Time: Fri Dec 05 17:14:13 1997 To: Jay Robbins <han-wi@ri.ultranet.com> From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: More detail... Cc: Bcc: sls, friends, liberty lists, 3cc, psc References: I would prefer that you read and study Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF in the Supreme Law Library first, then come back to us here with any questions which still remain. Here's the chain of evidence: 1. voter registrants must declare, under penalty of perjury, that they are federal citizens 2. the regulations at 26 CFR 1.1-1 impose the federal income tax on federal citizens 3. consequently, the fundamental Right to choose U.S. Representatives, has the unavoidable consequence of creating a federal income tax liability, under color of regulations 4. regulations are not valid, if they are overly broad extensions of the underlying statutes 5. the ONLY liability statutes, as such, for the federal income tax, are those which are itemized in the definition of "withholding agent" at IRC 7701(a)(16) 6. there are no liability statutes, as such, in Section 1 of the IRC 7. 26 CFR 1.1-1 contains the regs which correspond to Section 1 of the IRC This sequence is fully elaborated in the book "The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue," first published in 1992, and cited as a household word by Justice Kennedy concurring in U.S. v. Lopez, S.Ct. (1995). I hope this helps. /s/ Paul Mitchell, Candidate for Congress http://supremelaw.com At 05:17 PM 12/5/97, you wrote: >Can you elaborate on this, and how did you reach this conclusion? > > >You wrote: > >Because of 26 CFR 1.1-1(a) thru (c), electing >federal citizenship causes a tax to be imposed >on the Right to choose U.S. Representatives, >when such a Right is un-lien-able!! We have >also attacked these regs for being an overly >broad extension of the corresponding statutes >in the IRC. > Jay Robbins > 4 Your Information > PO Box 672 > Woonsocket, RI 02895 > Email: han-wi@ri.ultranet.com > Voicemail:1-800-947-1902 > Website: http://www.ultranet.com/~han-wi > IRS: We've got what it takes, to take what you've got. > > > > >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail