order non hybrid seeds LandRightsNFarming: FW: Social Security and Tax Withholding Are Voluntary Within The 50 States

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

FW: Social Security and Tax Withholding Are Voluntary Within The 50 States

From: Paycheck-Piracy-list-owner@mail-list.com <Paycheck-Piracy-list-owner@mail-list.com>
Subject: Social Security and Tax Withholding Are Voluntary Within The 50 States
Date: Monday, December 24, 2012, 6:04 PM

Paycheck Piracy does not accept any liability or responsibility for
the information provided by others. It is your duty to verify the
accuracy and the legality of any information accessed via the

Please note: This message was sent from an auto-notification system
that cannot accept incoming e-mails. Please do not reply to this

Paycheck Piracy:
- Does not rent, sell, use or abuse the list of subscribers.
- Does not insert any ads nor pop-ups into your message.
- Does not send HTML email ('tracking' messages with different colors,
   fancy fonts, or pictures).
- Does not track whether subscribers opened their email (requires HTML



The following ALERT covers the 100% voluntary nature of social
security and tax withholding as pertains to the Citizen living and
working within the (now) 50 States of the Union.

The Social Security Act, which is part of Title 42 of the United
States Code, was enacted in 1935 as a U.S. governmentâ•'sponsored,
voluntary pension program for the benefit of individuals who
wished to VOLUNTARILY participate in the program.  The Act is
administered by the Social Security Administration which handles
the administration and payment of benefits under the provisions of
the law.

The tax upon which the old age benefits is based is collected by
the Internal Revenue Service under the provisions of Title 26 of
the United States Code, otherwise known as the Internal Revenue Code

Monies collected by the IRS are not sent to the Social Security
Administration to fund their administrative and disbursement
activities, but rather end up in the general fund along with other
taxes collected. An accounting "gimmick" is created to lead the
public to believe that the monies paid in are held in a "trust fund".

There is no provision in the United States Constitution for the
federal government to be in the insurance business. Although it
may be technically correct that a so-called "trust fund" exists,
the truth is that it contains no monies or other assets, only
governmental IOU's promising to pay money to itself.

Social Security is NOT a contract as some allege, but a political
promise upon which Congress could renege at any time. Monies
disbursed by SSA must be appropriated by Congress each year as
needed. Since no contractual obligation exists for the payment of
any benefits, technically the benefits could be terminated at any
time, if Congress did not appropriate the funds.

This ALERT deals primarily with those statutes relative to the
imposition and collection of the tax. References to Code sections
are those found within Title 26 of the United States Code, which is
a codification of the Statutes at Large as enacted by the Congress of
the United States. All Code sections shown herein are copied directly
from Title 26, United States Code, precisely as printed therein.

All Internal Revenue taxes, including the personal and corporate
income taxes, self-employment taxes, as well as the soâ•'called
Social Security tax, are imposed and collected under Title 26,
United States Code, also known as the Internal Revenue Code ("IRC").

The Social Security tax is imposed by the Code sections in chapter
21, subtitle C of the IRC titled: "FEDERAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS
ACT" or "FICA".

Before examining the actual wording contained in these sections,
it is important to understand that courts have repeatedly held
that a statute means only that which is stated in the statute and
nothing more.

Southerland's Rules of Statutory Construction, an authoritative
legal guidebook, under section 66.01 titled "Strict Construction of
Statutes Creating Tax Liabilities" explains the limited application
of tax laws. The guidebook refers to the U.S. Supreme Court decision
of Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151, which states:

"In the interpretation of statutes levying taxes it is the
established rule not to extend their provisions by implication beyond
the clear import of the language used, or to enlarge their operation
so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. In case of
doubt, they are construed most strongly against the government and
in favor of the citizen."

So the Supreme Court tells us that IRC sections mean only that
which is stated; nothing else can be added to that which is stated
in the Code section.

With this Supreme Court ruling in mind, let's look at the wording of
sections 3101(a) and 3111(a) which are imposition statutes for the
(so-called Social Security) FICA tax -- section 3101(a) applying
to employEES and 3111(a) to employers, respectively.

