Yes, Form 4852.
But I'm not convinced it is necessary to do even that.
Have you ever noticed something:
-
Form 1040 requires one to sign under penalty of perjury.
-
Form 4852 does not.
-
Form 4868 does not.
Must be a reason ...
If you don't mind my assigning you homework, which are the privileges referred to on the W-2?
I'd rather you just state what you know, and we can discuss that.
But regarding W-2, it has to do with "wages," "tips," "dependent care benefits," "nonqualified plans," and "other."
The "social security" and "medicare" designations are irrelevant, as they are just categories of the overall income tax, but under Subtitle C rather than Subtitle A (but same thing, for practical purposes).
"Wages," defined in the code (at 26 USC 3401(a) and (c)) are basically money received for working for the federal government. You are correct that you don't have to do the work within the physical territory of DC. You could do that work anywhere.
The other categories, I have not looked into.
The ideal situation when it comes to W2 and 1099 is to arrange your financial life in such a way that those forms are not legally required to be generated in the first place; and if they are, then you have a legal way to avoid filing returns about them. One example is that corporations are exempt from receiving 1099's. There are a lot of "exceptions" in the tax code.
You can also file for a refund, but I understand that to be a bit "hit or miss," in terms of results.
If you don't volunteer, you empower the IRS to draw its own conclusions about your income (confiscation is often legal)
Theft of property by IRS happens to filers, not non-filers.
When you sign that document as being correct and true, "under penalty of perjury," you WAIVE your rights.
Non-filers do not, and therefore IRS must take them to court, where due process can (and should) apply. Maybe they still take your property, but only after a court battle -- in which YOU do NOT provide any information that could be used against you (5th Amendment).
Joe Bannister, former IRS Special Agent (the ones who carry guns and make criminal arrests) said that when he took on a new case, the FIRST THING he did was pull all past tax returns, so HE COULD USE THAT TESTIMONY AS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PERSON.
OP imagines that the only nexus is DC connection. This is incorrect, because working in territories or for a federal corporation are easy examples of other nexuses.
It used to be that way, but over the years, 26 USC 7701 (a)(10) has been re-defined and re-defined until today it ONLY applies to DC.
The other territories have, one-by-one, been given their own tax code so that the federal income tax (26 USC) does not apply to those territories anymore.
it doesn't help to listen to quick takes.
Agreed.
It's a deep subject that must be understood, and a 2-minute rant video does not cut it.
So the annual flu season is really the annual "toxin season?"
More accurately, probably the annual "detox" season.
But I can't PROVE it because guess what?
There is no MONEY in any narrative other than Big Pharma selling you drugs.
So, nobody will research other explanations.
Let me ask you a question: Do YOU actually KNOW how a virologist claims to PROVE that a virues exists, and that said virus is transmissable, and that said virus makes other people sick?
If you knew the answer(s), you would understand why the "no virus exists" people say what they do.
Maybe you would disagree with their reasoning or conclusion, but at least you would UNDERSTAND their position.
But you don't know, so you don't understand, as is the case for most people, even here on GAW.
That lack of understanding means you will not be able to figure how WHY the mainstream narrative is a lie -- and you won't know what to do about it.
Too many people, even here on GAW, are just too damn lazy.
Maybe you got it from the corpse.
If two women become roommates, and their periods synchronize, does that mean that one woman "caught" her period from the other?
Nobody has EVER been able to prove -- through clinical trials -- that ANY illness, such as cold and flu, is contagious. And they have tried. A LOT.
During Spanish Flu, they tried to prove it, and never could.
The original paper by Pfizer on the Covid vaxx clearly stated that they did NOT test for transmission (even though that is exactly what the media story was all about). They didn't even test for it because (I assume) they already knew they would not be able to prove anything.
I wrote a few thread on GAW about it at the time.
If you have no idea what the latest research is on this topic, then you have no idea WHY your anecdote is not proof of anything.
And if you don't even WANT to know, well that's just a damn shame on an "awakening" message board.
Viruses exist.
No, they do not.
And your anecdote proves nothing.
You are clearly ignorant about the evidence on BOTH sides, so naturally you fall for the propaganda (as I did, before I educated myself).
The only difference is that I wanted to learn both sides of the argument so I could decide for myself, and you don't.
Your signature does not bring it under "maritime law." And it is not a contract. Who is the other party signing? Nobody, so it cannot be a contract.
BUT ...
Your signature IS prima facie evidence that YOU BELIEVE ... that YOU HAVE A TAX LIABILITY ... that YOU MUST PAY.
"Voluntary compliance."
You CAN volunteer. And if you DO volunteer, then you MUST comply with the rules -- you said so yourself, under penalty of perjury.
She is correct, but she does not explain WHY.
Here's why:
-
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land (Article 6).
-
The Constitution grants to Congress (i.e. federal government) certain powers, some of which apply to the 50 States, and some of which apply ONLY to the territory that is owned by the federal government. So, the federal government has a DUAL jurisdiction. THIS is the KEY.
-
ALL powers not listed in the Constitution as belonging to the federal government belong to the States or the People (10th Amendment).
-
The constitutional clauses that grant Congress the power to tax (all types of taxes) are: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1; Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17; and Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2.
-
I will abbreviate these as 1:8:1, 1:8:17, and 4:3:2.
-
1:8:17 and 4:3:2 do not ACTUALLY mention taxes, but they are construed to INCLUDE taxes in the powers listed.
-
1:8:1 is the general power of taxation, but specifically mentions indirect taxes, and says that indirect taxes must be uniform throughout the States, which means THIS clause applies to the States, but ONLY for the purposes enumerated.
-
1:8:17 is the federal government's jurisdiction for the District of Columbia AND the federal enclaves (military bases, dockyards, etc.). It says the feds have authority to "make ALL laws that are necessary and proper ..." This will always be construed to include taxation.
-
4:3:2 is the federal government's jurisdiction for the federal territories (which includes DC but also Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.). It says Congress has the power to "make all needful rules and regulations ..." which will always include taxation. ALL rules and regulations.
-
In the OP, a "reader comment" says that the 16th Amendment gave Congress the power to impose an income tax, being a direct tax without apportionment. THIS IS A LIE! And it is THEE lie that the IRS relies on.
-
SCOTUS, in TWO cases right after the 1913 income tax was implemented, stated and then re-stated that the 16th Amendment did NOT give Congress ANY new taxing authority. The court specifically addressed the claim that the income tax was a direct tax without apportionment, and REJECTED THAT CLAIM. They stated that ANY income tax is, BY ITS NATURE, an INDIRECT tax.
-
So, the 16th Amendment is IRRELEVANT, according to the United States Supreme Court (in both the Brushaber case and in the Stanton case).
This means, NECESSARILY ...
-
That the income tax today is authorized by the Constitution ONLY under 1:8:17 and 4:3:2. Indirect taxes are, by their nature, taxes on PRIVILEGES. Earning wages and other forms of revenue are NOT privileges granted to the People by the Constitution.
-
However, as a tax ONLY imposed on the people living in, working in, and deriving their "income" from the federal territories and federal privileges, and NOT a tax on the People living in the 50 States, the income tax ... IS constitutional.
-
That is because of 1:8:17 and 4:3:2 -- NOT 1:8:1.
-
This is WHY the income tax and the regulations are written the way they are -- IF YOU READ THEM CAREFULLY (which nobody does).
Title 26 includes an income tax, but also includes other taxes.
I wrote about all of this in other threads on GAW:
https://greatawakening.win/p/17t1k8Zymy/
https://greatawakening.win/p/17txk0DrkW/
I realize most people don't want to do their homework. For such people, pay "your" taxes like a good little slave, and stop bitching about it.
For those who want to do the homework, start with the understanding that the income tax is authorized for FEDERAL TERRITORIES, and read everything with that understanding in mind.
a friend from Italy who dealt with this
Article:
"Control of Typhus in Italy in 1943-1944 by use of DDT:
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.36.2.119
That article says, the Rockefeller Foundation Typhus Team played an important role in getting the DDT into the population (for control of typhus, supposedly).
It also says they used DDT and other chemicals in powder form, and used a forceful blowing method to blow the DDT between the body and the clothes worn by the person.
So, people were directly dusted with a neurotoxin, and then they wonder why they "got muh polio."
I think I have made my case.
Side note: Typhus was raging all over Europe in the 1940's, and was spread by lice. This is why the Germans had delousing chambers for incoming prisoners -- to kill the lice, not the people.
This is mostly bullshit.
Polio was a problem in the late 1940's and into the 1950's in USA and Western countries. It continued until the 1970's.
In 1945, DDT was approved as an insecticide. It was used on farms and even in cities. There is film out there of large trucks spraying chemicals in city neighborhoods with children playing in the spray from the trucks.
"Polio" started happening in 1948.
This is a neurotoxin and is what caused the paralysis we call polio.
When DDT was banned, "polio" went away -- except in Africa, where DDT continued being used.
Today, we still have "polio," but they have changed the name to other illnesses (Bells Palsy, Guillane-Barre, for example), which are different types of paralysis of some sort (same as "polio"). They are ALL caused by the same thing: toxins and poisons.
