Should we send them a â€œAdministrative Notice?â€

suijuris · #1 10-06-2003, 08:16 PM

A while back I purchased a short guide on Administrative Notices from the Aware Group. While it did not give a great deal of info on this mysterious tool, it did give the logic behind it. It has been a while since I read it so I am rather fuzzy, but the premise was something like this:

Since most cases are heard administratively, and not judicially, one is wasting ones effort in having the court take â€œJudicial Notice.â€ So, they should be taking â€œAdministrative Noticeâ€ instead. All public officials, judges, lawyers, and most corporate officials, operate under the good old â€œignorance is blissâ€ theory, and unless given notice of applicable laws, can claim that they have â€œgood faith immunityâ€. In other words, since nobody can ever know all the laws of this country, government officials are allowed a healthy allotment of mistakes based on there claim to ignorance of the law.

Enter the â€œAdministrative Noticeâ€, this is touted by the author to give constructive notice to the certain parties BEFORE the fact, so they cannot take certain unlawful actions and later claim ignorance. The author made a few applications to this theory, and a minor example or so, but there did not seem to be to much muscle to the tool and since I could not think of any applications at the time I gave it little consideration.

But now, I think this may be a good way to serve certain parties (read IRS, SSA, etc) with the proper form of notice PRIOR to any possible action on their part, after one becomes aware of his citizenship status.

I do not contest that there are other legitimate forms of notice that these parties could be served that SHOULD work just as well (in theory), but the bottom line is that some forms of communication is simply brushed aside and can cost the sender valuable time in the future, dealing with more unwanted action. The purpose is to find a form of notice that effectively presses the MUTE button on the whole U.S. corp. soap opera. 

The government is&bound by law to accept substance over form, but they will&honor form more quickly than substance. Two can play that game, so I ask, what is the correct form? I have substance to my claim of your jurisdiction, in what FORM would you like NOTICE?

Your thoughts are appreciated, as always!
Sui Juris

suijuris · #2 10-06-2003, 08:16 PM

A while back I purchased a short guide on Administrative Notices from the Aware Group. While it did not give a great deal of info on this mysterious tool, it did give the logic behind it. It has been a while since I read it so I am rather fuzzy, but the premise was something like this:

Since most cases are heard administratively, and not judicially, one is wasting ones effort in having the court take â€œJudicial Notice.â€ So, they should be taking â€œAdministrative Noticeâ€ instead. All public officials, judges, lawyers, and most corporate officials, operate under the good old â€œignorance is blissâ€ theory, and unless given notice of applicable laws, can claim that they have â€œgood faith immunityâ€. In other words, since nobody can ever know all the laws of this country, government officials are allowed a healthy allotment of mistakes based on there claim to ignorance of the law.

Enter the â€œAdministrative Noticeâ€, this is touted by the author to give constructive notice to the certain parties BEFORE the fact, so they cannot take certain unlawful actions and later claim ignorance. The author made a few applications to this theory, and a minor example or so, but there did not seem to be to much muscle to the tool and since I could not think of any applications at the time I gave it little consideration.

But now, I think this may be a good way to serve certain parties (read IRS, SSA, etc) with the proper form of notice PRIOR to any possible action on their part, after one becomes aware of his citizenship status.

I do not contest that there are other legitimate forms of notice that these parties could be served that SHOULD work just as well (in theory), but the bottom line is that some forms of communication is simply brushed aside and can cost the sender valuable time in the future, dealing with more unwanted action. The purpose is to find a form of notice that effectively presses the MUTE button on the whole U.S. corp. soap opera. 

The government is&bound by law to accept substance over form, but they will&honor form more quickly than substance. Two can play that game, so I ask, what is the correct form? I have substance to my claim of your jurisdiction, in what FORM would you like NOTICE?

Your thoughts are appreciated, as always!
Sui Juris

Ice · #3 10-06-2003, 09:36 PM

There is link with my last post found in "Court" in regards to "jurisdiction."& So, with my statements in regards to the SS-5 form... let's go a bit further into the "jurisdictional" issue and the proper "notice" that is needed.& And I quote:

"I am enclosing a completed Certificate of Foreign Status[/b] [W-8], that John Lyons, Assistant to Commissioner International of Foreign Operations, Office of the Director of Foreign Operations in Washington, DC, indicated was needed in order to officially change the deceptive status on SS-5 from â€œU.S. Citizenâ€ to American Citizen.

