Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Good Faith Defense in Tax Cases

Expand Messages
  • law_self_help
    Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one in part due to the well recognized maxim, ignorance of the law is no defense . Good faith can only be
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 28, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one in
      part due to the well recognized maxim,
      "ignorance of the law is no defense". Good faith can only be used in
      a specific intent crime and is used primarily in tax and financial
      fraud cases. Some courts hold that an adequate
      specific intent instruction is enough. New England Enterprises, Inc.
      v. U.S. 400 F.2d 58,
      71 (1 Cir 1968); U.S. v. Dockray, 943 F.2d 152, 154-56 (1 Cir. 1991)
      (collecting cases pro and con a specific good faith instruction).
      Other circuits require an instruction that speaks
      directly to good faith, U.S. v. Casperson, 773 F.2d 216, 222-24 (8
      Cir. 1985); U.S. v.thHopkins, 744 F.2d 716, 717-18 (10 Cir. 1984)(en
      banc), U.S. v. Harting 879 F.2d 765 (10ththCir. 1989)(reversing for
      failure to give a good faith instruction in a tax case).Good faith,
      when asserted must be "objectively reasonable," with the exception
      of "willful
      evasion" of tax cases, U..S. v. Cheek, 498 U.S. 192, 111 S. Ct. 604
      (1991)(Cheek construed
      the word "willfully" in the tax evasion statute, 26 U.S.C. § 7201,
      7203, and concluded that
      a good faith misunderstanding of the tax law need not be objectively
      reasonable to serve as
      a complete defense.(THAT MEANS IF YOU HONESTLY MISUNDERSTOOD THE
      STATUTE IT"S A DEFENSE) 111 S. Ct. at 611). As the first circuit has
      since noted, the willfulness
      requirement in tax evasion serves a function unique in criminal law:
      it makes ignorance of
      the law a defense. Id. at 609; Dockray at 156. When good faith is
      asserted in tax fraud cases,
      Cheek requires the government to disprove the claimed good faith of
      the defendant. Cheek,
      112 S.Ct. at 610-12.Sample instruction - Good faith is inconsistent
      with an intent to defraud. Good faith is also
      inconsistent with an intent to obtain money or property by means of
      false and fraudulent
      pretenses or representations. The term "good faith" has no precise
      definition. However,
      "good faith" means among other things, a belief or opinion honestly
      held, an absence of
      malice or ill will, and an intention to avoid taking unfair
      advantage of another. Evidence of
      good faith can create a reasonable doubt that Defendant violated the
      mail fraud statute. It is
      important to bear in mind that Defendant has no burden to prove good
      faith. It is the
      government's burden to prove
    • Occupant Family
      Greetings, There appears to be a slight error, mistake or misdirection when making this quote... ignorance of the law is no defense . -Caveat Lector- Some
      Message 2 of 6 , Mar 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Greetings,
         
        There appears to be a slight error, mistake or misdirection when making this quote...
        "ignorance of the law is no defense".
         

         -Caveat Lector- Some things I learned about the law over these oh-so-many years:

         

        1.  The law assumes a "reasonable" person. [Just; proper; moderate, suitable

        under the circumstances.  Fit and appropriate to the end in view. 

        Having the faculty of reason;  rational;  governed by reason;  under the

        influence of reason;  agreeable to reason.  Thinking, speaking, or acting

        according to the dictates of reason.  Not immoderate or excessive,

        being synonymous with rational, honest, equitable, fair, suitable,

        moderate, tolerable.  Cass v. State, 124 Tex.Cr.R. 208, 61 S.W.2d 500.

        Black's Law dictionary, 5th Edition]

         

        2.  Ignorance of the [common] law is no excuse.  Since even the unknowing

        person is held liable for the totality of the [common] law, it is assumed that said

        aforementioned "reasonable" person would take the time and trouble to inform

        themselves of the facts in the case and the [common] law surrounding those facts.

         

        3.  A phrase frequently used in legal pleadings is: "...knew or should have

        known..." This is a direct application of the concept outlined in point No.

        2 above.  Any contention that one did not know (or was misinformed) of
        the truth in the matter, is worse than a cop-out ... it is in direct violation
        of legal concepts which the "ordinary/reasonable" person is bound by.
         
