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

Those of you with wage withholding or tax issues...

Expand Messages
  • goldilucks
    You guys really need to start paying attention to what Dan Meador s research started to uncover and what Ralph Winterrowd s research has concluded. 26 CFR Part
    Message 1 of 3 , Aug 13, 2008
    • 0 Attachment

      You guys really need to start paying attention to what Dan Meador's research started to uncover and what Ralph Winterrowd's research has concluded. 26 CFR Part 301 regs are internal housekeeping regs and do not apply to the general public. So, unless you are a federal or state employee, they do not have applicability to you. It's a slam dunk. I'm surprised that people are not picking this up and running with it.
       
      You have to understand the difference between Part 1 regs, Part 20 regs, Part 31 regs and Part 301 regs.
       
      Part 1 regs apply to the general public and without exception must have a mandatory comment period within the federal register to give you the opportunity to object and/or opt out. You can find that in 5USC553.
       
      Part 20 regs apply to estates
      Part 31 regs apply to employers (federal and state)
      Part 301 regs apply to federal and state employees, are internal and are not substantiative, but rather "interpretive" and do not have the force and effect of law.
       
      You absolutely have a case against them if you are not a federal or state employee subject to the housekeeping regs if they are applying those part 301 regs to you. In using their own terminology, it is the "unauthorized collection" of taxes. It is their regs that apply to them.
       
      All of this can be found within the federal register, the CFR's and the parallel table of authorities for Part 1 and Part 301 regs, Chrysler v. Brown.
       
      There are no part one penalty regs that apply to the general public.
       
      In addition, the statute for wage withholding only has a single part 1 substantive law and that is 26 CFR 1.1441-2 which comports with 26 USC 3401(a)(6).
       
      Most of the criminal penalty statutes of the 7000 series also do not have substantiative authorities, including the biggies of 7201 and 7203.
       
      That is probably why most people who get their IMF's decoded will find they are listed as federal personnel or engaged in some type of ATF activity.
       
      In Luhring v. Glotzbach, 304 F.2d 560, 564 (4th Cir.1962),[ Citation here ] the Fourth Circuit held that the provisions of 26 C.F.R. 601, also known as the Internal Revenue Service "Statement of Procedural Rules," "constitute rules laid down by the Commissioner for the regulations of the affairs of his office rather than formal regulations with the force and effect of law."  The statute under which these rules were promulgated, 5 U.S.C. Section 301  (formerly 5 U.S.C. Section 22), has an entirely different purpose from that of 26 U.S.C. Section 7805, which authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury (as opposed to the Internal Revenue Service Commissioner) to "prescribe needful rules for the enforcement of the Internal Revenue laws."  Luhring v. Glotzbach at 564. The purpose of 5 U.S.C. 301 , which originated in 1789 as a law "to enable General Washington to get his administration underway by spelling out the authority of Government officers to set up offices and to file Government documents,"id., is to set up merely internal guidelines for a given governmental agency. The Fourth Circuit in Luhring v. Glotzbach also held that even if the procedural rules set forth in 26 C.F.R. Section 601 had the same effect as regulations promulgated by the Secretary, they would still be "directory and not mandatory in legal effect."  Id. at 565. All other circuits asked to interpret Part 601 have adopted the Fourth Circuit's interpretation.   See, e.g., Boulez v. C.I.R., 810 F.2d 209, 215 (D.C.Cir.)cert. denied,484 U.S. 896 (1987) (Part 601 rules "serve merely as guidelines for conducting the internal affairs of the agency"); Estate of Jones v. C.I.R., 795 F.2d 566, 571 (6th Cir.1986) ("the circuits have consistently held that the Internal Revenue's Statement of Procedural Rules is only directory and not mandatory"); Ward v. C.I.R., 784 F.2d 1424, 1431 (9th Cir.1986) (procedural rules directory, not mandatory); United States v. Horne, 714 F.2d 206, 207 (1st Cir.1983) (procedural rules set forth in 26 C.F.R. § 601.101 et seq."were not designed to protect the constitutional rights of taxpayers.");  Einhorn v. DeWitt, 618 F.2d 347, 350 (5th Cir.1980) (procedural rules' purpose "to govern the internal affairs of the Internal Revenue Service"); Rosenberg v. C.I.R., 450 F.2d 529, 532-33 (10th Cir.1971) (procedural rules directory, not mandatory).
       

    • Founder
      Shalom tips group!!! I think that goldilucks is missing something. There is an old saying among lawyers that “when you write a contract, you are writing
      Message 2 of 3 , Aug 14, 2008
      • 0 Attachment

        Shalom tips group!!!

           I think that goldilucks is missing something.

           There is an old saying among lawyers that “when you write a contract, you are writing law.”

           Because of Article 1 section 10 of the U.S. constitution, they are right, at least within the scope of the contract.  When one binds themselves under a contract, then they must perform either specific performance or substantial performance, depending on the kind of contract and the specific wording of the contract, and when they fail by not performing on the contract, the law can compel performance.  In that way, when one agrees in a contract by signing their name, then they are writing law.

           What goldilucks says (below) is that 26 CFR Part 301 applies to federal and state employees and do not have the force and effect of law.

           Goldilucks is in error.

