Showing posts with label IRS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IRS. Show all posts

Saturday, February 28, 2015

YOU ARE WORTH MILLIONS: YOUR BIRTH BOND...

JUDGES INVEST THEIR PENSIONS IN CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA. THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE IN JAIL IN AMERICA THAN RUSSIA AND CHINA COMBINED AND AMERICA HAS LESS THAN 1/2 THE POPULATION OF THOSE TWO COUNTRIES..

About the Birth Certificate
Here's a bit more about the Birth Certificate. The way I overstand it, is that when your parents sign up for it, you get a Birth Certificate, which gives you certain RIGHTS to gov't benefits. And that's in return for you depositing your SOVEREIGNTY with the federal gov't. You see, American people are sovereign, and as such they're not liable for the national debt or income taxes, and the gov't needs someone to back up their fiat 'money' scheme and spending, without them being responsible for it.
So the Birth Certificate is kinda like a Certificate of Deposit, that you get when you sign up for a CD for a certain period of time, and in return the bank agrees to give you BENEFITS, which usually is a certain rate of interest that they pay you.
So the original BC application is a CONTRACT, which gives the benefit provider a RIGHT to proceeds from the State taxing and licensing you. So there basically is YOU the depositor, and the OWNER of the original BC contract.
It is a lot like issuing stocks, where the company sells stock, which gives the buyer EQUITY in the company, which entitles him to dividents, or in case of bonds, to guaranteed interest after maturity. And what holder in due course of the original BC/contract gets, is EQUITY in all your property, as well as a right to tax your income. Which is why the United States uses these BC contracts as COLLATERAL behind its US Treasuries and other securities, including Federal Reserve Notes. I.e. the State becomes the EQUITABLE owner of all your property, and so it gets to DICTATE how that property can be used, and what kind of fees you gotta pay for using that property. So as a corporate US citizen, you only get a LEGAL title to your property, which is a privilege subject to regulation.
In other words, without Birth Certificates, there'd be no corporate Democracy because the gov't COULDN'T print fiat money FRNs, because the Federal Reserve wouldn't issue FRNs, as US would have no collateral to back its borrowing, because all the American people would stay in the PRIVATE, where they're NOT liable for the US national debt and income tax.
So I hope you see that having a BC makes you a surety for the national debt, and your property a COLLATERAL for that debt. Makes you a subject of the federal gov't, including the IRS. And as the depositor, you have rights not only to gov't benefits, but also to FULL DISCLOSURE, as well as disclosure of who is the registered owner of your BC deposit, the holder in due course, and disclosure of the authority that gov't agencies claim when they demand you to pay or perform according to their demands. I.e., what is the instrument or agreement by which I consented to obey your rules?
And here's what Jean Keating says about it:
"When your parents signed the birth certificate, they created a legal fiction called a straw man. . In commercial law its called a (homus straus?), which is a legal fiction or straw man. First the State registered it with the bureau of vital statistics, and then they register it with the dept. of commerce. Then they register it with the DTC (Depository Trust Company).
This company right here (DTC) is a securities depository and settlement company. The DTC it’s nominee (nominee means name) is called CEDE and company. That’s the nominee. As in when they ceded the State of Maryland to the District of Colombia.
All your money goes through this company (DTC). This is the clearing corporation, clearing house and settlement depository for all commodities and securities. All commodities and securities are registered with CEDE and Co. under rule 12. Everybody is reading the UCC.  You should be reading SEC. Alpine publishing in NYC they have the national securities and exchange act of 1934.  There are two of them one in 1933, and one in 1934. Two different acts.  You should be studying these rules. Because what they're doing under rule 12, is they are registering your birth certificate. – Under rule 12 as a security.  They register this in the name of CEDE and Co. There are two types of securities. Certificated and un-certificated.  What they do is issue a certificate. Isn’t that what it says on your birth (certificate of live birth)? When they register it they issue a certificate, it becomes a certificated security. And it’s registered in the name of CEDE and Co.   What does that make them?  It makes them the registered holder. This has nothing to do with debtor/creditor law.
You own everything and you don’t control anything.  They control everything why? Because they are the registered owner. – of the certificated security (birth certificate) and they use this as collateral. You have to know what is going on before you go in there a start filing these UCC’s.
So, these people are the registered owners. Your are the owner in fact.  The registered owners control everything. They don’t own anything but they control everything. The people that are running this county control everything because they are the registered holder - owner of all these instruments - commercial paper.  You don’t control anything. I found all this out when I started studying the Erie vs Tompkins case decided in 1938 by Louis Brandis. This is what happened in 1938 that changed our country. The most important decision handed down by the US Supreme Court.  It’s not the real US Supreme Court – it is the High Court of Admiralty. Its called the high court of Justice, and you look up the word high court of Justice, you will find out its the high court of Admiralty. The real Supreme Court is the United States District Court for the District of Colombia in Washington, DC. They moved all the justices out of that court up on to the Capitol Hill in 1948.  If you go into the United States District Court for the District of Colombia, you will not find a yellow-fringed US flag in any of the courtrooms.  We went down there and looked.  Howard Griswald and I did.
That is your real article 3-section one court set up under the constitution. It was called the circuit court of the United States of the District of Colombia before it was called the Supreme Court in the United States for the District of Colombia.  They did that in march 3 1863.  They changed the name to the Supreme Court of the United States of the District of Colombia.  That is your real article 3 Supreme Court. That court setting up on Capitol Hill is your high court of justice, or your admiralty maritime court.   Nobody uses it – everybody goes into the territorial courts under article 1.
So they control everything because they are the registered holder – registered owner of the certificated security. Your birth certificate is a security.   On the screen is UCC Under definitions, it says a financial asset, except as otherwise provided under section 8-103, means a security.  What is a security? A security is an obligation of a person or a share, participation or other interest in a person or a property or an enterprise of a person which is, or is of a type dealt in or traded on a financial market.
Aren’t certificates traded in the market?  And this company (DTC) – CEDE and Co.- that’s its nominee, which means name, all your securities and commodities are registered in this company right here. They are the registered holder and registered owner of your birth certificate.
You are underwriting the public and national debt.  Because everybody on the public is, bankrupt.  They put HJR 192 in title 31 section 5118 2D.  “No contract shall contain an obligation which purports to give the obligee the right to demand payment in any kind of specific coin or currency of the United States.  They outlawed money. They did this under the War Powers Act.
How can there be a debt when there is no money.
June 4, 1933 they codified HJR 190 in title 31, sec 5118. (Banking Code)   under the War Powers Act.  There was no legal authority for doing this. Franklin Roosevelt sold more gold contracts than there was gold. They were going to run on the Treasury so he had to put a stop to it. And he declared a national emergency thru the Emergency Bank Act of arch 9, 1933. It’s in the Congressional Record- I am not making this up.  In 1970, they took 3 billion dollars out of Social Security to cover the British Treasury Department – they were going broke because all these corporations under GAT was converting all their dollars to euros, and they made a run on the British Treasury, and they didn’t have any currency, so they stole 3 billion dollars out of Social Security. They did this in 1970 under the Marshal Plan. One congressman was investigating it and they murdered him. This officially outlawed money (CFR31-5118).  When you sign a promissory note, it says you will pay back in US dollars. That’s why they indorse it on the back – to make it legal – it then is no longer a promissory note, it is an order to pay.  When you sign a mortgage, it is a financial agreement conveying your property to them – it is fraud, void. Then they sell it on the open market.
They track these with a CUSIP (committee on uniform security identification process) number. (9-digit number – the first 6 digits identifies what security it is. This is how they track you – that and trough your AUTOTRIS).
CUSIP is located on Water Street in DC in the DTC building.  They have another called ISIP (international securities identification process) in the ISID International Securities Identification directory."
************************************
So you're still the rightful OWNER of your sovereignty that you 'deposited' with the State, but CAN'T USE IT, just like you can't use the money that you deposited with a bank in return for Certificates of Deposit. And in order to get back your sovereign status, you'd have to basically return to them the Birth Certificate, maybe with an affidavit stating that it's the only BC that you have, and tell them that you cancel their trusteeship which was created by the original application for the BC.
And of course when you return the only copy of the BC that you have, you no longer can access gov't benefits. And if you are no longer eligible for gov't benefits, then the trust no longer exists, because without gov't benefits, the State did NOT give any value, so it has no rights/authority over you.

