Taxation Discuss Taxation (IRS, Real Estate Taxes, Car Taxes, etc.).


Go Back   Suijuris Forums > Educational & Learning > Taxation
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 01-12-2005, 08:43 AM
citizensoldier's Avatar
citizensoldier citizensoldier is offline
Unplugged
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 148
Need assistance in determining definitions in Title 26 USC..

I have been researching Title 26 of the USC and have found the following:

Subtitle F - Procedure and Administration
Chapter 29 - Definitions

(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly
expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof -

(1) Person
The term ''person'' shall be construed to mean and include an
individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or
corporation.
(9) United States
The term ''United States'' when used in a geographical sense
includes only the States and the District of Columbia.
10) State
The term ''State'' shall be construed to include the District
of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out
provisions of this title.
(26) Trade or business
The term ''trade or business'' includes the performance of the
functions of a public office.
(30) United States person
The term ''United States person'' means -
(A) a citizen or resident of the United States,
(B) a domestic partnership,
(C) a domestic corporation,
(D) any estate (other than a foreign estate, within the
meaning of paragraph (31)), and
(E) any trust if -
(i) a court within the United States is able to exercise
primary supervision over the administration of the trust, and
(ii) one or more United States persons have the authority
to control all substantial decisions of the trust.

b) Definition of resident alien and nonresident alien
(1) In general
For purposes of this title (other than subtitle B) -
(A) Resident alien
An alien individual shall be treated as a resident of the
United States with respect to any calendar year if (and only
if) such individual meets the requirements of clause (i), (ii),
or (iii):
(i) Lawfully admitted for permanent residence
Such individual is a lawful permanent resident of the
United States at any time during such calendar year.
(ii) Substantial presence test
Such individual meets the substantial presence test of
paragraph (3).
(iii) First year election
Such individual makes the election provided in paragraph
(4).
(B) Nonresident alien
An individual is a nonresident alien if such individual is
neither a citizen of the United States nor a resident of the
United States (within the meaning of subparagraph (A)).

I do not see any definition of the United States in Subtitle A Chapter 1. Where can I find the definition defining the United States as anything other than its geographic reference as defined above in determining what the IRS deems is a citizen or resident of the United States?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-12-2005, 10:29 AM
weishaupt1776's Avatar
weishaupt1776 weishaupt1776 is offline
The Outta Commissiona
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Florida Republic
Posts: 5,396
There's one key word that you left out in the definitions. Look up the word "includes" & there's your answer.

Bty, the code is set up like a trap. Use common law & non statutory methods
__________________
THE DOWNLOADS SECTION IS BROKEN & WILL NEVER BE FIXED, SO STOP BUGGING ME !

www.pacinlaw.org ~ www.pacgroups.us
Multi multa, non omnia novit = Many men know many things, no one knows everything.
The De jure Political Group: www.statenationals.net
Do you have concerns about America? www.redamendment.net
Is the government acting in your interest? www.notmygovernment.us
Have you been Deprogrammed? www.deprogram.us


DOWNLOAD THIS COURSE NOW !!

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-12-2005, 12:11 PM
SKYGZR's Avatar
SKYGZR SKYGZR is offline
Practice Makes Perfect
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Entire Universe
Posts: 321
Sub A

Also, there is no Liability Statute for SubTitle A. Any Correspondence, or Discussion should require, signed under penalty of perjury, the Offeror of any presentment the furnishment of this Statute (Law). Untill the Liability Statute is furnished, all other concerns are a mute point.
__________________
Free Thought NOT Forced Faith
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-13-2005, 12:53 PM
weishaupt1776's Avatar
weishaupt1776 weishaupt1776 is offline
The Outta Commissiona
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Florida Republic
Posts: 5,396
Arrow Let's Think

Let's say that in George Bush's new revamping of Title 26; the UNITED STATES writes a statute that says SKYGZR is liable for the individual income tax, is required to file & pay via a return, and lists the penalties if he fails to do so.
In the definitions of Title 26, the word, "person" is clearly defined as flesh & blood humans, United States is defined as any State of the Union, the statute falls into Subtitle A, there is an enacting clause for the statute, it is published in the Federal Register as the SKYGZR Income Tax Liability Act, the form he is required to file is approved by the Office of Money & Budget, the OMB number for it falls in Sec 1 -1 of 26 CFR Tax Imposed, an implementing regulation in 26CFR with it referring back to the statute in 26USC as an authority, and it manages to line up somehow with the Constitution & the Common Law.
His home State also adopts the Law & drafts it into legislation with the exact same provisions & definitions.
Restricted to the provisions above or any other provisions not mentioned written by legislators dictating a liability for SKYGZR;
Is there evidence of a liability for SKYGZR to still be obligated to pay the tax? Why or Why not?
__________________
THE DOWNLOADS SECTION IS BROKEN & WILL NEVER BE FIXED, SO STOP BUGGING ME !

www.pacinlaw.org ~ www.pacgroups.us
Multi multa, non omnia novit = Many men know many things, no one knows everything.
The De jure Political Group: www.statenationals.net
Do you have concerns about America? www.redamendment.net
Is the government acting in your interest? www.notmygovernment.us
Have you been Deprogrammed? www.deprogram.us


DOWNLOAD THIS COURSE NOW !!

