NEWS: * Hearings Scheduled for September * Preparing for an NRST
INFORMATION: * Life Without A... Fingerprint
Why The Tax Freedom 101 Report?
"An immense effect may be produced by small powers wisely and steadily directed." - Noah Webster, Founding Father of American Education
Dear Netizen: Do you find the material in The Tax Freedom 101 Report interesting, useful, educational, or surprising? You do? Great! Then why don't you recommend this newsletter to a friend or two. They don't have to be a crazed liberty-lovin "radical" like you and me - even raging communists and everyone in between enjoys reading this newsletter! So spread the word... the forward button is just a click away...
Submit a news story or articles for publication.
For details email: submissions@taxfreedom101.com with "submission info" in the subject line.
Subscription and advertising information for The Tax Freedom 101 Report is contained at the end of this on-line report. If you received this ezine in plain text format and would like to view it in HTML with all visible links visit the archive site:
Standard Reserve... Currency for the World Wide Web.
Set-up a free Instant Anywhere Account and integrate a
debit card with your e-gold account. Click here.
UPDATES: * Fast Means to an End?
As many of you may have already heard, Bob Schulz's fast ended last Friday evening. The government has agreed to provide the We The People organization a chance to present their remonstrance on Capitol Hill, live and recorded for the public. We sincerely hope that Mr. Schulz can accomplish his goal to have public servants answer truthfully and correctly the allegations which have developed throughout the Patriot community. However, considering the track record of our public servants, we will be astounded if tyrants simply roll over after a tedious 100 plus years of work aimed at rolling us into a one world government by actually allowing an honest straight forth line of questioning surrounding Constitutional money and lawful taxation to take place. However they just might.
Would the honest and truthful answers to the line of questioning by the "tax honesty movement" as it has been called of late, place us on a path of justice to rightful ends? We assert they would, only if the citizenry were educated enough to the intricacies surrounding our Constitutional legacy. We fear that the major majority of the American public is far from the ideals and theories which drafted the Constitution, as many have never even read the great document itself. Expect Americans therefore to latch onto any and all expedient means presented by our public servants to "fix" the problems for perceived future "just" taxation, especially if upheaval and economic conditions deteriorate as a result of the truth being exposed. We must ask ourselves, and answer ourselves honestly to the question: Do you really trust your public servants to do the right thing, or the politically expedient thing?
The decision to start the fast by Bob at the onset of July came as a surprise to many in the patriot community. Even more of a surprise is that Bob and his counterpart did not waste-away, they actually did accomplish their goal. Now the real work begins. We stand at a threshold of reckoning. We will either begin down a road to restore honest government, or we will be given a set back of thirty years or more of work in the arena of educating Americans to Constitutional money and lawful taxation. Worse we could begin down a road of no return, the plan since the beginning.
WTP has engaged the tax research community to come together and begin assembling questions that they would ask if they had a few brief moments to ask the Department of Justice or the Internal Revenue Service, the gallery made up of the American public, as these proceedings have been promised to be aired live. While we have begun to read many of the questions brought forward by various researchers, all great, and sure to keep the government on its toes, we have yet to see an exit strategy forwarded. This concerns us.
A concerted effort of continued vigilance must follow the proceedings.
Since the public will be invited to watch, we assert that opening statements by the participants of the "tax honesty movement" must be made prior to any questioning begin. These opening statements, or more aptly subtle terms must be made known at the onset of the proceedings and interwoven throughout, effectively being made part of the record so that any proposed agenda, course of action, or other means of rectifying the inconsistencies shown in the law, or public policy at a later date may be vigorously addressed and scrutinized by the very same tax researchers who brought the information to the table at the proceedings.
We must continue to be part of the process as witnesses, and testifiers to any proposed legislation that may follow as a result of these proceedings, because the public is not versed in the law, and simply may not understand the pros and cons of the issues to make any valid assessment on any future public policy or legislation forwarded by the same in control of the proceedings. Look at it this way if you would. WTP has agreed to meet in enemy territory, and play by their rules. Tax researchers are testifying before them, they are not testifying before us. Expect all means of trickery from those who control the proceedings.