That's UCC for you; unless one gives VALUE, security interest does NOT attach. And without security interest, the State has NO RIGHTS/authority against you, because it has no equitable title to your property, as you're in the PRIVATE.

Friday, June 22, 2012

SUE THE IRS TO COLLECT WHAT IS DUE...


From: Legalbear
Reply-To: "tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com"
Date: Sunday, June 3, 2012 6:19 PM
To: "tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com"
Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Giving the IRS an Attitude Adjustment




After § 7433 Suit Filed, IRS Attitude Changes for the Better:


I’m kind of excited. I just got word of what appeared to be a total change of heart by the IRS after receiving a final notice of intent to sue followed by the actual filing of a suit under 26 U.S.C. § 7433. 


The IRS had made this couple promises and was not keeping them. When the couple started taking the IRS to task for not keeping the promises they gave them still more runaround. This is such a typical story that I hear all the time.


The couple had already sent a notice of intent to sue based on § 7433. But, when the couple sent a final warning that they intended to file suit and then actually did file the suit, the IRS had change of heart and became kinder and more gentle. They began to leave polite messages on the voice mail and seemed to become very sincere about correcting the errors. It appeared that they were concerned that their actions had resulted in the suit being filed and inquired about the status of the suit. 


Beneficial Features of Section 7433:


As you may recall, 26 U.S.C. § 7433(a) provides: 


If, in connection with any collection of Federal tax with respect to a taxpayer, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service recklessly or intentionally, or by reason of negligence, disregards any provision of this title, or any regulation promulgated under this title, such taxpayer[1] may bring a civil action for damages against the United States in a district court of the United States.


But, subsection (d) provides limitations:




(1) A judgment for damages shall not be awarded under subsection (b) unless the court determines that the plaintiff has exhausted the administrative remedies…


As some of you know, I’ve been a proponent of using the exhaustion requirement to our advantage. 26 CFR 301.7433-1(e) provides: 


An administrative claim…shall be sent in writing to the Area Director, Attn: Compliance Technical Support Manager of the area in which the taxpayer currently resides.


Administrative Claim Letter Success:


Letters sent in compliance with this provision have met with some success. 


In all, I am aware of seven instances where levees were released after one of these letters was sent. 


I had always said that there was a possibility that somebody would get a check as a result of these letters. A while back that actually happened. Somebody combined my lien and levy research in their letter and got a check back for over $6000 of wrongfully levied funds from the IRS.


Government Does Not Want More Litigation:


I recently got some additional insight as to the distastefulness of litigation to the government when I read the book The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind, Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2004. The book is about Paul O’Neill’s 1.5 year stint as Secretary of the Treasury. He was trying to make some changes in the ways that executives of corporations were treated. The results will become self-evident as you read:


On page 225:


Shifting the standard to negligence is a huge problem, the SEC chairman said. We just can’t go there. There’s no doubt that we have to prevent gaming the system. But we need a high standard, otherwise we’ll be overwhelmed with litigation.


On page 230:


Three days later, a story ran in the Wall Street Journal about O’Neill’s position on corporate governance and his desire to lift the standard from recklessness to simple negligence. It mentioned that Pitt and Hubbard were against the new standard, “concerned that no matter how it was crafted it will lead to more lawsuits.”


At page 233:


Many of the CEOs seemed to have consulted already with their chief counsels. The one thing they didn’t want was even the slightest uptick in litigation.


At page 239:


The move from recklessness to negligence was dropped for fear it would invite a wave of lawsuits. O’Neill and Greenspan were discouraged. A single issue for the corporate crowd—fear of lawsuits—carried the day, O’Neill said, his outrage boiling over.


So, big corporations and big government, with all of their attorneys and resources, as I suspected, do not want more litigation. An administrative claim for damages, or notice of intent to sue, gives us an opportunity to take advantage of the government’s distaste for litigation. 


Success after the Suit has been Filed:


There have been reports of no results from administrative claim letters, but, after hearing about the results described in the first paragraph of this e-mail, it got me to thinking about the results I found in the case law after the suit was filed; for example: 


1) Mrs. Shaw received a refund of all the money collected, and the remaining tax liability was abated.  Shaw v. U.S., Fifth Circuit.  


2) After filing one of these suits, the government dismissed the criminal action against the 7433 plaintiff.  Fishburn v. Brown, Sixth Circuit, 1997.  


3) After filing one of these suits, the IRS returned a seized Cadillac.  Washington v. U.S., Ninth Circuit, 1992.  FE


4) After filing one of these suits, the plaintiff's tax liability "was resolved in the plaintiff's favor in tax court.  Templeman v. U.S., First Circuit, 1994.  


5) After filing one of these suits, an injunction restricting state court filings was vacated.  Templeman v. U.S., First Circuit, 1994. 


6) After filing one of these suits, improperly levied funds were returned.  Raymond v. U.S., Sixth Circuit, 1993. 


7) After filing one of these suits, the government conceded that an assessment was erroneous and released its liens.  Miller v. U.S. (N.D. Cal. 1992). 


8) The government provided the forms during the litigation that they had previously refused to. Ball v. U.S., No. 94-2125 (7th Cir. 1995). 