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-26-2005, 04:36 AM
riverplow
 
Posts: n/a
7701

26 IRC 7701(39) Persons residing outside United States. If any citizen or resident of the United States does not reside in (and is not found in) any United States judiciual district, such citizen or resident shall be treated as residing in the District of Columbia for purposes of any provision of this title relating to--

(A) jurisdiction of courts, or
(B) enforcement of summons.

Yes, I agree start useing the IRC code you just gave the courts jurisdiction and agreed to be treated as being in the District of Columbia [no rights]

It would also explain why people get in trouble in United States District Courts
being that these courts are territorial in nature and only apply to lands ceded to the federal government by acts of the state legislatures. Of course you can always claim to be a citizen of the United States or a resident of whatever jurisdictal district is after you, without first asking the definitions of United States and State, or asking to see a map of lands ceded by the state to the federal government for which this court is operating.

My thoughts, not legal advise.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-06-2005, 07:01 AM
charlene charlene is offline
Unplugged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 78
Exclamation Federal Reserve Act of 1913

Maybe this will clear things up for you. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913,
was a "non-positive law." and only applicable to the Federal United States (this would mean federal territory only.) Any other rinference is to be without basis in fact or law. So this would confirm the existence of the two
terms "United States" and United States of America" It also confirms that Goverment rules and legislates on bluff and deception and implies that it has
jurisdiction where it DOES NOT --- Title 26,USC Income tax law it is only applicable to the Federal United States, Federal territory and insular Federal property within the several states. "IF A LAW DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE CONSITITUTION, THAT LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO THE CITIZENS OF THE SOVEREIGN UNION OF STTES, only to Federal territory and Federal citizens. note we are citizens of the Sovereign states. You see it boils down to this,Money's influence over goverment and it proves---Any self regulating and self governing enity is slef serving--if the price is right. Just remember that the U.S. Goverment is a "federal" goverment NOT A NATIONAL GOVERMENT.
Charlene Columbus, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-02-2008, 01:54 PM
yebliker yebliker is offline
Unplugged
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 107
On the definition of "state"

Further evidence of the misleading wording in the definition of "State" can be found in a letter from Brbara Kennelly, ex-Congresswoman. She was responding to aperson asking her rabout the definition of "state: in a bill she was working on, and whether it varied from the definition of "state" in 26 USC.

BTW- This is my transcription of it, since the original is hard to read. The original copy can be found at www dot supremelaw dot org/press/rels/kennell3.gif

Dear Mr. Randall:

Thank you for writing with your question about Section 3 (a) of H.R. 97, legislation I introduced this Congress. Please excuse the delay in my response.

In your letter you asked if Section 3 (a) of H.R. 97 defining the word state, and U.S. Code 3121 (e) are the same. I have checked with Legislative Counsel and the Congressional Research Service about the definition. According to these legal experts the definitions are not the same. The term state in 26 U.S. Code 3121 (e) specifically includes only the named U.S. territories and possessions of the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. In addition, this section of the U.S. Code unlike H.R. 97 also states,

“An individual who is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (but not otherwise a Citizen of the United States) shall be considered for the purpose of this section, as a citizen of the United States.“

H.R. 97, section 3 (a) does not specifically define the U.S. territories and possessions that would be eligible under this legislation, and therefore is somewhat more expansive. Again, thank you for writing on this issue.

Sincerely,

Barbara B. Kennelly
Member of Congress
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Allodial Title in Nevada Smart-Aleck Land Ownership 50 10-03-2008 07:47 AM
Allodial TiTle and Land Patents, Ownerships Highest proof^i^ Birdman^i^ Land Ownership 33 04-30-2008 10:18 AM
Definitions from SS ACT 1935 TITLE XI gregtu Family Rights 2 08-26-2005 06:57 AM
Gun Control Cites & Code suijuris Court 15 02-26-2005 03:13 PM
Protecting Pop's Assets dochand Asset Protection & Estate Planning 8 01-26-2005 10:17 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
2003-2008 Copyright by Law Research Group, LLC Terms of Use | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Notice/Disclaimer