Pennsylvania statute quotes that fictitious and corporate names are spelled in all Roman (CAPITAL) letters. 15 PaCSA 5303, 5306

The term "Piercing the Corporate Veil" is a legal one which identifies the process where a court removes the protection provided individual members of a corporation for criminal activity, and makes these members responsible for their own actions. In reality, according to the original meaning of corporations, is that these corporate groups were established exactly for that reason; for unlawful purposes, primarily to escape punishment for their crimes by placing the blame on a fictional organization responsible to no one.

The "United States" government jumped on the corporate bandwagon the first part of the 1870's by declaring themselves a separate entity from Constitutional government. This, of course, followed the war between the states and the supposed Fourteenth Amendment, which lawfully never was, but was accepted by the newly formed corporation called the "United States."

The fact that the Constitution had already established a United States was inconsequential to those traitors in Congress, because it was the Constitution itself they wanted destroyed, and the war, instigated by the Jewish factions of Europe, was fought for this purpose, and all the flowery fictions blamed for the war is pure fantasy.

Corporations themselves are natural processes of society, that is, when a group of people gather for a particular purpose, such as for forming a community they are a corporation, and there can be no criminal intent attached thereto, but it is when corporations are established with the power to declare themselves bankrupt that makes them criminal. This is the situation of our "government" today; the richest, most powerful nation on earth "bankrupt." Just the thought is ridiculous.

Corporations are legal fictions; that is, they do not exist except in the minds of men. Anyone can create a fantasy in their own mind and make it do for them what they please, but these fantasies cannot, nor do not extend to areas outside the realm of personal capacity. Corporations are made of living, breathing men, all with the same ideas and purposes, so we can look upon them with the same limitations as the individual, and that is their jurisdiction is confined to the lawful area of their creation.

A corporation, being a legal fiction, cannot think, it cannot act in any manner, even to communication with natural man, and for this reason it must have somebody, or bodies to speak and act for it, and the lawyers have set themselves up for this task.

The enormity of corporate enterprises is limited only by imagination, and they are gold mines for the bar associations, which are corporations themselves. Even thieves must leave an out for themselves, as they never know when the worm will turn, and "dumb" burrowing rodents will have at least two exits from their dens. After years of research, a few people locally have found what we believe to be that "out" from corporate jurisdiction which has been milking the citizens of this nation for well over a century.

We have had great success with this "out," and the shocked looks and frenzies of judges presented with this procedure show us that we are on the right track. As all other "sure" things, however, we can't rest on our laurels and be smug with our assumptions that it is fool proof.

We have to remember that it took the lawyer profession many years to come up with their gimmicks, and they aren't going to fall over and play dead as we proceed to break up their playhouses, and we know from experience that they know how to play rough. The idea is to hit hard, fast, and as widespread as possible before they can see what is happening, and that is why we need as much diversity and geographical application as we can muster.

There is nothing complicated about the procedure of disclaiming corporation existence, which is what all this is about; the difficulty lies overcoming a lifetime of corporate propaganda, and we have had great difficulty in this area. We who work with this procedure went through the same agonizing process before we realized that it really works. We were looking for the complicated when the answer to our problems was right under our noses all of the time.

I don't mean to write a book and omit the meat of my subject, but you will find that some prosecutors and judges just haven't got the picture yet, and will ask your source of information when you go before them, and you need a little background to keep from being embarrassed. Again, try not to read difficulty into a perfectly simple procedure, which is outlined below. Not having access to laws of other states I can only quote from those to which I have access, and those are of Louisiana.

We have tried this system in Alabama and Florida, and know it works there (we didn't even research the law books in those states before acting) and we have to assume it will work nationally, as the corporation veil encompasses every nook and cranny of the nation, and for this very reason we at present can't see where a general withdrawal from their jurisdiction is possible. Every case must be decided on its own until there are enough of us, and locations, to make the corporate masters accept the fact that they can't fight it. Please read the two sections from the Louisiana Civil Codes, and the Louisiana Revised Statutes, below carefully; disect them word by word and the message will come out loud and clear.

(Eldon's note: Statute 445 was repealed around 1988; however, 429 is still around as Revised Statute 15:429, and is posted on the internet by the Louisiana State Government website: Revised Statute 15:429 )

The statutes and regulations which corporations enact for their police and discipline, are obligatory upon all their respective members who are bound to obey them, provided such statutes contain nothing contrary to the laws, to public liberty, or to the interest of others.

On trial of any criminal case it shall not be necessary to prove the incorporation of any corporation mentioned in the indictment, unless the defendant, before entering upon such trial, shall have filed his affidavit specifically denying the existence of such corporation.

These two simple paragraphs say it all. If one is a member of a corporation he is bound by corporate rules and regulations, and those outside those corporations are not subject to their jurisdiction. The corporate status of an individual entering the court is automatically assumed by the court unless they have notice to counter such assumptions, and this is the purpose of the affidavit, an example of which I will provide below.

All of the socialist programs, integration of the races, the grab of power at all echelons of government, and all the other ills of this nation are corporate "enterprises." One cannot escape the thumb of corporate authority until such time as he has removed himself from the jurisdiction.

We can view government today as a corporate reality, where the Constitution is merely a by word, or ruse of fiction, where the Congress is the board of governors, the president is the corporate CEO, and the "courts" are mere corporate arbitration boards, including the U.S. Supreme Court. When we pierce the corporate veil and remove ourselves from that corrupt venture we become men again and carry with us our natural laws and sovereignty, from whence the corporations received their powers originally.

EVERY CITY, TOWN, BURG, OR OTHER CORPORATE SUBDIVISION
EVERY MEMBER OF CORPORATIONS, INCLUDING YOURSELF UNTIL DENIAL OF THOSE CORPORATIONS ARE COMPLETE BY AFFIDAVIT

EVERY DEPARTMENT OF FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, CITY, ETC., INCLUDING SHERIFF DEPARTMENTS, CITY - TOWN POLICE DEPARTMENTS, JUDGES, PROSECUTORS, AND ALL OTHER MUNICIPAL OFFICERS AND PERSONS

THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INCLUDING STATE TAX DIVISIONS, AND CITY INCOME TAX DEPARTMENTS WHERE THEY EXIST (And, CCRA)

I will provide here a scenario (fictitious name and place) and a sample of affidavit to overcome the final disposition of the case involved: John Preston Hickman has just been stopped by a Tarrant City, Alabama cop by the name of William C. Henly, for doing 45 in a 35 MPH zone. After the normal procedures of checking drivers license, insurance, etc., Henly gives Hickman a ticket, with an appearance date of June 15, 2000 in city court. John does it right by not arguing with the cop, and doing as he has been told by the officer, and accepting the ticket and even signing it as ordered by the cop. Then John goes home and prepares himself an affidavit, which reads something like this:

I, John Preston: Hickman, a living, breathing full liability man, declare in my own handwriting that the following facts are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

I hereby deny that the following corporations exist: UNITED STATES, THE STATE OF ALABAMA, THE COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, TARRANT CITY, ALABAMA, THE TARRANT CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, WILLIAM C. HENLY, ALL BAR ASSOCIATIONS, THE TARRANT CITY COURT, JOHN PRESTON HICKMAN, of 3102 WILLOW DRIVE, TARRANT CITY, ALABAMA, and ALL OTHER CORPORATE MEMBERS WHO ARE, OR WHO MAY BE ASSOCIATED WITH ANY COMPLAINTS AGAINST MY NATURAL BODY.

If any man or woman desiring to answer this affidavit, please answer in the manner of this affidavit, with notarized affidavit, using your Christian or family name for signature, and mail to the below named notary, address provided, within five (5) days or default will be obtained.

On the 25th day of May, 2000 a.d., a man who identified himself as Jxxx Pxxxxx Hxxxxx appeared before me, a notary, and attested to the truth of this affidavit with his signature.

