|A small group in Kay County, Oklahoma began using
Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act requests to secure documents
from the Internal Revenue Service Arkansas-Oklahoma District disclosure
officer in June 1999. The purpose of the requests is to secure evidence
— either documents IRS personnel are required to complete for tax assessment
and collection, or verification that required documents do not exist. When
the growing number in our congressional district submits variations of
the model FOIA that follows, we will be in the fourth round of requests.
There has been an evolution in the process. At the onset, we weren’t certain if we should use Privacy Act or Freedom of Information Act requests so both were used by early participants. After first-round responses, we concluded that the FOIA is adequate and more practical. Technically, either forum should work.
The model is reasonably inclusive. Anyone who wants to secure documents relative to his or her tax situation should be able to select appropriate requests. For example, someone who has been paying federal tax, but doesn’t believe there is legitimate liability, might want to submit a FOIA with requests 1-4, 6, 7 & 13. Responses might provide a "factual" basis for recovering amounts previously paid and seeking an administrative determination that he or she is not required to keep books and records, file returns, and pay tax prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code.
Those originally participating in the project were each subjected to Internal Revenue Service administrative seizure, garnishment, recorded "notice of lien" encumbrances, etc. IRS personnel took these initiatives without first securing judgments, writs of execution, writs of garnishment and other judicial process.
Significant recent research breakthroughs enabled us to construct this FOIA and develop strategy that will be deployed once we have secured documents or verification that documents do not exist. In the meantime, we have resorted to outside assistance. We submitted notice of possible complaints to the Treasury Inspector General of Tax Administration, and backed that up with cover letters and duplicates of information to our two Oklahoma senators and the representative for our district. We have received notice from the office of the Treasury Inspector General that a case file has been opened and a number has been assigned, and one person in our group received word from Senator Don Nickles that he is making inquiries via the Arkansas-Oklahoma district office on our behalf.
Several research breakthroughs in the last year contributed to particularizing the FOIA requests. I’ll treat some of them briefly as background will shed light on the reason for each requested document.
One of the more important is that there are no internal revenue districts of the United States in the several States. Authority for the President to establish internal revenue districts is at 26 U.S.C. § 7621. The President delegated authority to the Secretary of the Treasury to establish revenue districts via Executive Order #10289, as amended. The Secretary established customs collection offices under jurisdiction of the United States Customs Service in the several States, but no internal revenue districts as such.
In fall 1995, William Cooper and Wayne Bentson published constructive evidence that IRS is successor of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico. My research confirmed theirs. In January of this year, I found that the first civil governor and executive committee of Puerto Rico established five bureaus that eventually became BIR, Puerto Rico on May 1, 1900. That particular lineage is now complete. It has been common knowledge, and in the IRS organization statement published in the Federal Register and Internal Revenue Manual, it is verified that Congress did not legislatively create a Bureau of Internal Revenue, i.e., Internal Revenue Service. However, documenting that there are no internal revenue districts in the Union of several States makes IRS origins moot. Per 26 U.S.C. § 7621, revenue officers, regardless of agency, have jurisdiction solely in revenue districts established under authority of 26 U.S.C. § 7621 & E.O. #10289. Thus, the "source" questions in the FOIA that follows.
"Source" is a second paramount issue.
What most people know as "income tax" is actually "normal tax". The normal tax is a species of income tax. All income taxes are excise taxes. The normal tax is a privilege excise tax where the "wage" is not the object, but the measure of the tax. Privileges derived from government service are the object. The normal tax was resurrected from the federal employee tax imposed via the revenue act of July 1, 1862. It was enacted "in lieu" of individual income tax of 1916 & 1917 (42 Stat. 233).
Theoretically, the normal tax is mandatory for all officers and employees of United States Government, and governments of United States territories and insular possessions. However, Thurston Bell’s research pertaining to "gross income" demonstrates that "source" is vitally important for another reason. Only nonresident aliens with United States "source" income, and United States citizens living abroad with income derived from a United States trade or business have "gross income" subject to normal and other income taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code.
Possibly the third most important matter of completed research relates to due process.
The Fifth Amendment secures the right of due process of law: No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. The Internal Revenue Code preserves due process at 26 U.S.C. § 7804(b):
A tax liability is a debt owing the United States. All debts are collected in more or less the same way. Only specific actions unique to tax law are classified in Chapter 76 of the Internal Revenue Code.
A lien is an encumbrance that deprives whoever it is against of full enjoyment and benefit of his property. Under federal law, a lien may arise in one of two ways: It may arise by agreement, which includes licensing and the like, or by judgment. Where there is no preexisting license or other contractual condition relative to any given enterprise, a lien may be secured only by judgment. In other words, the "statutory" federal tax lien (26 U.S.C. § 6321 et seq.) does not have general application except as a post-judgment remedy.
One of the few ways a private enterprise may lawfully be drawn into the federal income tax scheme is via contract for work on public buildings and lands, and public works programs in general. The contractual obligation must be bonded, per 40 U.S.C. § 270a(d).