(CAPITALIZATION for emphasis is added to certain phrases, Code
sections and court decisions in this article.)

Sec. 3101. Rate of Tax.

(a) Old-Age, survivors, and disability Insurance.  In addition
to other taxes, there is hereby imposed on the income of every
(as defined in section 3121(a)) received by him with respect to
employment (as defined in section 3121(b)) --

Sec. 3111. Rate of Tax.

(a) Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance.  In addition to
other taxes, there is hereby imposed on every employer an excise
tax, with respect to having individuals in his employ, EQUAL TO THE
FOLLOWING PERCENTAGES OF THE WAGES (as defined in section 3121(a))
paid by him with respect to employment (as defined In section
3121(b)) --

The popular mistaken belief is that the FICA tax, which is imposed
on the income of "employees" under section 3101(a), is a "wage"
tax. However, a reading of section 3101(a) shows clearly that the
tax is not, in fact, a WAGE tax but rather is imposed on "income"
which is MEASURED by "wages". Hence, the FICA tax is simply another

However what is of vital importance in both these sections is the
limited application of the terms "wages" (as defined in section
3121(a)) and "employment" (as defined in section 3121(b)). The
definitions of these terms create a TERRITORIAL limitation on the
application of the tax as we will see.

Section 3121 states:

Sec. 3121. Definitions.

(a) Wages. For purposes of this chapter, the term "wages" means
all remuneration for EMPLOYMENT, including the cash value of all
remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash;
except that such term shall not include --â•Å"

Note that the term "wages" identifies monies paid for the activity
identified by the term "employment" which is defined in section
3121(b), the essential part of which is reproduced as follows:

Sec. 3121 (b). Employment.

For purposes of this chapter, the term "employment" means any
service, of whatever nature, performed (A) by an EMPLOYEE for the
person employing him, irrespective of the citizenship or residence
of either,


(II) on or in connection with an American vessel or American aircraft
under a contract of service which is entered into WITHIN THE UNITED
STATES or during the performance of which and while the employee
Is employed on the vessel or aircraft It touches at a port in THE

As shown, the term "employment" means a service performed by
one identified by the term "employee" within the "United States
...". United States is also a term used in this chapter as defined
in section 3121(e)(2):

Sec. 3121(e)(2).

For purposes of this chapter --

(2) United States. The term "United States" when used in a
geographical sense includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa.

The definition of the term "United States" lists those areas in which
the activity described by the term "employment" takes place. The
definition lists ONLY the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands, Guam and American Samoa as the areas in which the tax
imposed by this chapter applies. Before examining the provisions of
this law, it is essential to understand the use of words as "terms"
when used in laws.

When words are used as legal terms in order to establish their
clear and unambiguous meanings, precise definitions of those terms
are always included in the law.  These definitions explain the exact
meanings of terms used in the IRC. As quoted earlier in this article,
the Supreme Court in the decision of Gould v. Gould established that,
in taxing statutes, definitions of terms used in the statutes cannot
be expanded by implication. Nothing can be added to the definition
of a term; it means only that which is stated, regardless of any
belief to the contrary.

At first, it may be hard to believe that the definition of the
term "United States" could be limited to mean ONLY the four island
possessions of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and American
Samoa. But, that is exactly what this definition means because
statutes mean ONLY that which is stated, nothing more, as set forth
by the Supreme Court in Gould v. Gould, already discussed. Also,
there are other decisions where the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed
the principle of the limited meaning of statues.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained two such
decisions as follows:

"We begin our interpretation by reading the statutes and regulations
for their plain meaning. The plain meaning rule has its origin
in U.S. v. Missouri Pacific Railroad, 278 U.S. 269 (1929). There
the Supreme Court stated that "where the language of an enactment
is clear and construction according to its terms does not lead to
absurd or impracticable consequences, the WORDS EMPLOYED ARE TO BE
principle was more recently affirmed in Dickinson v. New Banner
Institute, Inc., 460 U.S. 103,103 S.C. 986, 74 L.Ed.2d 845 (1983),
rehearing denied, 461 U.S. 911,103 S.C. 1887,76 L.Ed.2d 815 (1983),
where the Court stated, "In determining the scope of a statute,
one is to look first at its language. If the language is unambiguous
v. Varlet, 780 F.2d 758 on P.761 (9th Cir. 1986)