Three copies of this affidavit should be (preferably) handwritten; one copy forwarded to the Tarrant City Police Department in time to give them five days to respond. One copy should be kept on you when you go to court, and, thirty minutes before you enter the court, take the remaining two copies, file one in their court, have the clerk stamp the other and keep with you in court in case the prosecutor and judge have not received their copies.

Eldon's note: It may be better in Canada to serve by registered mail. Make sure it is sent so as to allow time to get to the Clerk of the Court. Have the affidavit sworn before a notary or a commissioner for oaths. Send at least three copies, and the original.

The way it has gone for us in like situations here, when the "defendant's" name is called, he stands and answers and the judge will look to the prosecutor and ask him the anticipated action of the charges. The prosecutor (speaking in low tones) replies that the evidence is lacking for prosecution, or something in that manner, and the judge dismisses the case.

This system has worked in many such cases, in a state tax case, where the state was required to return the money taken from the bank accounts of a husband and wife, with the tax "debt" being cleared from the records. I have used it, personally, to place a $150,000.00 lien against a lawyer in Birmingham, Alabama, which has been there for several years. He brought suit in HIS court to have the lien removed, to no avail. Of course I never answered his frivolous suit because I had already identified myself as a living man, and not one of his fictions.

I used the affidavit to stop my phone company from adding AT&T charges for their social engineering, and a couple of other minor purposes; all were stopped cold. The amount of wins in this area, with no losses convinces us that this procedure set up in 1925 by the state legislature of Louisiana is a very valid process, and should be effective, for any and all reasons, against any corporation, public or private, within the United States. There is a case pending against the Social Security administration, or involving social security, and the results will be reported to those who receive this.

Tax liens are official legal charges against an individual, and the affidavit works there also. Remember that IRS is a corporation unto itself, and even though it is not directly connected to the U. S. Government, the fact that it operates within this nation makes it liable to the affidavit. If a bank, for any reason, gives a person's money to those whose signatures are not on the bank card, are committing a crime, and the person giving that money to IRS, the state, or anyone else is personally responsible to the depositor, and an affidavit to that bank should result in the immediate redeposit of those funds. The use of the affidavit is limited only by the imagination, and I think it is about time we make it payback time for those bastards who have milked us dry for the past several decades. I would like to know the results of all who use this system and I will keep a permanent record of all transactions.

One man was hesitant to use this system because "judges just walk all over those who challenge their jurisdiction." Well, with the affidavit we most certainly challenging their jurisdiction, but not in general. Any rebuttal at all is, in a way, challenging their jurisdiction, and that is what it is all about.

What we need to get straight right off is the fact that they DO have jurisdiction in their corporate capacities, but that doesn't mean they can bring noncorporate citizens into that jurisdiction, which is exactly what they have done - through fraud. All we are doing with the affidavit is merely showing them that their assumptions that all men are a part of their scheme are very wrong, and that we have the law on our side that shows them to be wrong.

Corporations, even though they are "legal" fictions, are still businesses; businesses are commercial enterprises, and commercial enterprises are controlled by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Judges will tell you differently and they will be wrong. Corporations are established by the state, whether federal or otherwise, (government is state) and all states of the Union have accepted the UCC, which originally was established for the District of Columbia, if my information is correct. The UCC is a complicated mass of business jargon to the casual reader, but in reality our rights are contained in the pages of those documents. Our right to contract, fair play in contracts, business, and all other aspects of human commerce activities are covered in the UCC.

While man, especially the Christian man, is born with the common law in his heart, the English common law was derived from commerce and commercial law itself. In the middle ages, open "fairs," or trading centers were set up in England, and most likely in all other countries of Europe, where people could bring their produce and goods to sell. People would come from all areas of Europe to attend these fairs, or trading centers, and of course squabbling was rampant and constant, so courts of arbitration were established to settle these arguments, and render the exact law on any subject. These courts were called "pied powder courts" because, it is said, that the courts settled arguments before the dust of the well trampled ground could settle on their feet.

If I remember correctly, admiralty and maritime law was derived from this, and separation was made between law of the sea and law of the land, which was included in our Constitution. For a judge to say that this isn't affected by commercial law, or the UCC, is hogwash. I ask them if they aren't under commercial law, then why did it cost me $150.00 to file a case their courts and

I still pay taxes to support them. Of course, the answer is evaded, and this is another story. The bottom line of the affidavit denying the existence of corporations is that it pierces the corporate veil by an individual, and for the same purposes; the criminal activities of the courts themselves. We, as individual sovereigns, have the right and the duty to questions our servants, and if the refuse to be questioned then this only proves our contention that they are crooks. It also makes them aliens to our way of life, because they are upholding the policies of the bar associations, which are alien corporations, instead of the law of this land. No lawyer, no judge, or other "judicial" agent of this nation is licensed by the state; aka, we the people, to do business - anywhere in the country. Yet, they treat us as aliens in our own venues. This has to stop, and I mean to do everything within my power to help it along.

Impeachment of 29 judges in Alaska filed in Senate + evidence
IRS is not a agency of the United States Government
IRS can't sue or be sued, No Official Bond
Judicial Notice
Drivers License Revoked Won 5-0
Discovery document - federal and State of Alaska
Bouviers 1856 Law Dictionary - Complete

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

Current Texas Rules of Court recognize a man's right to deny corporate existence:
By a Texas Law Researcher

In "The State of Texas" there are 2 rules in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. They are rule 52. ALLEGING A CORPORATION, and rule 93. CERTAIN PLEAS TO BE VERIFIED. Rule 52 is straight forward about the corporation status.

"An allegation that a corporation is incorporated shall be taken as true, unless denied by the affidavit of the adverse party, his agent or attorney, whether such corporation is a public or private corporation and however created."

In an equity setting where there is a maritime contract in effect. Only like entities can contract with each other. The entities I am talking about are "persons", entities in a subject to government position (citizens, body politic, corporations, members, employee's and any other man made legal fiction).

Now we get to rule 93. This one is vague but interesting. In the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, this rule is mentioned in the section on the "Motion to Abate", which is basically an old common law motion. I will reproduce the important parts with my comment in parentheses. - This rule takes up a whole page.

"A pleading setting up any of the following matters, unless the truth of such matters appear of record, shall be verified by affidavit.

1. That the plaintiff has not legal capacity to sue or that the defendant has not the legal capacity to be sued. (if you are not a corporation you would lack capacity, just for fun look up "civilly dead" or "civil death")
2. That the plaintiff is not entitled to recover in the capacity in which he sues, or that the defendant is not liable in the capacity in which he is sued.
(Note: Corporations, or members of a corporation as officers or employees of a corporation) cannot sue a man who is of unlimited liability status.)
3. omitted
4. That there is a defect of parties, plaintiff or defendant. (See Note in #2 above.)
5. omitted
6. That any party alleged in any pleading to be a corporation is not incorporated as alleged. (See note in #2 above)"

Ok. You get the point. This rule goes on to talk about contracts without consideration. It also talks about insurance claims. These pleadings are basically denying "personam jurisdiction" and subject matter jurisdiction.

Here is one more interesting tidbit. The book to which I refer is "O'Connor's Texas Rules Civil Trials 2000". Quoting Justice Michael O'Connor On page XII:

"To reduce gender choices, I refer to trial judges as the "trial court" and to parties as "it" - as though all parties were corporations, which they often are."

What is the significance of this? If you answer to the appelation of "person" in response to a charge under any Statute or Act, you are considered a corporate body without a free will mind.

621. (1) The clerk of the court or the prosecutor may, where an indictment is filed against a corporation, cause a notice of the indictment to be served on the corporation.

Comment: This is the only place where indictments are authorized, and for corporations, not for full liability People. The Common Law and the Magna Carta allow ONLY "Good Men of the Neighborhood" - a Grand Jury to take a man to court.

(2) A notice of an indictment referred to in subsection (1) shall set out the nature and purport of the indictment and advise that, unless the corporation appears on the date set out in the notice or the date fixed pursuant to subsection 548(2.1), and enters a plea, a plea of not guilty will be entered for the accused by the court, and that the trial of the indictment will be preceded with as though the corporation had appeared and pleaded.
R.S. 1985, c, C-46, S. 621; 1997, c. 18, s.71

Comment: The entering of a plea by a judge is done frequently against Canadians. This activity is only authorized in the Criminal Code of Canada for an accused corporation.

This means that all Canadians are considered corporations or corporate entities; or, the judges have unlawfully assumed authority for which there is no basis. Since the civil codified system (Criminal Code of Canada) is ONLY applicable to corporations or corporate entities, and not to full liability men with God Given rights, that means that Canadians judges are arch-traitors to the People of Canada when they unlawfully assume jurisdiction over them by imagining that they are corporations, and should be facing the death penalty, the penalty for TRAITORS.

Treason is not only aiding the enemy in time of war. It is the act of a servant overthrowing the authority and rights of the master or sovereign. The Canadian People are sovereign over all levels of government.

The foundational maxims of the underlying commercial law, from which all law and commerce in the world today derive, are:

*All are equal under the law (moral and natural law). In commerce truth is sovereign.

*All matters must be expressed to be resolved. He who leaves the field of battle first loses by default.

*Sacrifice is the measure of credibility (one who has not been damaged by, given to, lost on account of, or put at risk by another has no basis to make claims or charges against him/her).

*A lien or claim can be satisfied only through rebuttal by counter affidavit point-for-point,
resolution by jury, or payment.

The reason, this scenario prevails is because the world has been set up to run precisely this way.
We (the slaves) were just not supposed to figure it out. Code is Set in Stone

It MUST be understood that in this fraud that makes you a corporate entity, the Canadian (and American) courts determine whether you are, or are not a corporate member subject to the Crown, or to the corporate UNITED STATES, in the PRE-TRIAL HEARING.

That is, in fact, the so-called "TRIAL" where you MUST have the above noted affidavit, and have it read into the transcript. If you are charged under any statute, the actual trial is an administrative procedure of a dissident slave. Therefore, one must be persistent in demanding that the affidavit denying corporate existence be refuted point by point, or demand that it stand as truth prior to the termination of the pre-trial hearing. The result should only be the quashing of the case for want of proper jurisdiction; and, this upon your request for a motion to quash.

In previous correspondence and in our lawsuit 1:99XX00000 (attached), now before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, you and your agency have not provided any grounds for your action. Any attempt to cause us harm will cause us to initiate a separate lawsuit against your agency and a lawsuit against yourself in your personal capacity.

In regards to the attached letter (P-000 000 000), let us say that we do not believe we owe you or the Internal Revenue Service any money therefore there exists a controversy which exceeds twenty dollars and there are still facts to be decided that pertain to this matter. So we are sending you this letter to give you legal notice that we want and demand a judicial trial by a. jury of our peers as guaranteed by the 7th amendment of the Constitution for the united States of America.

Any fiduciary Officer of the Court, who has taken an affirmation of oath who then proceeds to violate our Seventh Amendment Rights by seizing , or causing the seizure of our property or moves forward by any action on your part to have our property taken away by others, will be guilty of numerous violations of law and among other things violating our Civil Rights we therefore demand Due Process of law.

Be advised that we will use this letter to prove that you had prior knowledge that you were committing a Civil Rights crime and while committing a Civil Rights crime as fiduciary with full knowledge, we can now prove intent and as in the Rodney King vs.Ventura case others who standby or participate in a Civil Rights crime were sentenced to a mandatory ten years in prison.