Rockefeller (or his people) might have had something to do with getting DDT approved, but nobody has ever produced that evidence, AFAIK.
[EDIT: I changed my mind about the evidence for Rockefeller involvement. The article I posted about DDT use in Italy provides that evidence. So, yeah they did it.]
As far as something being put into vaccines that can also cause health problems, sure, it's possible. But let's see the EVIDENCE that it actually happens. If it does, then the executives of those companies need to be executed for mass murder. But I am not aware of ANY evidence EVER being provided to prove it (maybe because nobody wants to investigate -- they have full immunity from causing harm, after all, which of course is a law that blatantly violates human rights).
There are NO viruses that cause illness. It is ALL toxins and poisons, of various types.
P.S. The OP says that Rockefeller was doing his dirty deeds in 1916, trying t "create a virus" -- something that is impossible to do, but they THOUGHT there must be something called a virus back then. That being the case ... I wonder if Rockefeller was also behind the Spanish Flu of 1917. Not due to a virus, but due to other toxins/poisons. After all, the US military was getting injected with the newest, latest, greatest "vaccine," and then members of the military magically "got muh Spanish Flu." Rockefeller probably had something to do with injecting poison into those vaccines. And then in the 1940's, they also pushed the DDT toxins, leading to "polio." She is probably right about Rockefeller involvement, but wrong about the actual method.
No problem.
Just one last effort on my part: You are ignoring my comments about carnivore diet. I would suggest checking out videos on YouTube about this. MANY people reporting improvements in all types of health problems -- even some docs coming around now and recognizing that diet is the #1 cause of ALL illness.
Anthony Chaffee, Neurosurgeon, who talks about how diet can help arthritis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8lHJt32ug0
Cardiac surgeon who wrote a book, "Stay Off My Operating Table" by going carnivore:
Yeah, he probably is that indoctrinated.
Also, a lot of the money docs got did not come directly from Big Pharma. That's ususally the ones who push fake studies that Big Pharma likes.
The other docs got their money on the Covid scam from their clinics or hospitals, which got it from their administrators, which got it from the state health departments, which got it from Congress in the CARES Act.
It was taxpayer money that ultimately went into their pockets. Or more likely at that time, printed money from the Federal Reserve.
They are not refugees.
Refugees MUST go to the NEAREST country and seek asylum if they are in real danger in their own country.
They are NOT to be put on a plane and flown half-way across the world to land in USA.
And they certainly are not to take vacations back to their home country just for fun (proving they are in no danger) -- which many of them do.
The Biden pResidency (whoever was running the autopen) pushed this garbage.
But it is time to take out the trash.
Ya mean like the illegals crossing the border, with Texans doing jack shit about it?
The old days of "Don't mess with Texas" are long gone, replaced with soy boy power.
You need a different governor, for starters.
And you need to get rid of the Bush and GOPe influence, for another.
Because Biden didn't have authority to push state health departments to issue demands to kill 150,000,000 hens in South Korea or Turkey.
And oh ... the irony of Turkey giving us eggs in the face of the fake "bird flu" ...
These doctor "professionals" are so lost. It's downright sad ... and infuriating.
There is no such thing as an "antibody" -- at least, not in the way they have been falsely taught.
The body does not make antibodies as a reaction to a PARTICULAR THING (such as HIV or SARS-CoV-2 or measles, etc.).
What actually happens is whenever the body senses a foreign protein that should not be in the body, it reacts by trying to get rid of it.
This is what they CALL an "antibody," but it is not specific to anything.
It is just the body's method for excreting that thing out of the body. And if the body cannot get rid of it, it will find someplace to store that toxin. Hence, "antibodies" can be constantly present in the body because the body is constantly trying to get rid of toxins.
Technically, Congress has not imposed a tax on "income."
Rather, it has imposed a tax on "taxable income," which is a term of art that Congress created and defined.
See: 26 USC 1.
When you research that, you get to the definition of "gross income," and when you research the regulations, including the past history of the regulations regarding "gross income," you find that the regulations say that gross income means ... blah blah blah ... UNLESS EXCLUDED BY LAW.
This does not appear in the statute, but only in the regulations.
The past regulations said, "... unless excluded by fundamental law, or otherwise not taxed under the Constitution." This language has been changed over the years to hide the true meaning, but the meaning still exists because it MUST exist in order to stay constitutional (and to be in line with the SCOTUS decisions about what "income" means).
There are also some areas of the tax code that give a different definition of "income," which are very interesting, as well.