        And who in his "right/reasonable/proper" mind would even suggest,
        as in the post from L_S_H... "everyone is to know and understand
        the 'statutory law'". That is "unreasonable" to say the least and
        Ludicrious in fact and in law! It is a "legal impossibility"~!
        It again appears that "statutory law" applies only to "statutory persons"!
        If we quit trying to show how smart we are and start telling the truth
        as it is, we could win more... Failure to "understand the charges"
        has had many a statutory case thrown out on that basis alone!
        "Understand" means full and complete knowledge...
        Do You All Have That?
         
        Deo volente,
        Jim
         
        It is not the things that we know to be true that hurt us...
        It is the things we know to be true THAT ARE NOT!
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 01:11:39 -0000 "law_self_help" <law_self_help@...> writes:
        > Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one
        in
        > part due to the well recognized maxim,
        > "ignorance
        of the law is no defense". Good faith can only be used
        >
        in a specific intent crime and is used primarily in tax and financial
        > fraud cases. Some courts hold that an adequate
        >
        specific intent instruction is enough. New England Enterprises,
        > Inc. v.
        U.S. 400 F.2d 58, 71 (1 Cir 1968); U.S. v. Dockray,
        > 943 F.2d 152, 154-56 (1 Cir. 1991)
      • Email41@aol.com
        Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one in part due to the well recognized maxim, ignorance of the law is no defense . I wonder if this can be
        Message 3 of 6 , Mar 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one in
          part due to the well recognized maxim,
          "ignorance of the law is no defense".

          I wonder if this can be an enforcable maxim in our time. Title 26 includes over 66,000 pages of code and I don't have a clue as to the regulations for Title 26, at the Federal level there exist over 13, 000, 000 codes and laws by the early 1990's with the new energy bill over 4 inches thick of 8x11 paper; plus GATT and NAFTA and a myriage of other treaties and laws; let alone what remains at the State level.

          I submit, it is an impractical and unreal posibility to know the law in our day. There would be no time to eat or sleep or earn funds sufficient to pay your bills should one try to eliminate their ignorance of the law.

          And for another maxim, what is "impossible is also unenforcable."
        • MerryBelle Hodges
          I believe Cheeks v. US speaks to the good faith belief. If one is relying on previous Supreme Court rulings....then willful failure to file cannot
          Message 4 of 6 , Mar 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            I believe Cheeks v. US speaks to the good faith belief.  If one is relying on previous Supreme Court rulings....then willful failure to file cannot stand.....we just seem to have agents that inferior courts rule over the Supremes.
             


            Email41@... wrote:
            Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one in
            part due to the well recognized maxim,
            "ignorance of the law is no defense".


            I wonder if this can be an enforcable maxim in our time. Title 26 includes over 66,000 pages of code and I don't have a clue as to the regulations for Title 26, at the Federal level there exist over 13, 000, 000 codes and laws by the early 1990's with the new energy bill over 4 inches thick of 8x11 paper; plus GATT and NAFTA and a myriage of other treaties and laws; let alone what remains at the State level.

            I submit, it is an impractical and unreal posibility to know the law in our day. There would be no time to eat or sleep or earn funds sufficient to pay your bills should one try to eliminate their ignorance of the law.

            And for another maxim, what is "impossible is also unenforcable."


            Yahoo! Mail
            Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

          • Dave Miner
            Email41 -- A very good point. The really good news is the fact that there are only a few sections of the IR Code that MUST be understood. The rest of the
            Message 5 of 6 , Mar 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
               
              Email41 --
               
              A very good point.  The really good news is the fact that there are only a few sections of the IR Code that MUST be understood.  The rest of the sections take on meaning in light of those few sections.
               
              First section that must be understood includes the list of subtitles in the Internal Revenue Code.  Each subtitle is separate, with separate requirements, and apply to different "persons." 
                  Subtitle A is the Income Tax
                  Subtitle B is Estate and Gift Taxes
                  Subtitle C is Employment Taxes
                  Subtitle D is Miscellaneous Excise Taxes
                  Subtitle E is Alcohol, Tobacco and Certain Other Excise Taxes
                  Subtitle F is Procedure and Administration
               
              The deceptive issue here is almost everything you hear about from the IRS is from Subtitle C or from Subtitle F.  Yet the IRS would imply that everything you hear about from them applies to income taxes.  For example, there are no provisions in Subtitle A for withholding income taxes from your paycheck.  Withholding is simply not allowed by Subtitle A for income taxes.  Withholding is in Subtitle C and it applies to employment taxes.  So the statute allows for withholding employment taxes and not for income taxes.  The taxes withheld from your paycheck are referred to as "federal withholding taxes" or FWT, or something equally misleading.  So you supposedly have an employment tax that is due and payable, and it is withheld from your paycheck and called federal withholding taxes.  Then at the end of the year the "employment tax" that was collected all year long is declared non-existent and the money collected is credited to your supposed income tax that is now due and payable.  Remember, Subtitle A claims that income taxes are due as of the first of the year and not a second earlier.  So the IRS collects all year long a non-existent tax under an official sounding name, and then transfers the money collected to a debt you didn't owe until January 1st of each year.  And the IRS hopes that no one will ever ask about that non-existent tax whose collected funds have just been credited to a tax in a different subtitle.
               
              For evidence of this, check out Section 3401(c).  Subtitle C Employment Taxes apply to employees, which is defined quite clearly.
               

                  "For purposes of this chapter, the term 'employee' includes an

                  officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a

                  State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of

                  Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of

                  the foregoing.  The term 'employee' also includes an officer of a

                  corporation."

               
              Further, Subtitle F contains all the requirements, procedures, and penalties from all the Subtitles.  This allows the IRS to reference these requirements, procedures and penalties without ever stating which subtitle or tax they apply to.  If you do a serious reference check, you will discover that EACH AND EVERY penalty in Subtitle F applies to Subtitle E taxes, which have their basis NOT in 26 USC the Internal Revenue Code, but in Title 27 Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Code. 
               
              This is further underscored by the reference "persons" that are subject to the income tax.  Check out Sections 1441 through 1446, which lists the ONLY "persons" subject to the income tax.  These persons include foreigners earning a living in America, foreign corporations earning a profit in America, Americans earning a living in a foreign country, American corporations earning a profit in another country, and those involved in specified revenue-taxable activities.  The only other "person" in the entire IRC that is subject to the income tax laws is the "withholding agent" as defined in 2 different sections of the Code. 
               
              There is no section in the Internal Revenue Code that requires me, an individual American living within the 50 States and NOT involved in a revenue-taxable activity, to file a Form 1040 or pay income taxes.
               
              This is even further underscored by the fact that the IRS has every American who has ever filed a tax return listed as a business and as using an invalid SSN.  The IRS has to have you and I listed as a business or else we would not be required to file returns and pay income taxes, and it has no authority authority to pursue individuals for returns or for taxes unless that individual is involved in a very limited list of revenue-taxable activities.
               
              So there are very few sections of the more than 9,000 pages of the Internal Revenue Code that individual Americans need to understand.  once these sections are understood, then we can ignore the rest of the Code, and all the claims and threats of the IRS.  If we do not fit in the short list of those who are subject to the IRC, then we do not need to worry about the IRC.  In other words, I do not need to worry about the myriad of regulations that apply to those who manufacture car batteries, because I do not manufacture car batteries.  I do not need to worry about the myriad of regulations that apply to those who manufacture firearms because I do not manufacture firearms.  I do not need to worry about the myriad of regulations that apply to those who distill whisky because I do not distill whisky.  And so on.
               
              So, again, I state "There is no section in the Internal Revenue Code that requires me, an individual American living within the 50 States and NOT involved in a revenue-taxable activity, to file a Form 1040 or pay income taxes."
               
              Yours in financial freedom,
               
              Dave Miner
               
               


              From: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com [mailto:tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Email41@...
              Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 3:08 PM
              To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Good Faith Defense in Tax Cases

              Good FaithThe defense of good faith is a difficult one in
              part due to the well recognized maxim,
              "ignorance of the law is no defense".


              I wonder if this can be an enforcable maxim in our time. Title 26 includes over 66,000 pages of code and I don't have a clue as to the regulations for Title 26, at the Federal level there exist over 13, 000, 000 codes and laws by the early 1990's with the new energy bill over 4 inches thick of 8x11 paper; plus GATT and NAFTA and a myriage of other treaties and laws; let alone what remains at the State level.