Strong people need to be on-hand to hold the patient down!
We all must remember that there is no easy fix to the Constitutional violations in question. Like a fatal disease that has spread throughout a living organisms being, there is no quick fix to the years of symptomatic unconstitutional actions in government. Expect tremendous upheaval, convulsions, and suffering if the remedy begins to work. The remedy being the supreme law as presently written - the Constitution, upheld and defended against all enemies foreign and domestic.
See the News Section story: "Hearings Scheduled September" for more.
The Tax Research Compendium- It's All on One Compact Disk!
Students of Tax Freedom 101 - don't be without this gem. The TRC is the perfect
companion to the Tax Freedom 101 Home Study Course. TRC contains Legislative History
of the Internal Revenue Code,The Victory Tax Act, Complete 1939, 1954 and 1986 IRC, Plus
much, much more. Visit www.taxfreedom101.com/pages/TRC.htm for further details!
NEWS: * Hearings Scheduled for September
DOJ and the U.S. Congress Officially Commit to Send IRS Tax and Legal Experts to Appear on Capitol Hill. Public Hearing to be Conducted by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett and Rep. Henry Hyde to Answer Citizens’ Challenges of IRS Jurisdiction and Illegal Enforcement of U.S. Tax Law.
Washington D.C. – We The People Foundation For Constitutional Education, Inc. announce that the Department of Justice and the U.S. Congress have committed, in writing, to appear with IRS representatives in a recorded, public meeting to officially answer to charges challenging the legal jurisdiction of the IRS and the illegal enforcement of U.S. income tax laws against U.S. citizens.
Department of Justice U.S. Assistant Attorney General Dan Bryant and Congressmen Roscoe Bartlett (MD) signed the written agreement Friday that commits the government to send their top tax and legal experts to a two-day September hearing to be conducted on Capitol Hill. These actions are in response to a proper petition for redress of grievances brought by Robert Schulz, Chairman of the Foundation. Schulz ended his 3-week hunger fast mid-afternoon today after having secured official commitment from representatives of the U.S. Government that his formal petition will be answered.
* Preparing for an NRST
Preparing for a push of the National Retail Sales Tax should be on the back of everyone's mind - especially now. Here are some interesting comments, and news stories from the past week that should make everyone sit up and take notice. If you do not understand the dangers of "alternative" tax plans such as a National Retail Sales Tax please read the "Beware of All So-Called 'Tax Reform' Proposals" as printed in the Information section of the September 19th, 2000 issue of The Tax Freedom 101 Report - click here to access the archive of this piece in the Tax Freedom 101 Library.
First the lack of media attendance and blackout of Bob and Roland's fast wasn't much of a surprise for us in the Patriot community, so there are no stories to report on the coverage of last week's events except the ones run on the Liberty Works Radio Network or published on the Internet at World Net Daily and the Sierra Times.
However consider the other news stories run and the events taking place in Washington DC as of last week:
- Monday, July 16th President Bush announced a sudden interest in studying "alternative" taxation systems, including disposal of the entire tax code. (New York Times)
- Wednesday, evening July 18th HR 2525 the "Fair Tax Bill" was introduced in the House.
- The New York Times, runs the story covering a Senate briefing by Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil. O'Neil explains how they have determined that there are approximately 1 + million offshore accounts in Grand Cayman alone, and that only 6,000 are registered with the U.S. The NY Times story essentially says that all this money is moved offshore to evade the income tax.
- Friday, July 20th the Associated Press provides a story about a Presidential Commission's findings on the future of Social Security, and the viability of privatization. The article relates a good portion of the truth behind Social Security with uncanny quotes from the commission's report which resemble what Tax Freedom 101 and others have been saying about Social Security for years - all except the voluntary nature of participation by citizens. To read the article in its entirety click here.
Related items: 2001 April Fools' Day Joke: IRS is ready to concede, and The Plan Since the Beginning, click here.
Privacy, Protection and Prosperity - How the Other Half Lives
Do you know how to properly protect your property and Income? If you do know about asset
protection and have not taken the steps to protect what is yours what are you waiting for?!
Order: "Privacy, Protection and Prosperity - How the Other Half Lives" to learn how!
Ordering info: http://www.taxfreedom101.com/products/ppp.htm
INFORMATION: * Life Without A... Fingerprint
by fellowship member Neil McIver
In late December I attempted to cash a check at a bank that required of me two forms of ID and, to my surprise & disappointment, my precisely planted fingerprint on the check. Business was slow that day and I was essentially talking to 3 tellers at once.
I provided 2 forms of ID, but told them that I would not provide a fingerprint. The teller told me that if I did not provide a fingerprint, that they would not cash the check. I told them that if they did not cash the check, I would return it to the company that wrote it and assess a bad check fee.
The tellers looked at each other & one said "Better get the manager".
There is a growing trend throughout the banking industry where banks require non-account holders to place a fingerprint on the check they present for cashing. The motive is to cut down on check fraud, such as thieves cashing stolen checks. While the policy no doubt works to discourage fraud (as most Orwellian tactics do), it works at the expense of privacy, and ultimately liberty on the part of an otherwise free people.
Banks are entitled to some reasonable proof of identification from those presenting a check for payment to show they are, in fact, the party to which the check is made payable. But fingerprints are not used to identify the payee. If they were, the print would be compared to a fingerprint database prior to cashing, which it is not. Instead, it is examined only if fraud is determined days or weeks later.
This means fingerprints are collected solely as evidence of a crime before any crime is known -- or even reasonably believed -- to be taking place. This clearly qualifies as a violation of the 4th Amendment which guarantees to us the right "to be secure in [our] persons....against unreasonable searches & seizures...". Certainly my fingerprint is part of my person, so by what right do banks require me to waive a right in order to cash a check?
After a few minutes, the bank manager came out and I sat down in her office. We repeated the dialog I just had with the teller.
She explained "If you want us to serve you, you must provide a fingerprint".
I replied "You aren't serving me. You are serving your account holder that wrote me this check".
"But if you want us to cash the check, you must provide a fingerprint."
I was talking to a brick wall. I asked for her business card.
"If you refuse to cash it, I'll have to mark it as a bad check, return it to your account holder and assess a $50 bad check fee".
She offered me a pen. I could mark the check right then & there.
I was really talking to a brick wall, but at least there was no confusion between us of where we stood.
Rights activists might assume that the bank is the party that is legally at fault for having a fingerprint policy. Yes, there are a myriad of bank regulations that banks must follow in order to be allowed to operate with the government regulated banking system, and those regulations cannot override our 4th Amendment protections. Still, there's a fundamental relationship at work which excuses us from having to navigate those regulations.
Banks were first invented out of a need for those with excess money to safely store their funds. Checks were invented as a means to allow depositors to instruct banks to make payments from those stored funds. The depositor simply writes out an order for the bank to pay out a certain sum & gives the document to the person to whom it he is paying.
The payee could accept the check and "take it to the bank" if it was "good enough". The bank would receive the check, judge by the unique seal or signature its authenticity (how many banks still do that?) and then pay over the prescribed amount to the payee.
Giving someone a check is not payment & never has been. Checks are merely a promise of payment, and nothing more. If the bank refuses to honor a check for insufficient funds or any other reason, (it doesn't matter why) then the promise is broken. When promises are broken, no matter what the reason, recourse is against the promise maker, which is the person that wrote the check.
Being a bit angry at having wasted a trip and having a curve thrown in my immediate financial plans, I left the bank and came home. Having never had to process a bad check before I used my best judgment. With a red flair pen, I noted the following on the face of the check:
"Dishonored by [Bank name]
[Bank address (the specific branch I visited)]
[Date & Time it was dishonored]
I then returned it to the client with the following letter:
------
Attn: Accounts Payable
Sirs,
Enclosed please find a returned check in the amount of [$XXX]. The check was tendered to me as payment for services rendered (Ref: invoice [XXYYZZ], dated [date]).
On [a particular day] at approximately [a particular time], during normal business hours, I attempted to redeem the check at a branch of [your damn bank], located at [address]. I presented suitable identification, as requested, but your bank was nonetheless unwilling to cash the check. The bank personnel demanded I surrender a fingerprint as a condition of honoring your check. For moral, privacy and legal reasons, I do not surrender fingerprints or waive any other rights as a condition of accepting payment.
I then spoke with Ms. [Bank Bigwig], (copy of business card enclosed) of this branch and was told that if I wanted to be served, that I must surrender the fingerprint. I informed Ms. [Bank Bigwig] that they were not serving me, they were serving [you guys], and if they did not honor the check, I would have to mark the check appropriately, return it and assess a $50 bad check fee. Ms. [Bank Bigwig] seemed unswayed by this warning and handed me a pen, which I understood as an invitation to do exactly that.
[You guys] apparently appointed [that damn bank] a fiduciary of funds in the amount of [$XXX], promised to me in the form of the enclosed check. Since [that damn bank] has acted on your behalf in declining to honor your promise of payment, I regret my only recourse is to return the check to you and assess a return check fee.
Please find enclosed an invoice for the original amount due and additional fees. As the original amount was due on [date], your prompt payment is appreciated. Due to the policies of [that damn bank], I regret I am unable to accept further checks drawn upon that bank. Instruments drawn on other banks or financial institutions are welcome, provided a fingerprint is not required as a condition of their being honored. Should you have questions about the enclosed check or what other methods of payment are acceptable, please do not hesitate to call.
I thank you for your kind attention in this matter.
Sincerely,
[Me]
------
I cc'd (sent "carbon" copies) to Ms. Bank Bigwig as well as that bank's main office, as a "courtesy" of sorts. I would guess that Ms. Bank Bigwig committed an error when she offered me a pen, thereby encouraging me to return the check, but that's a matter to be settled between the bank and my client.
One remedy that may bring attention to the fingerprint policy without risking severe repercussions from customers is to add (in advance) a $10 check handling fee for any check drawn upon a bank that requires a fingerprint. A simple but polite notice on an invoice may suffice.
Although I'm not obligated to attempt to negotiate a check in any manner beyond cashing at the bank upon which it is drawn, there are other ways. But most reasonable ones available to me carry with them cashing fees or a delay for check clearing. Certainly a $10 or $15 fee for that trouble is quite reasonable.
Of course, I'm not obligated to accept checks in the first place, and many vendors don't, so accepting checks is itself a courtesy, subject to any restrictions I would care to impose.
This could end any number of ways and I have no idea what's going to happen. Obviously, the bank's account holder is also my own customer, and by taking this stand I may lose some business. But for this one customer and this one payment, that is a risk I'm willing to take to give this Orwellian practice some of the attention it deserves.
Neil
-----
You can learn more about Neil McIver and his stories about being a free sovereign citizen at his home page by clicking here.
Dear Netizen: Do you find the material in The Tax Freedom 101 Report interesting, useful, educational, or surprising? You do? Great! Then why don't you recommend this newsletter to a friend or two. They don't have to be a crazed liberty-lovin "radical" like you and me - even raging communists and everyone in between enjoys reading this newsletter! So spread the word... the forward button is just a click away...
$$$ Advertise Your Product or Service in The Tax Freedom 101 Report
Do you have a product or service available that our educated and faithful readership would be interested in knowing about? Many of our readers understand the intent of Article 1 Section 10 as written in the Constitution and are eager to do business and network with others who share they same understanding. To learn more about advertising in this weekly ezine visit: http://www.taxfreedom101.com/pages/advertising.htm
Past Issues: If you received this ezine in plain text format and would like to view it in HTML with all visible links visit the archive site: http://www.nossn.com/tf101
"Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, and with a flick of a pen they will
create enough to buy it back." -- Sir Josiah Stamp, former President, Bank of England
DISCLAIMER: The data on this website is the collaborative experience, contributions, and research of various websites, legal books, tax documents, researchers, associates, attorneys, CPA's, etc. and does not constitute legal advice. The primary purpose of this site is education. We do not advocate any specific course of action. What you do with this information and any course of action you decide to take, if any, is entirely your responsibility.
