justice@pobox.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: The law says WHAT? (fwd)
References: <>

The withholding agent is liable for any
taxes withheld, but they are liable to 
the United States, not to the worker.

If a company is acting as a withholding
agent withOUT authorization, they become
liable for fraud and conversion, to the

To hold them harmless, as against the latter 
liability, would constitute a waiver 
of your right to sue them for this tort.

I would recommend against it, frankly.

Absent a valid W-4, the only other 
authorization which sanctions withholding,
is a court order, which comes at the end
of due process of law, pursuant to the
Fifth Amendment.  See IRC 3402(p), and
the regulations promulgated pursuant to
this whole section.

/s/ Paul Mitchell

At 09:29 PM 9/3/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Brad Barnhill wrote:
>> I have just sent a complete analysis to my (non-statutory) employer
>> picking
>> apart Subtitle C and showing that he is not an "employer" as defined
>> in the
>> code, and my compensation is not "employment" as defined in the code.
>> I just
>> got his return letter (and will post it this weekend) and he thinks
>> that the
>> definition for "United States" at 3121(e)(2) should be read to "also
>> include" the federal states that it lists. I phoned him and asked him
>> to
>> compare this to the definition of "United States" in
>> 7701(a)(whatever). He
>> will get back to me. I am wearing him down, and soon he will have
>> nowhere to
>> hide.
>> This series of letters can be found at:
>> http://www.mindspring.com/~bradbva/freedom/fontaine.htm
>> B
>I did all of the same things that you are doing and the legal counsel
>for the company I work for has stated, "Yeah, sure, we'll stop
>withholding if you sign a hold harmless agreement and post a bond
>so our client isn't liable". I asked them where I was liable or where
>their client was liable. "Liable for what", I asked in my letter (much
>substantive than this but this is the general idea). To which the only
>reply has been, "Mr. Martin the 'Circular E' publication states that the
>'employer' has to withhold taxes". I find it interesting that this law
>would base their client's entire position on a lawfully unenforceable
>document. Do you have any ideas on this offer to sign a hold harmless
>agreement and post a bond? I see potential problems with this route.
>Brooks Martin
>"Money only appeals to selfishness and irresistibly
>invites abuse. Can anyone imagine Moses, Jesus, or
>Gandhi armed with the money-bags of Carnegie?"
>                             -Albert Einstein 1934-
>Unsub info - send e-mail to majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com, with
>"unsubscribe liberty-and-justice" in the body (not the subject)
>Liberty-and-Justice list-owner is Mike Goldman <whig@pobox.com>

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
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

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail