[color=black][b](NOTE: THIS IS PURELY STATUTORY & SHOULD NOT BE USED IN PLEADINGS WHEN TRYING TO OPERATE IN THE COMMON LAW. THIS IS MEANT TO ONLY INFORM SOMEONE (Lawyer, etc . . ).AS TO THE STATUTORY NATURE OF LEVIES. Please proofread for any mistakes(small or large. This is intended only to motivate your employer or their lawyer to inquire as to the IRS authority for garnishment or levies. This was accomplished with the Help of The Crucified, Resurrected, & Ascended Messiah.
To (Fill in the party in charge of dealing with the IRS)
I have received a (“Notice of Intent to Levy” "levy, they have received it, etc...)from the IRS. IRS agents who may or possibly have contacted __________ do not have authorization necessary to impose levies, liens on or from my paycheck to satisfy an alleged collection of a tax. The preponderance of legal evidence herein & attached will show that ________is under no legal obligation to honor misapplied & possibly fraudulent notices sent by unauthorized IRS employees. Failure to objectively consider the facts below would be a demonstration of negligence of your institution’s supervisory) obligation & responsibility to me. Honoring fraudulent &/or misapplied notices of levy or lien would result in negligence due to turning over people's property without being served via judicial process (court order) , a writ of garnishment/attachment, or perhaps other LEGAL methods pursuant to State Law. Please note the web addresses at the bottom of each exhibit & see that I am using legitimate documents from the U.S. government’s websites or law sources & not just speculatively stating my opinion.
POINTS OF CONTENTION I-XIX
I. First of all, the Internal Revenue Code is in
Title 26 or 26USC. Any code section within USC26 is referred to as a statute. Any thing having to do with income tax falls within Subtitle A of 26USC.(Exhibit 1)
II. The Supreme Court ruling,
FEDERAL CROP INS. CORPORATION V. MERRILL , 332 U.S. 380 (Exhibit 2), 4th Paragraph shows that ________ or anyone takes a risk if it is assumed a government employee may have authority to do a certain function even though they may be aware or unaware as to whether or not they are stepping outside of the bounds of their authority. The risk could result in serious legal peril on __________’s part or mine if the proper authority of the agent(s) acting on behalf of the U.S. Government is not accurately ascertained.
III. In the IRS employee manual(Herein "IRM"),
IRM 9.1.2.7.1 (Exhibit 3) , Title 26 seizures can only be performed by special agents according to code section
7608(Exhibit 4).
IV. 7608(a) authorizes any IRS employee to enforce laws pertaining to liquor, tobacco, or firearms tax(Subtitle E taxes). However, 7608(b) authorizes only criminal investigators of the Intelligence Division (special agents as described in Ex. 3) to enforce laws for taxes other than subtitle E(Refer to Ex.1 again). Note that in 7608(b)(1) the Secretary must delegate the authority by means of a delegation order to the special agent.
V. Back in Exhibit 3 paragraph 4 further states
Delegation Order #157(Exhibit 5) in IRM 1.2.2.9.5* as being the authorization necessary for seizures of personal property. Out of the 3 types of employees under this delegation, ONLY SPECIAL AGENTS are authorized to perform the actual seizure. Also note that the
<U>authority CAN NOT be re-delegated.</U>
VI. In IRM 1.16.6.1,
Pocket Commissions (Exhibit 6)are the identification media necessary for IRS employees to prove their authority in dealing with tax matters Note in paragraph 2 that the two types of pocket commissions are “enforcement” & “non-enforcement”. In the same paragraph, also note that Special Agents are involved with Criminal Investigation within the individuals in the 1811 series.Therefore, if an IRS employee says that they are a special agent, they should be able to produce an “enforcement” pocket commission in order to validate their delegated authority in performing a seizure. The rest of the exhibit explains in detail what an enforcement pocket commission looks like.
SUMMARY OF POINTS III-VI
<LI>ENFORCEMENT FOR SUBTITLE A TAXES (INCOME TAX) IN 26USC CAN ONLY BE PERFORMED BY SPECIAL AGENTS.
<LI>AUTHORITY FOR SEIZURES MUST BE DELEGATED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY BY ORDER#157, WHICH CANNOT BE RE-DELEGATED.
<LI>THE ONLY AGENTS WHO ARE AUTHORIZED TO SEIZE PROPERTY ARE SPECIAL AGENTS WHO ARE INVOLVED WITH CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.
<LI>ANYONE CLAIMING TO BE A SPECIAL AGENT QUALIFIED TO ENFORCE SEIZURES MUST BE ABLE TO PRODUCE AN ENFORCEMENT POCKET COMMISSION (as described in IRM 1.16.6.2) IN ORDER TO VALIDATE THEIR PRESUMED AUTHORITY.
VII. The IRS cites
26USC section 6331 (Exhibit 7) on their Notice of Levy as their statutory authority to impose a levy. The code is reproduced for the recipient of the notice without paragraph (a). The first paragraph sets the standard for the rest of the code section in that it states that levies apply to officers, employees, elected officials, agencies or instrumentalities of the United States or the District of Columbia.
It now demands to be demonstrated how 26USC6331 is applied as law.
VIII. According to
26USC 7805 (Exhibit 8), a statute in USC26 can only be enforced as a law by means of a regulation prescribed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Exhibit 8 is further bolstered by
Parallel Table of Authorities (Exhibit 9). The instructions for it says, “statutory citations are noted as being interpreted or applied by those regulations.” In other words, a statute can only be understood and applied if it has a regulation to implement it.
IX. 26USC 6331 in the parallel table (EXHIBIT 10) is traced to its implementing regulation which is
27CFR 70 (Exhibit 11). 27CFR70 concerns the procedural & administrative rules for liquor, tobacco, & firearms taxes & NOT INCOME TAX. However, an implementing regulation for a statute is still not yet sufficient to make it authoritative.
X. At the bottom of each regulation in the CFR is a citation of the authority for the regulation in brackets. According to
1CFR 21.40 (Exhibit 12) , a regulation can only have legal effect when it has authority delegated to it referring back to a statute. So at the bottom of 27CFR70.1 we see the authority for it is a Treasury Decision (T.D.) dealing with the ATF, and
61 FR 31031(Exhibit 13), which is published in the Federal Register record from 1996 dealing with liquor, tobacco, and firearms . The Federal Register contains ONLY those documents that have "general applicability & legal effect" according to
44USC1505(a) (Exhibit 14)
So 26USC6331 is first implemented & interpreted by 27CFR70 and can only be applied & have legal effect for liquor, tobacco & firearms in 61FR31031.
XI. A “Notice of Seizure” MUST be given on the day the levy is made according to
26USC 6502(a)(Exhibit15). So even if the IRS was to step outside the bounds of their authority & attempt to levy my property, it would be __________’s responsibility to ask the agent for the “Notice of Seizure” the day the levy would be legitimately carried out. But since they are citing USC6331 as their authority to impose a levy on my wages, the whole process would be illogical because the TRUE, LAWFUL application & interpretation of USC6331 has been revealed above.
SUMMARY OF POINTS VII-XI.
• USC6331 CAN ONLY BE LEGITIMATELY APPLIED AS LAW IN REGARDS TO LIQUOR, TOBACCO & FIREARMS TAX IN CONNECTION WITH OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, ELECTED OFFICIALS, AGENCIES OR INSTRUMENTALITIES OF THE UNITED STATES OR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
• IF A LEVY IS TO OCCUR A NOTICE OF SEIZURE MUST BE PROVIDED.
• A United States Code section(USC) must have a regulation in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to implement & interpret it.
• Therefore, any code section in 26USC must have a regulation from 26CFR (regulations for income tax) to apply and interpret it in regards to income taxes. 26USC6331 falls into 27 CFR (regulations for liquor tobacco, & firearms Ex.16) , so it can only be applied & understood within that scope.
• At the bottom of the the regulation (in CFR), a citation or link back to a statute (in USC) must be present to declare any delegated statutory authority for the regulation itself.
• Finally, any document that can be applied as law must be published if the Federal Register. If their is no citation to an FR document, or a statute, the regulation is not enforceable as positive law & would have no legal effect.
XII. The IRS has threatened me with an intention to "levy certain assets" & is attempting to impose a misapplied civil penalty which I am currently disputing, also. At the bottom right hand corner notice that they informed me of an enclosed "Notice of Potential Third Party Contact". On that notice the immediate position is that they allege is that they are attempting to collect unpaid taxes from me. So by connecting the threat of a levy with the statement that they are attempting to collect unpaid taxes from me , it would seem that the IRS is trying to collect alleged unpaid taxes from me by potentially levying my assets.
XIII. Exhibit 16 (A- C)
A.
IRM 9.7.13.2.1 notes the 2 PRIMARY statutes (26USC7301& 7302) under which property can be seized under the Internal Revenue Code (26USC).
B. Notice under 9.7.13..2.1 that 7301 obviously cannot relate to my wages because it is not property that can logically used in the manner described.
C. The next section IRM 9.7.13.2.2 CLEARLY STATES THAT 7302 , "cannot be used as a substitute to the collection of taxes"
XIV. Upon researching 26USC7301 &7302 in the Parallel Table of Authorities, (Exhibit 17) it can be shown that 7301 has no regulation in the CFR to either apply it or interpret it & 7302 is implemented in CFR27 which, again, deals with liquor, tobacco, & firearms taxes.
SUMMARY OF POINTS XII-XIV
THE 2 PRIMARY STATUTES UNDER TITLE 26 AUTHORIZING SEIZURES BOTH CANNOT RELATE TO ME AS AN ACCOUNT HOLDER OR PROVIDE FOR SEIZING MY ASSETS FOR COLLECTING TAXES AS THEY TRIED TO IMPLY IN THE PREVIOUS EXHIBITS 18 & 19 EXPLAINED BEFORE.
The legal basis for the U.S. government to collect a debt from a citizen is delineated in these final exhibits. Title 28 is Judicial Administration. Chapter 176 of 28USC is Federal Debt Collection Procedures which defines the processes involved in LAWFULLY collecting a debt from a citizen
The Federal Debt Collection Procedures/ Chapter 176 28USC
XV.
28USC 3001 (Exhibit 18) sets forth the "exclusive civil procedures for the United States....to recover judgment on a debt...." The word "exclusive" means what it says & says what it means regarding debt collection from civilians who are not involved in criminal activity.
XVI.
28USC3002 (Exhibit 19) has numerous definitions of the word "debt" among them being the words, "penalty" & "tax". Piecing the language of 28USC3001 with 28USC3002 in relation to my issue could read,<BLOCKQUOTE>" The Federal Debt Collection Procedure provides the exclusive civil procedures for the United States to recover judgment on a penalty or a tax"</blockquote>
XVII
Exhibit 20 (A- F)
A. 28USC3102(a) instructs that "any property except earnings may be attached(seized) pursuant to a writ of attachment..."
B. 28USC 3102(b) says , "a court shall issue a writ authorizing the United States to attach property... in an action to recover a fine, penalty, or tax."
C. 28USC 3102(c) says, " a writ of attachment shall be issued directing the UNITED STATES MARSHAL OF THE DISTRICT WHERE THE PROPERTY....."
D. 28USC 3102(d)(5) says, "The United States Marshal shall file a copy of the notice of levy on the person who has possession of the property subject to the writ."
E. 28USC 3102(f)(1) deals with the "Satisfaction of Lien" by stating that in order for there to be a levy, it must be under a writ of attachment first then a lien is created.
F.
28USC 3104(a) & (b)(1)(A)state TWICE that earnings cannot be garnished even with a writ of garnishment.
SUMMARY OF XV-XVII
• ANY PROPERTY EXCEPT EARNINGS CAN BE SEIZED BY A WRIT OF ATTACHMENT.
• ONLY BY A COURT ORDER CAN A WRIT OF ATTACHMENT BE ISSUED IN COLLECTING A PENALTY OR TAX.
• ONLY A U.S. MARSHALL CAN SIEZE PROPERTY BY MEANS OF A WRIT OF ATTACHMENT.
• THE U.S. MARSHALL ALSO MUST FILE A NOTICE OF LEVY ON THE PERSON(S) IN POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY (such as a bank) WHICH FIRST MUST BE SUBJECT TO A WRIT BEFORE THE MARSHALL CAN EVEN TAKE ACTION.
• THE COMBINATION OF 3102(a), 3104(a), &3104(b)(1)(A) TOTALS THREE TIMES THAT EARNINGS CANNOT BE GARNISHED BY EITHER A WRIT OF ATTACHMENT OR GARNISHMENT.
CONCLUSIONS
Again, the main complaint is that the agent will have lacked the authority to send out the notice of levy; therefore _________ is under no legal obligation to honor it and ___________________________
• would be negligent in not checking that out,
• would breach their duty as supervisors regarding turning over funds, &
• I would suffer damages due to the warrantless denial of access to their own funds.
1. If________________'s position is that the account holder's argument is with the IRS ,"so take it up with them"; it must be understood that the IRS doesn't have the my wages,________________ has it; and if ________________ allows the IRS access to my wages, it will be_________________, not the IRS, that is doing it. The IRS will not have siezed anything since _______________ without legal obligation, will have written them a check and VOLUNTARILY sent it to them in the mail.
2. Wages can only be garnished in connection with a judicial process only (writs of attachment or garnishment); Know that a notice of levy is not issued pursuant to a judicial process but is issued as a result of an administrative process, and if _________________ turns over my wages they will have breached a duty and responsibility in supervising the well being of their employee.
3.
A. Point XIV shows that the IRS's own manual combined with cross referencing the statutes with the implementing regulations proves they cannot perform seizures to collect a tax whatsoever.
B. Points XV-XVII proves that ONLY U.S. Marshals can seize property to satisfy a tax or penalty liability & if the Marshal did, he must have a court order to do so Points III. V & VI. combined show that EVEN IF the agent in question tried to impose a levy he can only be a special agent & must prove it by being able to visually present an enforcement commission as described in IRM1.16.6.1 under 26USC7608(b) according to Delegation Order#157. This still would be insufficient because the record shows that only U.S. Marshals can seize assets in connection with the payment of a tax or a penalty by means of a court order.
5. In the event of an alleged notice of levy or actual seizure, the____________ will have my sworn affidavit that the IRS agent in question has no such authority. This means your institution will need an affidavit from the agent(s) contesting the preponderance of statutes, regulations, & their own procedures in their manual described in the Points of Contention above & attached claiming he has such authority.
6. ________________has a common law duty in based upon the documents I have given you, with due diligence, to check out my concerns and to send a notice & demand to the IRS for their authority for a garnishment. I will provide____________ with one in the event of a notice of levy. The notice will present statutes, regulations, & directives in the Internal Revenue Manual based on my sworn affidavit. The demand will be the __________________inquiring as to the legitimate authority of the agent(s) in question.
Respectfully Presented,
Linear Mode