1) Addressing correspondence with all capital letters indicates a letter sent and addressed to a fictitious or other non-living being/entity or any other such corporation fiction or nom de guerre.

2) We are not a corporation. Our Christian given names are spelled with a capital first letter in our first and last names and the remaining letters of each part of our names are spelled in lower case alphabet, which is the acknowledged proper form according to Chapter 3 of the United States Government Printing Office Style manual ( 1984 edition, currently circulated).

3) Also refer to Federal District Court, in the Western District of Washington at Seattle (Civil #C97-84WD), wherein the Federal District Court Judge acknowledged that a "true legal name" is not spelled with all capital letters, and the use of upper and lower case is the proper form.

4) Assigning said corporate fiction to us without our consent and without full disclosure of its intended use shall be deemed continuous fraud. The use of the postal service in the aforesaid manner also constitutes mail fraud. Any such correspondence will be deemed mailed in error and refused for fraud, unless your intention is not to mail correspondence to us.

5) There is no Legislative Implementing Regulation that would allow the IRS or its agents to seize or cause to seize or lien our property for frivolous return penalty.

6) The IRS has NO LEGAL AUTHORITY to seize (levy) our "paycheck, bank account, auto or other property if the IRS does not receive payment in full" as is threatened in your "Final Notice".

7) IRC (INTERNAL REVENUE- Code) Section 7608 (a), limits the seizure authority of IRS employees to Subtitle E provisions and "any other law of the United States pertaining to the commodities subject to tax..."

8) IRC Section 7608 (b) (1) LIMITS the enforcement of laws relating to internal revenue other than Subtitle "E" to "Any criminal investigator of the intelligence Division or of the Internal Security Division of the Internal Revenue Service..." not to other agents.

9) IRS manual MT1100-354, states that Special Agents are ONLY authorized to enforce criminal statutes "applicable to income, estate, gift employment and excise taxes ... INVOLVING UNITED STATES CITIZENS RESIDING IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND NONRESIDENT ALIENS SUBJECT TO FEDERAL INCOME TAX FILING REQUIREMENTS." Therefore, no IRS agent is authorized to enforce any Internal Revenue law other than Subtitle "E".

10) Delegation Order No. 157(Rev.5) only authorizes Special Agents to seize property" when involved, used or intended to be used in violation of internal revenue laws..." No IRS agent has a Delegation Order allowing them to seize property in PAYMENT of income taxes.

11) Pursuant to the Federal Debt Collection procedures Act, 28 USC 3001, seizures can only be done by U.S. Marshals armed with Court Orders, and/or Writs of Attachment or Writs of Garnishment.

12) The regulations for IRC Sections 6331- 6343 only apply to taxes enforced by the BATF and are located in CFR 27, not in CFR 26.

13) The dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court in Bennis v. Michigan (I 996) 134 L. ED. 2d 68, proves that the IRS has no authority to seize property in payment of income taxes when it observed : "For purposes of analysis it is useful to Identify THREE different categories of property that are SUBJECT TO SEIZURE: pure contraband, proceeds of criminal activity, and tools of the criminal trade".

14) 28 USC Section 3001 (a) " the chapter provides the exclusive civil procedures for the United States- (1) to recover a judgment on a debt; or (2) to obtain, before judgment on a claim for a debt, a remedy in connection with such claim. Section 3002 (3) (B) verifies that "taxes" and "penalties" fall within the provisions of this Act.

15) 28 USC 3102 (d) and 3104 (a) confirm that ONLY U.S. MARSHALS, armed with COURT ORDERS AND WRITS OF ATTACHMENT OR WRITS OF GARNISHMENT, are authorized to seize property.

16) 28 USC 3104 (b) (A) provides that even a court order and a writ of garnishment the "earnings of the debtor shall not be subject to garnishment ".