The Certificate of Foreign Status, according to Mr. Lyons in his governmental capacity, clearly indicates that, as an American Citizen [united by and under the Constitution], I am a foreigner to the exclusive jurisdiction and absolute sovereignty of the Congress of the United States and have no citizenship there."
Also:
&
The following comments are to be considered as STATEMENTS OF THE FACTS, as I understand them at this time.& My authority for this change in citizenship status derives from 26 CFR Â§ 301.6109-1(g):<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o

></o

>
<o

>&</o

>
(g) Special rules for taxpayer identifying numbers issued to foreign personsâ€”(1) General ruleâ€”(i) Social security number. A social security number is generally identified in the records and database of the Internal Revenue Service as a number belonging to a [/i]<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region><st1

lace>U.S.[/i]</st1

lace></st1:country-region> citizen or resident alien individual. A person may establish a different status for the number by providing proof of foreign status with the Internal Revenue Service under such procedures as the Internal Revenue Service shall prescribe, including the use of a form as the Internal Revenue Service may specify. Upon accepting an individual as a nonresident alien individual, the Internal Revenue Service will assign this status to the individualâ€™s social security number.<o></o>[/i]
&
Now, how is that?& Does that do the trick?
&

Ice · #4 10-06-2003, 09:36 PM

There is link with my last post found in "Court" in regards to "jurisdiction."& So, with my statements in regards to the SS-5 form... let's go a bit further into the "jurisdictional" issue and the proper "notice" that is needed.& And I quote:

"I am enclosing a completed Certificate of Foreign Status[/b] [W-8], that John Lyons, Assistant to Commissioner International of Foreign Operations, Office of the Director of Foreign Operations in Washington, DC, indicated was needed in order to officially change the deceptive status on SS-5 from â€œU.S. Citizenâ€ to American Citizen.

The Certificate of Foreign Status, according to Mr. Lyons in his governmental capacity, clearly indicates that, as an American Citizen [united by and under the Constitution], I am a foreigner to the exclusive jurisdiction and absolute sovereignty of the Congress of the United States and have no citizenship there."
Also:
&
The following comments are to be considered as STATEMENTS OF THE FACTS, as I understand them at this time.& My authority for this change in citizenship status derives from 26 CFR Â§ 301.6109-1(g):<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o

></o

>
<o

>&</o

>
(g) Special rules for taxpayer identifying numbers issued to foreign personsâ€”(1) General ruleâ€”(i) Social security number. A social security number is generally identified in the records and database of the Internal Revenue Service as a number belonging to a [/i]<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region><st1

lace>U.S.[/i]</st1

lace></st1:country-region> citizen or resident alien individual. A person may establish a different status for the number by providing proof of foreign status with the Internal Revenue Service under such procedures as the Internal Revenue Service shall prescribe, including the use of a form as the Internal Revenue Service may specify. Upon accepting an individual as a nonresident alien individual, the Internal Revenue Service will assign this status to the individualâ€™s social security number.<o></o>[/i]
&
Now, how is that?& Does that do the trick?
&

suijuris · #5 10-06-2003, 09:38 PM

That should effectively serve the purpose! And while we are on this topic, I think certified mailing + green card is an&acceptable form of delivery. Any thoughts?

suijuris · #6 10-06-2003, 09:38 PM

That should effectively serve the purpose! And while we are on this topic, I think certified mailing + green card is an&acceptable form of delivery. Any thoughts?

Ice · #7 10-06-2003, 09:46 PM

I always use Registered Mail.& From what I understand, Registered Mail is the actual "government" doing the mailing... not the USPS.& But with that aside, I like the idea of having each leg of the trip it takes "monitored" and "noted" by the person handling the parcel.

My important papers/documents are always sent via registered mail.

&

Ice · #8 10-06-2003, 09:46 PM

I always use Registered Mail.& From what I understand, Registered Mail is the actual "government" doing the mailing... not the USPS.& But with that aside, I like the idea of having each leg of the trip it takes "monitored" and "noted" by the person handling the parcel.

My important papers/documents are always sent via registered mail.

&

suijuris · #9 10-06-2003, 09:48 PM

Gotcha

&

suijuris · #10 10-06-2003, 09:48 PM

Gotcha

&