Possibly it is necessary to see the federal tax system from an overview: By the early 1920s, Congress had for all practical purposes abandoned Article I delegated authority by moving federal law, including tax law, under authority of the territorial clause at Article IV § 3 ¶ 2 of the Constitution. State officials accommodated the scheme through assorted uniform "adopted" acts. The scheme is variously known as Federalism or Cooperative Federalism. So far as the federal tax system is concerned, virtually all "income" taxes other than the normal tax were repealed via the revenue act of November 23, 1921. When they were reenacted, they were enacted as "municipal" law applicable solely in territory subject to sovereignty of the United States under the territorial clause. The shift was formally completed via the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. To that point, federal revenue districts more or less corresponded with congressional district or state borders. An assessment officer and a collection officer were appointed within each district. Via Reorganization Plan No. 26 of 1950 and Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1952, implemented by the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, these quasi-independent positions were abolished in favor of federal tax administration being placed under the Internal Revenue Service, Puerto Rico.
However, the kicker or sleeper in the mix is the General Accounting Office. GAO was established as general agent of the Treasury of the United States in 1921 (42 Stat. 23), and is responsible for determining all liabilities of or against the United States.
With this background, FOIA requests that follow should make sense so those wishing to adapt various requests to personal circumstance.
A unique aspect of requests that follow is that many are specific with respect to form or letter number revenue officers and others must perfect at any given step of the assessment and collection process. These documents are known by IRS personnel as they are identified in coursework revenue officers are required to take. Therefore, they are presumed to know the law and can be held directly accountable. See 26 U.S.C. § 7804(b) relating to personal liability.
October 8, 1999
John & Jane Doe
Silvia Rollover, Disclosure Officer
SUBJECT: Freedom of Information Act Request
ENCLOSURE: Postal money order made in the amount of $20.00 to the Internal Revenue Service.
CAVEAT: This request is being submitted to secure documents relating to Internal Revenue Service personnel assessment and collection activity and subject matter jurisdiction. Copies of requested documents, or verification that requested documents do not exist, will be used as evidence to secure administrative and/or judicial due process remedies, possibly including criminal prosecution. We are entitled to whatever evidence is in Internal Revenue Service files, or verification that certain documents are not on file, in order to confront witnesses and otherwise contest evidence (see Goldberg v. Kelly 397 U.S. 254 (1970)). In the event you fail to provide documents, specifically identify those not in record, or otherwise evade disclosure, you may be called as a hostile witness or may be implicated for obstruction of justice, conspiracy, and other criminal infractions.
Dear Ms. Rollover:
We are consolidating requests for documents from systems of records maintained by the Internal Revenue Service. If any given document is not kept in the district office, the request may be forwarded to the regional service center, the national office, the Assistant Attorney General over the Tax Division of the Department of Justice, or the office or officer who has or should have custody of the document or documents.
This request is being made under Freedom of Information Act authority codified at 5 U.S.C. § 552 and attending Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service regulations (see 26 CFR § 601.702). Documents requested are for personal use.
We are having our respective signatures notarized to verify that we are entitled to secure requested documents.
We are enclosing a United States Postal Money Order made in the amount of $20.00 to the Internal Revenue Service. The payment is being submitted to cover whatever fee there is for verification of your reply letter as pertains to requested documents (signed under penalties of perjury, or issued under Internal Revenue Service seal).
If the number of documents returned exceeds the number provided without charge, you have our firm promise to pay an amount up to $50.00 on your billing. If the estimate for reproduction of records exceeds $50.00, please notify us of estimated costs at the address in the header of this letter.
We have had two other postal mailing addresses since 1990. Therefore, documents may have the address of 744 Heartache, Buck Tussle, Oklahoma 77777, or P.O. Box 3712, Buck Tussle, Oklahoma 77778. Our current postal mailing address is in the head of this letter. Please send documents and your cover letter to the postal mailing address set out in this letter header.
Documents may be filed under the following name variations: John Paul Doe, John P. Doe, or John Doe; Jane Alice Doe, Jane A. Doe, or Jane Doe. Although erroneously contracted, the Social Security number issued to John Paul Doe or John P. Doe, is 454-44-7412; the Social Security number issued to Jane Alice Doe, maiden name Hornay, or a variation thereof, is 634-44-7786.
Please send copies of requested documents, as applicable, for John Doe, Jane Doe, and/or John Doe and Jane Doe. The years for which documents should be sent are specified for each document or set of documents requested.
We are requesting copies of the following documents or sets of documents:
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
/s/ John Doe
/s/ Jane Doe
I the undersigned notary public verify that John Doe and Jane Doe, known to me, signed this Freedom of Information Act request.
My commission expires __________________________________________.
26 CFR § 301.6203–1 Method of assessment.
The district director and the director of the regional service center shall appoint
one or more assessment officers. The district director shall also appoint
assessment officers in a Service Center servicing his district. The assessment
shall be made by an assessment officer signing the summary record of assessment.
The summary record, through supporting records, shall provide identification
of the taxpayer, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable
period, if applicable, and the amount of the assessment. The amount
of the assessment shall, in the case of tax shown on a return by the taxpayer,
be the amount so shown, and in all other cases the amount of the assessment
shall be the amount shown on the supporting list or record. The date of
the assessment is the date the summary record is signed by an assessment
officer. If the taxpayer requests a copy of the record of assessment, he shall be
furnished a copy of the pertinent parts of the assessment which set forth the
name of the taxpayer, the date of assessment, the character of the liability
assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amounts assessed.