Also, Code section 3121(e)(2) uses the term "includes" which, in law,
is a word of CONFINEMENT and not EXPANSION. This is exactly what the
U.S. Supreme Court said in the decision of Montello Salt v. Utah,
221 U.S. at page 455, wherein they stated:

"'Include' or the participial form thereof, is defined 'to comprise
within'; 'to hold'; 'to contain'; 'to shut up'; and synonyms are
'contain'; 'enclose'; 'comprise'; comprehend'; 'embrace'; 'involve"'.

This U.S. Supreme Court decision, and others in support of its
ruling that "includes" is a word of limitation, also support the
Court's decision in Gould v. Gould that there can be no broadening
of the statute by implication. Legislative drafters in the Internal
Revenue Service who write the tax bills know very well this "plain
meaning rule" of statutory interpretation.

If the term "United States" could constitutionally include the 50
STATES OF THE UNION, they would have specifically included them. As
an example of this, Code section 4612, which relates to a tax on
crude oil, defines the term "United States" as: "the FIFTY STATES,
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any
possession of the United States, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands and the trust territory of the Pacific Islands."

This shows that when the term "United States" means the fifty States
of the Union, it says so. Consequently, it is very clear that the
term "United States", when used to describe the areas where the
"Social Security" tax applies, means, and IS LIMITED TO, the four
island possessions which are the only areas listed in the term's
definition.  Therefore, according to the wording of the law itself,
the FICA tax does not apply within the fifty States of the Union.

This makes sense when one understands the limitations of the direct
taxing authority of the Federal government as contained in the
Constitution under Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 and Article I,
Section 9, Clause 4, both of which prohibit any Federal direct
tax within the States of the Union other than those laid on the 50
State governments in proportion to their respective populations.

The FICA tax is administered by the IRS as if it were a direct tax
on individuals. To be constitutional, any direct tax on individuals
must be imposed by law ONLY OUTSIDE the 50 States of the Union:
i.e. only in the four listed island possessions despite the IRS'
deception of the public into falsely believing the tax applies
WITHIN the 50 States of the Union.

IRC section 7655 also supports the limited meaning of the term
"United States" as respects both the selfâ•'employment tax
imposed in chapter 2 of the IRC, as well as the FICA tax imposed
in chapter 21. Section 7655 states:

Sec. 7655. Cross references.

(a) Imposition of tax in possessions. For provisions imposing tax
in POSSESSIONS, see --

(1) Chapter 2, relating to selfâ•'employment tax;
(2) Chapter 21, relating to the tax under the Federal Insurance
Contributions Act. Clearly this section also shows the application
of both the selfâ•'employment tax and the FICA tax imposed under
chapters 2 and 21 to be limited to "possessions" (Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands, Guam, and America Samoa, as listed in IRC section
3121(e)(2) defining the TERM "United States").


In the Code, there are many definitions that are limited in their
applications by words such as "for purposes of this chapter", "for
purposes of this sub-chapter" and "for purposes of this sub-part". In
contrast, IRC section 1402 contains definitions of terms upon
which there are NO SUCH LIMITATIONS upon their application, so the
definitions therein apply THROUGHOUT the ENTIRE IRC. Section 1402(d)
states as follows:

Sec. 1402(d). Employee and wages. The term "employee" and the term
"wages" shall have the same meaning as when USED in chapter 21
(sec. 3101 and following, relating to Federal Insurance Contributions

Note the absence in this Code definition of any words of limitation
such as "for purposes of this chapter" or "for purposes of this
subchapter". This definition means, therefore, that WHENEVER
AND WHEREVER the terms "employee" and "wages" are used ANYWHERE
throughout the IRC, their applications are limited to those people
involved in activities within the four island possessions ONLY,
the same as in chapter 21, the FICA tax chapter.

The Internal Revenue Code chapter which relates to withholding
is chapter 24, titled "COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE". It is
extremely important to note that this chapter contains NO section
imposing any tax. Rather, the entire chapter is written to establish
and authorize provisions for withholding of tax merely as a method
for the payment of taxes which may be imposed in OTHER sections of
the IRC.

Whenever a tax is imposed, there is always a section containing
words such as "there is hereby imposed a tax ...." But, in chapter
24, no such wording exists in any section; so clearly the entire
ELSEWHERE in the IRC by the withholding methods described in the Code
sections of the chapter. Provisions of this withholding chapter are
applicable only to "employees" as defined in Code sections 1402(d)
shown above, and 3401(c) reproduced here:

Sec. 3401(c). Employee. 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. [Note: a corporation created by Congress,
not a private sector corporation]

It is revealing that this definition INCLUDES the term "State" which
is defined in Code section 7701(a)(10) as the District of Columbia
(ONLY). Remember that "includes," as a word used in laws, is a
word of CONFINEMENT, not of ENLARGEMENT according to the Supreme
Court in Montello Salt v. Utah, as discussed earlier. Hence this
definition limits the application of the term "employee" to those
working for the Federal government, for the District of Columbia,
for U.S. possessions, and officers of a government owned corporation.

Section 3401(d) identifies the "employer" as one for whom
the "employee" works. This means that the meaning of the term
"employer" is limited to those entities listed in section 3401(c)
-- the U.S. government, District of Columbia, etc. The term does
NOT apply to any nonâ•'government employer or business. On the
basis of these definitions alone, most of the nation's population
is not subject to the withholding provisions in this chapter.

In addition to those limitations on the application of the term
"employee" shown above, section 1402(d) LIMITS the application of
the term "employee" and the term "wages" to activities within the
four island possessions ONLY. Therefore, the withholding provisions
of chapter 24 can apply only to those working for the Federal
government or the District of Columbia, etc., within these four
island possessions -- not within the fifty States of the Union.

IRC section 3402(a)(1) contains tricky wording which could readily
lead businesses and individuals into erroneously believing that
they are required to deduct and withhold taxes from the pay of
those they hire.  It is worded as follows:

Section 3402. Income tax collected at source.

(a) Requirement of withholding.

(1) In general. Except as otherwise provided in this section, every
employer making payment of wages shall deduct and withhold upon such
wages a tax determined in accordance with tables or computational
procedures prescribed by the Secretary. Any tables or procedures
prescribed under this paragraph shall -- ....

Note that this section 3402(a)(1) says that the "employer" (Federal
government, District of Columbia, etc.) shall deduct and withhold
from "wages" a tax determined in accordance with the Secretary's
tables and computational procedures. We previously showed that the
meaning of the term "wages" is limited by section 1402(d) to payments
for activities occurring within the four island possessions ONLY,
the same as provided in chapter 21 imposing the so-called Social
Security (FICA) tax. These "tables and procedures" are authorized
to be provided by the Secretary under section 3402(p)(3):

Sec. 3402(p)(3). Authority for other voluntary withholding. The
Secretary is authorized by regulations to provide for withholding
--(A) from remuneration for services performed by an employee for
the employee's employer which (without regard to this paragraph)
does not constitute wages, and

(B) from any other type of payment with respect to which the
Secretary finds that withholding would be appropriate under the
provisions of this chapter, IF THE EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE, OR THE
AGREE TO SUCH WITHHOLDING. Such agreement shall be in such form
and manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe. For
purposes of this chapter (and so much of subtitle F as relates to
this chapter), remuneration or other payments with respect to which
such agreement is made shall be treated AS IF THEY WERE WAGES PAID
BY AN EMPLOYER TO AN EMPLOYEE to the extent that such remuneration
is paid or other payments are made during the period for which the
agreement is In effect.

Note that the Secretary is authorized to provide for withholding
by issuing tables, computational procedures and other instructional
material on withholding that apply ONLY to those who have VOLUNTARILY
AGREED to withholding. An agreement exists only when an individual
who is hired voluntarily REQUESTS that money be deducted and withheld
from his pay for payment of taxes and the one for whom he works
completes the agreement by his VOLUNTARY act of collecting money
as an unpaid tax collector for the government.

Despite the general mistaken belief that the deduction
and withholding of money for taxes is required by law, a
simple reading of this Code section shows that such is not the
case. Mandatory withholding would conflict with two key provisions
in the U.S. Constitution: the Fifth Amendment right to due process
states that no person shall be deprived of property (having his pay
withheld) without due process of law (a ruling by a court) and the
Thirteenth Amendment prohibition against slavery and involuntary
servitude, such as being forced to be an unpaid worker (slavery)
or an unpaid Federal tax collector.

The use of the words "the person making" and "the person receiving
such other type of payment" relates to nonâ•'federal employers
and employees who voluntarily "agree to such withholding". Federal
regulation number 31.3402(p)(1) states:

Sub-Section 31.3402(p)-1 Voluntary withholding
agreements. (T.D. 7096, filed 3-17-71; amended by TD 7577, filed

(a) In general. An employee and his employer MAY enter into an
AGREEMENT under section 3402(p) to provide for the withholding OF
INCOME TAX upon payments of amounts described in paragraph
(b)(1) of Sub-Section 31.3401(a)-3, made after December 31, 1970. An
agreement MAY be entered into under this section only with respect
to amounts which are includible in the gross income of the employee
under section 61, and must be applicable to all such amounts paid by
the employer to the employee.  The amount to be withheld PURSUANT
TO AN AGREEMENT under section 3402(p) shall be determined under
the rules contained in section 3402 and the regulations thereunder.

(b) Form and duration of agreement.


(i) Except as provided in subdivision (ii) of this subparagraph, AN
SHALL FURNISH to his employer Form W-4 (Employee's Withholding
Allowance Certificate) executed in accordance with the provisions
of section 3402(f) and the regulations thereunder.  The furnishing
of such Form W-4 shall constitute a REQUEST FOR WITHHOLDING.

AGREEMENT under section 3402(p) with his employer, if the employee
performs services (in addition to those to be the subject of
the AGREEMENT the remuneration for which is subject to mandatory
income tax withholding by such employer, or IF the employee wishes
to specify that the AGREEMENT terminate on a specific date, the
employee shall furnish the employer with a REQUEST for withholding
which shall be signed by the employee, and shall contain --

(a) The name, address, and social security number of the employee
making the REQUEST,

(b) The name and address of the employer,

(c) A statement that the employee DESIRES WITHHOLDING of Federal
income tax, and, if applicable, of qualified State individual
income tax (see paragraph (d)(3)(i) of Sub-Section 301.6361-! of
this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration)), and

(d) If the employee desires that the AGREEMENT terminate on
a specific date, the date of termination of the AGREEMENT. If
accepted by the employer as provided in subdivision (iii) of this
subparagraph, the REQUEST shall be attached to, and constitute part
of, the employee's Form W-4.  An employee who furnishes his employer
A REQUEST FOR WITHHOLDING under this subdivision shall also furnish
such employer with Form W-4 if such employee does not already have
a Form W-4 in effect with such employer.

(iii) No REQUEST for withholding under section 3402(p) shall be
effective as an AGREEMENT between an employer and employee UNTIL
the amounts with respect to which the request was made. Note the
wording in sub-sections (b)(1)(ii) and (iii) of this regulation:
"... an employee who desires to enter into an agreement" and "REQUEST
for withholding", "DESIRES withholding" and "mutually agree upon",
all of which clearly and unambiguously show the VOLUNTARY nature
of the entire withholding system.  The significance of a Form W-4
"Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate" is clearly explained
in this regulation which states:

"The furnishing of such Form W-4 shall constitute a REQUEST FOR

The printed heading on the Form W-4 confirms the voluntary nature
of withholding; it states "Employee's Withholding ALLOWANCE
Certificate". If withholding were mandatory, why would the form be
called an "Allowance" Certificate? To "allow" means to "permit"; if
the law REQUIRED the withholding of tax from your pay, no PERMISSION
or request form would be needed! To have a nonâ•'deceptive,
clearâ•'meaning heading, the words could be rearranged to
"Employee's Certificate ALLOWING Withholding".