              I submit, it is an impractical and unreal posibility to know the law in our day. There would be no time to eat or sleep or earn funds sufficient to pay your bills should one try to eliminate their ignorance of the law.

              And for another maxim, what is "impossible is also unenforcable."
            • Patrick
              Well if you want to be TECHNICAL... I am a Californian, a native of the California Republic, which is one of the several States of the Union, which formed the
              Message 6 of 6 , Mar 2, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Well if you want to be TECHNICAL...
                 
                I am a Californian, a native of the California Republic, which is one of the several States of the Union, which formed the NATION known as the United States of America and to the best of my knowledge I am NOT now NOR have I ever been involved in an ACTIVITY that is TAXED under the EXCISE tax commonly known as the PERSONAL INCOME TAX.

                Such as the TAX on OFFICERS of the GOVERNMENT and CORPORATIONS  when I am NOT an "employee" as DEFINED in 26 USC 3401 NOR do I receive "wages" as therein DEFINED, NOR am I a "person" SUBJECT to the "internal revenue" laws.

                26 CFR 31.0-2  General definitions and use of terms.

                   
                (a) In general. As used in the regulations in this part, unless otherwise expressly indicated--
                   
                (1) The terms defined in the provisions of law contained in the regulations in this part shall have the meanings so assigned to them.
                ...
                (8) Person includes an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust or estate, a joint-stock company, an association, or a syndicate, group, pool, joint venture or other unincorporated organization or group, through or by means of which any business, financial operation, or venture is carried on. It includes a guardian, committee, trustee, executor, administrator, trustee in bankruptcy, receiver, assignee for the benefit of creditors, conservator, or any person acting in a fiduciary capacity.
                ...
                (19) The cross references in the regulations in this part to other portions of the regulations, when the word ``see'' is used, are made only for convenience and shall be given no legal effect.
                   
                (b) Subpart B. As used in Subpart B of this part, unless otherwise expressly indicated--
                    (1) Act means the Federal Insurance Contributions Act.
                    (2) Taxes means the employee tax and the employer tax, as respectively defined in this paragraph.
                   
                (3) Employee tax means the tax (with respect to wages received by an employee after Dec. 31, 1965, the taxes) imposed by section 3101 of the Code.
                    (4) Employer tax means the tax (with respect to wages paid by an employer after Dec. 31, 1965, the taxes) imposed by section 3111 of the Code.
                   
                (c) Subpart C. As used in Subpart C of this part, unless otherwise expressly indicated--
                     ...
                    (5) Tax means the employee tax, the employee representative tax, or the employer tax, as respectively defined in this paragraph.
                   
                (6) Employee tax means the tax imposed by section 3201 of the Code.
                    (7) Employee representative tax means the tax imposed by section 3211 of the Code.
                    (8) Employer tax means the tax imposed by section 3221 of the Code.
                   
                (d) Subpart D. As used in Subpart D of this part, unless otherwise expressly indicated:
                    (1) Act means the Federal Unemployment Tax Act.
                    ...
                    (3) Tax means the tax imposed by section 3301 of the Code.
                   
                (e) Subpart E. As used in Subpart E of this part, unless otherwise expressly indicated, tax means the tax required to be deducted and withheld from wages under section 3402 of the Code.
                27 CFR 72.11  Meaning of terms.
                    As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires, terms shall have the meanings ascribed in this section. Words in the plural form shall include the singular, and vice versa, and words importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine.
                The terms ``includes'' and ``including'' do not exclude things not enumerated which are in the same general class.
                NOR have been served the REQUIRED NOTICE that I am required to make any "such returns, render such statements, or keep such specific records."
                "In general, the tax is payable upon the basis of returns rendered by persons liable therefor (subchapter A (sections 6001 and following), chapter 61 of the Code) or at the source of the income by withholding."  26 CFR 1.1-1.
                26 USC 6001. Notice or regulations requiring records, statements, and special returns
                Every person liable for any tax imposed by this title, or for the collection thereof, shall keep such records, render such statements, make such returns, and comply with such rules and regulations as the Secretary may from time to time prescribe. Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary it is necessary, he may require any person, by notice served upon such person or by regulations, to make such returns, render such statements, or keep such records, as the Secretary deems sufficient to show whether or not such person is liable for tax under this title. The only records which an employer shall be required to keep under this section in connection with charged tips shall be charge receipts, records necessary to comply with section 6053 (c), and copies of statements furnished by employees under section 6053 (a).
                § 156.6001-1   Notice or regulations requiring records, statements, and special returns.

