Subject: Complying With The Law (Part 5) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dear Subscriber, The issue which this series of messages addresses is often called the "861 evidence." You may note, however, that I haven't even MENTIONED "861" until now, demonstrating that there is a whole lot more to the issue than one section. But now it's time to address 861 itself. For reasons shown below, I believe that one should use Section 861 of the federal tax code, and the regulations related to that section, to determine one's taxable DOMESTIC income (income from inside the U.S.). However, the vast majority of tax professionals do NOT use those sections for that, and the IRS very much does NOT want people looking there. Let's consider a few things that the lawbooks themselves say: 1) Section 861 itself is titled "Income from sources within the United States" (while Section 862 is about income from outside of the U.S.). The first two subsections of 861 are titled "Gross income from sources within United States" and "Taxable income from sources within United States." 2) If you look in the indexes of the tax code, under "gross income," you'll see entries regarding "sources within the United States," which direct the reader to Section 861. If you look under "taxable income," you'll see entries referring to 861 regarding income from within the U.S. If you look under "deductions," you'll see 861 referenced regarding determining taxable income from sources within the United States. 3) Section 61 gives the broadly-worded general definition of "gross income." Up until 2001, all three major printings of the tax code (USC, USCA, USCS) included a cross- reference under Section 61 itself, pointing to Section 861 regarding income from sources INSIDE the U.S. You can see scans of such cross-references here: http://irobyou.info/TaxableIncome_Net/exhibits/61crossref.html 4) The regulations which go along with Section 861 include Section 1.861-1, which is titled "Income from sources within the United States," as well as Section 1.861-8, which is titled "Computation of taxable income from sources within the United States [*]and from other sources and activities." (The part after the asterisk was added in 1978.) 5) Section 1.861-1 addresses three types of income: income from INSIDE the U.S., income from OUTSIDE the U.S., and income which comes from both inside and outside. Concerning domestic income (income from inside the U.S.), the regulation very plainly shows Section 861 and its regulations (and in some cases Section 863 as well) to be the place to look. The actual regulation can be found here: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_06/26cfr1i_06.html 6) Section 1.861-8 of the regulations begins by saying this: "(a) In general--(1) Scope. Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in general terms how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from sources within the United States after gross income from sources within the United States has been determined." There are many other sections which point to 861 and its regulations regarding the determination of one's domestic "gross income" and "taxable income" (e.g., 26 CFR 1.863-1(c), Treasury Decision 6258), but the above will do for now. Notice that none of the above citations give even the slightest hint that only certain people should use those sections in certain unusual circumstances. No, the lawbooks say over and over again, unequivocally and unconditionally, that 861 is the place to be regarding income from INSIDE the U.S. (If you have income from outside the U.S., other sections, particularly 862, deal with that.) Having seen the above, what would you think of someone saying that it's "frivolous" for me to think I should use 861 to determine my taxable domestic income? How about "baseless"? Maybe "ridiculous," or even "stupid"? And, in light of the above, what would you think about me getting PROSECUTED, and then thrown in prison, for using 861 and its regulations to determine my "taxable income from sources within the United States"? Well, I did. And my wife is in prison right now (halfway through her 30-day sentence) for doing just that. You may think I'm making this up, because it's so absurd. I am REQUIRED to determine my tax liability (if any) the way the LAW says to determine it. Remember, this is all about how to COMPLY with the law, and I complied exactly with the citations you see above. For my trouble, I was thrown in prison for a year. People who haven't been following the issue will probably have a really hard time believing what I just said. I wouldn't believe it myself if it hadn't happened to me. You may wonder, what did the government cite from the law itself demonstrating that I was wrong to use 861 (and related regulations) to determine my taxable domestic income? Absolutely nothing. In fact, when I met with the IRS to discuss the issue (at my request) they admitted that they weren't familiar with the sections I just cited above, and could not answer my questions--one of which was whether I should be using 861 to determine my taxable domestic income. They said they would do further research and get back to me. They never did, unless you call raiding my house in 2003 "getting back to me." Yep, a dozen armed IRS agents invaded my home, stole every copy they could find of my "Theft By Deception" video (www.861.info), my "Taxable Income" report (explaining the issue above in detail), etc. Then they prosecuted me for doing what the law COMMANDED me to do. If you're thinking, "That cannot be," I sympathize. You can get the whole story, with all the surreal details, later. For now, just look again at the citations above, and ask yourself, is there anything frivolous about what I did? Is it ridiculous of me to think I should have referred to Section 861? Soon we'll see what those sections say (and then you'll know WHY the IRS really doesn't want people looking at those sections). But for now, I know of no better "assumption versus evidence" test than this: Which would you give more weight to, what the law SAYS (see above), or what IRS bureaucrats and tax professionals baselessly ASSERT? Most people choose the latter. Apparently the jury in my case decided that I was obliged to IGNORE the law itself and instead obey the unsupported, legally worthless assertions and commands of the people who work for the IRS, DOJ, and the courts-- who, coincidentally, all get their paychecks from the money the IRS collects. Does that seem odd to you? Sincerely, Larken Rose -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 2.5 wpwEAQECAAYFAkW+nOQACgkQGmVFo/iGj32KuAQAgC0ttF0O9OCz23yx+aVn9oQzqkXl ra4kDBLDvmg9GOOr4uAhajq07NshS2oi5hjp2ZpfAwnshcF6sasy2KqIwKGRmOvNCr0u vN4j1xSKkaJUuPz/utqbQN2RfOU5TCnGKQsooTWefYleVTnsTz90Ty/tkIrrAjEPjVFO mq61Hw4= =O7Sf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 -------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe, send a blank message to 861-on@mail-list.com