17) You will be violating the Garnishment Laws of the State of Michigan if you proceed without judicial process. See Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated Sections:

This letter will serve to put you and the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE on notice that if our wages or bank account or other property are seized by your actions, or any seizure action stemming from your fraudulent claim, we will sue for damages. From my research, no monetary limit can be set against a Civil Rights law suit. Not only will we seek to sue the government under Title 26 USC 7422 but we will sue you personally for damages under 26 USC 7433, since you now will be proceeding "intentionally" and in "reckless" disregard for both the law and facts. In addition you will be in violation of 18 USC 214 Conspiracy against rights of citizens (criminal), 18 USC 242- Deprivation of rights under the color of law (criminal), 18 USC 287 False, fictitious, or fraudulent claims (criminal) among others.

The attached Final Notice is not properly signed or attested to. Therefore we are making you and the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE both responsible for the contents of this notice. Any jurisdiction you feel you have over us is merely presumptive and ceases to exist when factually rebuffed.

Let me make myself perfectly clear. We are not a tax protesters. The income tax, when properly applied, to the proper subjects of the "residents" of the proper territories are both legal and constitutional. None of our facts are contrary to any Dejure law or Article III Court of law decision in the proper Venue. Also the attached Notice P-000 000 000 is hereby timely Refused for Cause, without dishonor for the following reasons:

3) We are not liable for the penalty stated in attached dated letter, P-000 000 000.

7) We are not involved in any revenue taxable activities including, but not limited to the manufacture, sale or distribution of alcohol, tobacco, or firearms.

8) You have no jurisdiction over us, therefore any jurisdiction you feel you have over us is hereby timely challenged and rebutted.

9) We are not a person, corporation or other entity as defined in the IRC for the purposes of imposing as income tax on us. This definition does not include the "natural person".

In addition, we request at this time to meet with you and have an informal meeting as we have the right to as per your own publications. At this meeting we will be bringing at least two witnesses and we will tape record our meeting, please have ready documentation to the following:

a) Your letter failed to cite a specific tax, provide to us the statute of the specific tax you say we owe.

c) Provide to us your Delegation of Authority that would allow you to impose (a) above.

d) Provide to us the specific Statute and regulation that made us liable for (a) above.

e) Provide to us the specific Statute and regulation that made us subject to (a) above.

f) Provide to us and all documents, statutes and regulations, if any exist, use to determine that we owe a federal tax.

g) Provide to us your determination as to what is being taxed if anything is it people, property or some revenue taxable activity?

h) Provide to us a statement as to what is the subject of any tax you say we may owe.

If you agree that we are neither subject to nor liable for any revenue tax; we respectfully make this timely demand that you ABATE your claim, correct your error, and notify us in writing of the actions you have taken.

If you disagree, we respectfully make this demand that you provide us with copies of the documents we listed above. Also we respectfully demand that you provide us with an itemized list of all of the herein requested documents and information you and your Service does not have.

Any statements or claims cited herein, properly rebutted by facts of law, or Supreme Court rulings, such shall not prejudice the lawful validity of other claims or statements not properly rebutted or invalidated by facts of law.

Respectfully, we will end here but we do reserve the right to enter further arguments and court citings. Again, we demand a face to face hearing with you as specified by your own publications. We will expect. your response to our demand for abatement and correction of your error or for your correction of any error you claim we have made, along with the documents demanded to support your position, within 30 days of your receipt of this letter of demand and inquiry. If you need additional time, please make your request in writing and it will be granted.

If we do not hear from you in 30 days, your lack of response will establish the presumption that neither you nor those in your Service has the documentation to make or support any presumptions that we are the ones who come within your purview of your statutory authority, nor is your claim of any requirement or obligation upon us valid.

Mr. and Mrs. personally appeared to me (who I know or proven to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the citizen whose name is subscribed to within the instrument and acknowledge to me that they executed the same in their capacity and that their signature on the instrument is the said person.

Disclaimer: We are just people that get together and exchange information.
We are not a group or organization.
We are not a company or corporation or association.
We sell nothing and we charge nothing.

To cancel your class e-mail click "reply" and type "stop messages".