It Is Possible to Win Damages off a Section 7433 Suit:


Let’s not forget the 5th Circuit case Gandy Nursery v. U.S. where $388,500 in damages were awarded and $317,738.50 in costs and attorney's fees; plus, post-judgment interest on the $16,800.   


Some Suggestions for Those Dealing With IRS:


If you already sent your claim letter:


26 CFR 301.7433-1(d) provides that, “…no action under paragraph (a) of this section shall be maintained in any federal district court before the earlier of the following dates: (i) The date the decision is rendered on a claim filed in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section; or (ii) The date six months after the date an administrative claim is filed…”


If you had a decision on your administrative claim letter, you can go ahead and file your suit, or, you can do like the couple in the first paragraph and send them a warning letter.


If you send an administrative claim letter and less than six months has passed you may want to send a warning letter telling them that the six month deadline is approaching; and that they may want to take action.


If you send an administrative claim letter and more than six months has passed you have the option of sending the warning letter or filing suit.


If you have one of my packages, but have not sent a section 7433 letter:


You may want to go into my package and locate the file 26USC7433. If you need to search your hard drive you should quickly find the file if you search for exactly this: 26USC7433. Once you locate it you should review the notes files and the sample letters. You should also review the statute and the regulation which are here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7433


and here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/301.7433-1


I’m sure these have changed since you bought my package. Locate some statutes and regulations that the IRS violated and you will be ready to put together your letter. I am available to review letters; if you would like that please call me: 720 -675 -7230 9:00 AM to 8:30 PM MST. 


If you do not have one of my packages, but think it would benefit you to send an administrative claim letter: 


My research packages amount to what I call a “shortcut to competence”. If you follow the statute and the regulation there is somebody on the other end that is going to be reading your letter. Because of this, you want your letter to display a certain degree of competence. It must appear in your letter that you’ve done your homework. A competent letter is the shortest route to success; and may save you from having to file suit. If you go to my shopping cart here:


http://www.legalbears.com/armor/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4&products_id=47


You’ll see you will see THE BIGGEST PACKAGE! THE BIGGEST SAVINGS! This package includes Lien & Levy Thumper-IRS Terminator for CDPH-All Angles Offensive MP3’s-Frivolous Return Penalties Research-Bear’s Online Legal Research Video & Golden FOIAs. This package is normally $577. For the next 10 days (June 13) when you enter IRSAttitudeAdjustment during the checkout process you will save $200 and be able to get the package for just $377. That’s a $1213 savings over what you would pay for these packages separately!


I’m convinced that filing one of these letters, sending a warning letter, and filing suit is one of the quickest and most effective ways of getting some respect from the IRS.


Knowing what your rights are is the first step to getting them: 


When the IRS violates our due process rights, most people feel bad. The bad feeling is what tells you that your rights have been violated. However, the bad feeling should only be the trigger that sets in motion a search for the authority, usually from the Supreme Court, establishing the right and explaining it. Understanding this concept is what set me on a search for Supreme Court decisions explaining due process rights. I copied and pasted 34 pages of due process quotes from the Supreme Court with the citations to the cases and quotes and put them here:


http://www.legalbears.com/armor/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4&products_id=49


If the IRS agent fails to give you all your constitutional rights he could lose his job. I made a video about this and you can view it at the link above. I call this package HOW TO HOLD IRS CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS over THEIR HEAD. This is a tremendous lever to use against IRS personnel, the threat of the loss of their job. Normally I sell this package for $200. Through June 13th, when you enter DueProcessViolations in the coupon code blank on check out you will save $100 and be able to buy these quotes for $100; a 50% savings!


NOTE: If you would like to get both of these packages you must make separate purchases because the shopping cart will only accept one discount code at a time.


I hope this email has been some help to you and given you some hope. Bear


Call me at: 720-675-7230


On Skype: legalbear


Best times to call: 8:30 am to 9:00 pm MST


Join my Yahoo Group Tips & Tricks for Court by sending an email to:


tips_and_tricks-subscribe@yahoogroups.com


My blog: legalbearsblog.com 


Tax sites: IRSTerminator.com IRSLienThumper.com IRSLevyThumper.com 


(formatted like this so this email doesn't end up in your spam folder)


[1] The Supreme Court has held that there are two kinds of taxpayers: 1) the taxpayer from whom the tax is sought to be collected; 2) the taxpayer that is subject to the Internal Revenue Code. The court held that a non-taxpayer could not be deprived of remedies under the Code by virtue of that status.