                (a) In general. Any person subject to tax under chapter 54 (Greenmail) of the Code shall keep such complete and detailed records as are sufficient to enable the district director to determine accurately the amount of liability under chapter 54.

                (b) Notice by district director requiring returns, statements, or the keeping of records. The district director may require any person, by notice served upon him, to make such returns, render such statements, or keep such specific records as will enable the district director to determine whether or not the person is liable for tax under chapter 54 of the Code.

                (c) Retention of records. The records required by this section shall be kept at all times available for inspection by authorized internal revenue officers or employees, and shall be retained so long as the contents thereof may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law.

                [T.D. 8379, 56 FR 65685, Dec. 18, 1991; 57 FR 5931, Feb. 18, 1992]

                http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=bad6b2827e4589202a332f052c2fa21b&rgn=div8&view=text&node=26:17.0.1.1.12.2.1.1&idno=26

                26 USC 5881. Greenmail
                 (a) Imposition of tax
                    There is hereby imposed on any person who receives greenmail a tax equal to 50 percent of gain or other income of such person by reason of such receipt.
                (b) Greenmail
                    For purposes of this section, the term ``greenmail'' means any consideration transferred by a corporation (or any person acting in concert with such corporation) to directly or indirectly acquire stock of such corporation from any shareholder if--
                        (1) such shareholder held such stock (as determined under
                    section 1223) for less than 2 years before entering into the agreement to make the transfer,
                        (2) at some time during the 2-year period ending on the date of
                    such acquisition--
                            (A) such shareholder,
                            (B) any person acting in concert with such shareholder, or
                            (C) any person who is related to such shareholder or person
                        described in subparagraph (B),
                    made or threatened to make a public tender offer for stock of such corporation, and
                        (3) such acquisition is pursuant to an offer which was not made on the same terms to all shareholders.
                Especially considering that it is the SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY of PUERTO RICO who has the AUTHORITY to COLLECT taxes from all TAXPAYERS and the AUTHORITY to CREATE all of the RULES & REGULATIONS for the ENFORCEMENT of TITLE 26 as is shown in the CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS and 26 U.S.C. 6301 and 26 U.S.C. 7805.
                27 CFR 26.11
                Director. The Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the Department of the Treasury, Washington, D.C.
                    Director of the service center. A director of an internal revenue service center.
                    District director. A district director of internal revenue.
                    Revenue Agent. Any duly authorized Commonwealth Internal Revenue Agent of the Department of the Treasury of Puerto Rico.
                   
                Secretary. The Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico.
                   
                Secretary or his delegate. The Secretary or any officer or employee of the Department of the Treasury of Puerto Rico duly authorized by the Secretary to perform the function mentioned or described in this part.
                    Treasury Account. The Department of the Treasury's General Account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
                    United States. The States and the District of Columbia.
                When used in this part and in forms prescribed under this part, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof, terms shall have the meaning ascribed in this section. Words in the plural form shall include the singular and vice versa, and words importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine. The terms ``includes'' and ``including'' do not exclude things not enumerated which are in the same general class.
                 
                (68A Stat. 917, as amended (26 U.S.C. 7805); 49 Stat. 981, as amended
                (27 U.S.C. 205) Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 775 (26 U.S.C. 6301);
                June 29, 1956, ch. 462, 70 Stat. 391 (26 U.S.C. 6301))

                [T.D. ATF-48, 43 FR 13551, Mar. 31, 1978]

                http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/05dec20031700/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2003/aprqtr/27cfr26.11.htm
                26 USC 6301. Collection authority
                The Secretary shall collect the taxes imposed by the internal revenue laws.
                 
                26 USC 7805. Rules and regulations
                (a) Authorization
                Except where such authority is expressly given by this title to any person other than an officer or employee of the Treasury Department, the Secretary shall prescribe all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of this title, including all rules and regulations as may be necessary by reason of any alteration of law in relation to internal revenue. (rest omitted)
                 
                26 USC 7701(a)(14) Taxpayer
                The term “taxpayer” means any person subject to any internal revenue tax.

                Nor can I "pay" a tax I do NOT OWE for "money" that I have NEVER RECEIVED.

