[Notorial dissent]

Trusts are generally domiciled in the state a person is living in in order to be effective, as a matter of convenience.

Since they were all busted for tax violations, and there being nothing said about it in the case summaries, the people involved can be assumed to be U S citizens and the trusts domiciled within the US, and most likely within the state they were charged from. My basis for this being that they were busted for tax violations and not violations of foreign trusts, which would have been a whole other set of charges. I wasn’t talking about the trustees in any point, I was talking about the people busted for tax violations, but it is most likely that they were trustees as well.

Sorry statement should have been “ However, domicile does NOT alter the fact that they were being used illegally.”, I have a keyboard that is not well and I don’t always catch it before I post.

I’m sorry if I misunderstood you.

I agree, that change of domicile has an effect on the governing laws, but the laws under which it was formed are the controlling ones, regardless of where they move to. All that aside, there isn’t all that much difference state to state for most of these do to uniform trust standards, and IRS requirements, which actually drive the entire matter any way.

The treaty you are referring to is basically an international version of our constitution’s full faith and credit article. The point being that the trust has to be legal and recognized by the nation it was drawn under.

In

Defendant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is an agency of the United States government which has presented to Plaintiff a lien against monies to which Defendant Steve Morgan, or presumably Defendant T-Bow Company Trust for him, may be entitled.

The phrase is an agency is the key part, and the rebuttal is correct. The IRS is technically a bureau of the Treasury, but it is not an agency of the government in the sense they were trying to use. While I realize this is mostly semantics, for all practical purposes, the IRS is nothing more than a group of people with a special task within the confines of the Department of the Treasury. As such they have no separate existence outside of the Treasury, and by act of law, they cannot be sued as there is not an entity to sue, and for the same reason, the Treasury cannot be sued. If someone is going to sue, the party they can sue is the US. I don’t pretend to understand why they did it this way, but they did, and if you want to sue the IRS, the proper party to be sued is the US.

It is no different than having an argument with the collections department of a department store. You cannot sue the collections department as they do not exist separately of the department store. If you want to sue, you have to sue the department store. The same logic applies here.

The Treasury Department is created under authority of the constitution and fleshed out by act of congress. Within the Treasury, the various units are created either by statute or by general authority of the Secretary to carry on the treasury’s business. In most cases there will be some congressional action directing the Secretary to take on some function and giving the authority to set up that part of the internal bureaucracy.

The IRS is/was created by order of the congress by act of law, its employees are treasury department employees and subject to the Secretary of the Treasury and their immediate supervisor the Director of Internal Revenue.

The IRS is not a collection agency and not subject to FDCPA.

The IRS in one form or another has been in existence since 1862, but it has been reformed a great many times since then. I doubt if any of the 1862 act is still in force.

I believe that the bureau designation came out of the teens, but don’t really remember, it is just a convenient term of use as most groups within a Government Department are usually referred to as bureaus. As I remember, somewhere on the IRS site is a historical record that should have the changes that have happened over the years. There is also a public information office at the Treasury that would have the information as well.