           26 CFR is called “Treasury Regulations” and 26 CFR Part 301 is titled “Administrative Rules.”  26 CFR Part 301, therefore, contains the “administrative rules of the Department of the Treasury,” and they apply to any and all natural and juridical persons who place themselves under the legal obligation to obey these regulations.  Becoming a government employee is only ONE of the many ways of placing one’s self under contract and subjecting themselves to Part 301.  Making one's self entitled to receive federal benefits or survivor benefits is another way [5 USC 552a(13)].

           Now, please go to your own bank or savings & loan, and get a copy of the application for your account.  You will most likely find the information you need right on the signature card that you voluntarily signed.  You don’t have to have the entire bank codes.  At the most, you will only need the brochure that they have on hand that explains the account procedures.  The signature card or brochure will tell you that when you contract with the bank to get an account, you are agreeing to abide by the administrative rules of the department of the treasury.

           Can it get any plainer than this?  This is yet another way to become subject to 26 CFR Part 301.

           IRS Special agents are told that when they are preparing for a lawsuit, they are to go to all of the local area banks and S&Ls, and get your signature cards to attach to the complaint.  Look it up in the Handbook for Special Agents , if you don’t believe me.  It can be purchased on line.

           The IRS enforces the entire 26 CFR Part 301, including all of the specialized regulations that govern the BATF, upon anyone who signs the bank’s signature card when opening an account, and they do it under your own, voluntary agreement.  No one had a gun to your head when you applied for benefits or opened the account, therefore, it was voluntary.

           You are signing a contract and making your own law that applies 26 CFR Part 301 to yourself.  Better you cut your hand off than sign that paper, but if you do sign it, you are obligated to conform with the administrative rules until and unless you go through all of the legal procedures to vacate that contract.  The bank and the Treasury have a right to expect performance unless served with due and timely notice of legal reasons why you are vacating the contract, and you have no right to expect them to be psychic and read your mind that you no longer want to abide by your voluntary agreement.  Some people actually want to be slaves and be abused, so until you make the correct, legal & lawful steps and complete the legal procedures to unvolunteer, the courts will enforce your voluntary agreement.  You are the one who made the law that they are enforcing, so they are under no obligation to "show you the law."  You are presumed to already "know, understand, and concur with the content of any instrument that bears your voluntary signature."

           I hope that this helps save someone the $150K that it cost me to learn this, some 15 years ago.  After I learned what caused my voluntary slavery, and I learned how to legally unvolunteer myself, I became a free man of the soil of Washington state, and have been a free man after that time.  I can now travel in foreign countries, work and receive a master’s wages, and have no obligations that most people have under either 26 USC or 26 CFR.

           My hope for you all is that the Almighty ONE will bless you with wisdom to make the right decisions, and peace.

        Shalom,

        Bernie Besherse                        

        Skype:  paraclete45



        Thursday, August 14, 2008, 9:24:59 AM, you wrote:

         1. 

             Those of you with wage withholding or tax issues... From:        goldilucks 

        Posted by:      "goldilucks"  goldilucks@...     goldilucks   

        Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:58 am        (PDT) 

          You guys really need to start paying attention to what Dan Meador's

          research started to uncover and what Ralph Winterrowd's research has

          concluded. 26 CFR Part 301 regs are internal housekeeping regs and do

          not apply to the general public. So, unless you are a federal or state

          employee, they do not have applicability to you. It's a slam dunk. I'm

          surprised that people are not picking this up and running with it.


        Part 301 regs apply to federal and state employees, are internal and are not substantiative, but rather "interpretive" and do not have the force and effect of law.

      • goldilucks
        ... federal and state employees and do not have the force and effect of law. ... titled Administrative Rules. 26 CFR Part 301, therefore, contains the
        Message 3 of 3 , Aug 16, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          > What goldilucks says (below) is that 26 CFR Part 301 applies to
          federal and state employees and do not have the force and effect of law.
          > Goldilucks is in error.
          > 26 CFR is called "Treasury Regulations" and 26 CFR Part 301 is
          titled "Administrative Rules." 26 CFR Part 301, therefore,
          contains the >"administrative rules of the Department of the
          Treasury," and they apply to any and all natural and juridical
          persons who place themselves >under the legal obligation to obey these
          regulations. Becoming a government employee is only ONE of the many ways
          of placing one's self >under contract and subjecting themselves to
          Part 301. Making one's self entitled to receive federal benefits or
          survivor benefits is another way >[5 USC 552a(13)]. Now, please go to
          your own bank or savings & loan, and get a copy of the application for
          your account. You will most likely >find the information you need right
          on the signature card that you voluntarily signed. You don't have to
          have the entire bank codes. At the >most, you will only need the
          brochure that they have on hand that explains the account procedures.
          The signature card or brochure will tell you that when you contract with
          the bank to get an account, you are agreeing to abide by the
          administrative rules of the department of the >treasury. Can it get any
          plainer than this? This is yet another way to become subject to 26 CFR
          Part 301.
          > Shalom,
          > Bernie Besherse
          > Skype: paraclete45

          Bernie does have a point, so I would go and pull my signature card and
          make a reservation above my signature stating that only 26CFR part one
          regulations will apply. That will remove the presumption and call the
          law form. They did not promulgate penalty regs in part one and there is
          good reason for that. When they prosecute they are laying "sanctions"
          upon you for bad "conduct". Just a little bit militiaristic sounding?
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.