Regulation Section 31.3402(p)(2). states:

Sec. 3402(p)(2). An AGREEMENT under section 3402(p) shall be
effective for such period as the employer and employee MUTUALLY AGREE
WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE OTHER. Unless the employer and employee AGREE
to an earlier termination date, the notice shall be effective with
respect to the first payment of an amount in respect of which the
AGREEMENT is in effect which is made on or after the first "status
determination date" (January 1, May 1, July 1, and October 1 of
each year) that occurs at least 30 days after the date on which
the notice is furnished. If the employee executes a new Form W-4,
the request upon which an AGREEMENT under section 3402(p) is based
shall be attached to, and constitute a part of, such new Form W-4.

This regulation states that the AGREEMENT "shall be effective for
such period as the employer and employee MUTUALLY AGREE UPON",
and that either the employer or the employee "MAY TERMINATE THE
AGREEMENT prior to the end of such period by furnishing a signed
written notice to the other." Therefore, it is obvious that the
withholding must be REQUESTED by the employee, must be AGREED TO
NOTICE TO THE OTHER. The regulations merely state that the notice
terminating withholding must be a signed, written notice -- no
particular form is ever required!


Because employers have possession and control over their employees'
earnings before the money is paid over to the employees, the
key to the operation of the withholding scam is the deception and
intimidation of the employers to withhold money from their employees'
pay even if their employees object to the withholding.

Most employers, as well as their accountants and attorneys,
have never studied the IRC carefully enough to understand its
complexity. They are not aware of the geographical and other
limitations in the Social Security (FICA) tax, and upon the
withholding provisions in chapter 24 of the IRC. They do not
understand (as explained earlier in this article) that the FICA
tax and the withholding provisions apply only within Puerto Rico,
the Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa; that under chapter 24,
withholding is not mandatory for either the employer or the employee,
and that the withholding provisions apply ONLY to cases where BOTH
the employer and the employee voluntarily agree to the withholding.

If a nonâ•'government employer considers NOT withholding when
his employees demand their full pay and consults his accountant,
tax lawyer or the IRS about the matter, his attention is usually
called to IRC section 3403. This section is a psychological bombshell
designed to intimidate the non-government employer into ignoring
and defying any employee's refusal to agree to withholding. IRC
section 3403 states:

Sec. 3403. Liability for tax.

The employer shall be liable for the payment of the tax REQUIRED
liable to any person for the amount of any such payment.

This section usually erroneously convinces nonâ•'government
employers that they are personally liable to pay to the IRS the
amount the withholding tables specify EVEN IF THEY DO NOT WITHHOLD

Non-government employers rarely understand that the term "employer"
used in this section does not apply to them because the term
"employer" as defined in the withholding provisions, means ONLY
in section 3401(c) quoted earlier in this article).

Even then, withholding applies ONLY within the four island
possessions and then only when there is a VOLUNTARY MUTUAL
AGREEMENT for withholding requested by the "employee" and agreed
to by the "employer".  Because of these facts, there is no way a
nonâ•'government employer within the 50 states can be required to
withhold tax under chapter 24.  He cannot be "LIABLE" for payment
of the tax unless he voluntarily acts as an unpaid tax collector
for the government.


The provisions of the Constitution cited heretofore, under Article
1, Section 2, Clause 3 and Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4, prohibit
any Federal direct tax on the people or their property within the
States of the Union. If it were constitutionally lawful for the
Federal government to impose upon us a direct tax on our wages in
the fifty States of the Union without being in conflict with these
constitutional limitations, why would all the above cited sections
clearly show the VOLUNTARY nature of all withholding?

Why, in fact, would the Federal government not have a clear and
unambiguous single section in the IRC which would simply say
that all of us who work for a living in this country are required
to give Big Brother whatever portion of our earnings it decides
to take? If such a law were constitutional, it would surely be
included in the IRC. Why all the convoluted, complicated provisions
showing geographical and other limitations and voluntary "requests"
for withholding?

The answer is clear: No such simple taxing statute is possible,
because it is constitutionally prohibited to lay a Federal
direct tax on the fruits of our labor inside the fifty States
of the Union. All the provisions of the IRC and the implementing
regulations are strictly limited in order to be in conformity with
these constitutional limitations.

As shown herein, the FICA tax imposed on workers under the provisions
of section 3101 is a territorial income tax which applies ONLY in the
four island possessions. The regulations implementing the withholding
provisions in the IRC clearly show that all withholding is voluntary
for all individuals â•'â•' both government employees, (under
3402(p)(l)(A)) and nonâ•'government workers (under 3402(p)(3)). In
order to institute withholding, a voluntary REQUEST must be made
by the employee and ACCEPTANCE must be made by the employer.

After studying these Code sections carefully, and understanding
that they say what they mean and mean what they say, the complexity
of the Code becomes much easier to unravel. Terms such as "United
States", as defined in section 3121(e)(2), show the restricted
meaning of "United States" in chapter 21 to mean the four island
possessions only.

A student of the Code will find that FIVE other definitions of the
term "United States" therein: Sections 638(1), 927(d)(3), 3306(j)(2),
4612(a)(4) and 7701(a)(9), also define the term "United States"
for RESTRICTED USE in various parts of the IRC.

Each definition is different, in one or more ways, from the
others as to the geographical boundaries included in the meaning
of the term.  But, as discussed previously, when a particular Code
section intends to include "the fifty States" in its definition, it
says so -- as in section 4612(a)(4). But, the term "United States"
as defined in section 3121(e)(2) limits this FICA tax to the four
island possessions.

Because of the dispersed placement of Code sections defining
most people who read the Code without thorough study are unaware
of the unique Code definitions of these terms. These definitions
limit the applications of the tax laws so that they do not conflict
with the Fifth or Thirteenth Amendments, or with the constitutional
prohibition against unapportioned direct taxes inside the fifty
States of the Union.

The highly paid and well-trained attorneys who write the tax bills
which are given to Congress for enactment are not dummies; they know
very well the necessity of drafting these statutes in conformity
with these Constitutional limitations forbidding direct taxation
of the people within the fifty States.

But, through careful framing of statutes and the use of confusing
and misleading words, terms and definitions, they make the IRC
almost impossible to understand without deep study. Such actions
perpetuate the intentionally created and false popular belief that
the Federal government has the constitutional authority to tax us
directly in these 50 united States. But once these Code sections
are carefully analyzed, one is reminded of the old adage: "Oh what
a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive!"

INFORM AMERICANS of their rights! Show this to your family, friends
and pastor! Copy this article and distribute it widely.


Mediate, not litigate.

Subscribe to the free e-letter


No law compels a private-sector non-governmentally-privileged work eligible man or woman to submit a form W-4 or W-9 (or their equivalents), nor to obtain or disclose an SSN as a condition of being hired or keeping one's job.  With the exception of an order from a court of competent jurisdiction issued by a duly qualified judge, no amounts can be lawfully taken from one's pay (for taxes, fees or other charges) without the worker's explicit, intentional, knowing, voluntary, written consent.
This is a one-way announcement list. Only the list moderators are able to post a message.
To subscribe: <mailto:Paycheck-Piracy-on@mail-list.com>
To unsubscribe: <mailto:Paycheck-Piracy-off@mail-list.com>
To change your email address: <mailto:Paycheck-Piracy-change@mail-list.com> with your old address in the Subject: area

free archived files: http://archive.mail-list.com/paycheck-piracy

mail-list.com    1302 Waugh Dr. #438    Houston, Texas    77019    USA

To unsubscribe, or change your email address, click here.

This message was launched into cyberspace to cornmash007@yahoo.com