                12 USC Sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

                Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.

                http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000411----000-.html

                18 USC Sec. 8. Obligation or other security of the United States defined

                The term ''obligation or other security of the United States'' includes all bonds, certificates of indebtedness, national bank currency, Federal Reserve notes, Federal Reserve bank notes, coupons, United States notes, Treasury notes, gold certificates, silver certificates, fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized officers of the United States, stamps and other representatives of value, of whatever denomination, issued under any Act of Congress, and canceled United States stamps.

                http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000008----000-.html

                31 USC Sec. 3124. Exemption from taxation

                (a) Stocks and obligations of the United States Government are exempt from taxation by a State or political subdivision of a State. The exemption applies to each form of taxation that would require the obligation, the interest on the obligation, or both, to be considered in computing a tax, except -
                (1) a nondiscriminatory franchise tax or another non-property tax instead of a franchise tax, imposed on a corporation; and
                (2) an estate or inheritance tax.
                 
                (b) The tax status of interest on obligations and dividends, earnings, or other income from evidences of ownership issued by the Government or an agency and the tax treatment of gain and loss from the disposition of those obligations and evidences of ownership is decided under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). An obligation that the Federal Housing Administration had agreed, under a contract made before March 1, 1941, to issue at a future date, has the tax exemption privileges provided by the authorizing law at the time of the contract. This subsection does not apply to obligations and evidences of ownership issued by the District of Columbia, a territory or possession of the United States, or a department, agency, instrumentality, or political subdivision of the District, territory, or possession.
                 

                Nor do I live in a FEDERAL AREA created under the BUCK ACT (such as in the State of XYZ) which is a FEDERAL ENCLAVE within one of the several STATES of the UNION.

                BUCK ACT definitions, codified at 4 USC 110.
                (a) The term “person” shall have the meaning assigned to it in section 3797 of title 26. [NOTE: see 26 USC 7701]
                (b) The term “sales or use tax” means any tax levied on, with respect to, or measured by, sales, receipts from sales, purchases, storage, or use of tangible personal property, except a tax with respect to which the provisions of section 104 of this title are applicable.
                (c) The term “income tax” means any tax levied on, with respect to, or measured by, net income, gross income, or gross receipts.
                (d) The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States.
                (e) The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency, of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State.
                http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sec_04_00000110----000-.html
                 
                REVENUE & TAXATION CODE 6017.  "In this State" or "in the State" means within the exterior limits of the State of California and includes all territory within these limits owned by or ceded to the United States of America.
                http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=rtc&group=06001-07000&file=6001-6024
                 
                REVENUE & TAXATION CODE 11205.  "In this State" or "in the State" means within the exterior limits of the State of California and includes all territory within these limits owned by or ceded to the United States of America.
                http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=rtc&group=11001-12000&file=11201-11206

                The simple FACT is that since I am NOT involved in the PRIVILEGES/ACTIVITIES that are being TAXED, those laws do NOT apply to me.

                "Duties and imposts are terms commonly applied to levies made by governments on the importation or exportation of commodities. Excises are 'taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale, or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations, and upon corporate privileges.' Cooley, Const. Lim. 7th ed. 680.
                 
                The tax under consideration, as we have construed the statute, may be described as an excise upon the particular privilege of doing business in a corporate capacity, i. e., with the advantages which arise from corporate or quasi corporate organization; or, when applied to insurance companies, for doing the business of such companies. As was said in the Thomas Case, 192 U. S. supra, the requirement to pay such taxes involves the exercise of [220 U.S. 107, 152]   privileges, and the element of absolute and unavoidable demand is lacking. If business is not done in the manner described in the statute, no tax is payable. "  FLINT v. STONE TRACY CO., 220 U.S. 107 (1911)
                The simple FACT is that most people NEVER REALIZE that many laws are FRAUDUENTLY APPLIED to them under a FICTION OF LAW because they don't KNOW any better.
                 
                Maybe people should read the REGULATIONS that INTERPRETE the CODE, so they can see just HOW DEEP the RABBIT HOLE really is.
                 
                Patrick in California
                 
                "Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities. Truth isn't." -- Mark Twain
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.