Requirement for Consent

tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public

1

policy.65 ”

2

[63C American Jurisprudence 2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247 (1999)]

3

An employee who is not a “public official” has no authority to bind the government because he has no fiduciary duty to act 4 in the best interests of the government. It is worth noting that the ONLY person in the IRS who is a “public official” is the 5 IRS commissioner himself. He is appointed by the President pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §7803(a)(1)(A). Everyone below him 6 has no statutory authority to serve and DO NOT serve even as federal “employees”. This is confirmed by the 1939 Internal 7 Revenue Code, which is the basis for the current Internal Revenue Code and was never repealed. All laws prior to that 8 relating to federal taxation were repealed by the Revenue Act of 1939. See 53 Stat. 1, the Revenue Act of 1939. Below is 9 what it says about Revenue Agents in the 1939 Code, in section 4000, 53 Stat. 489: 10

53 Stat. 489

11

Revenue Act of 1939, 53 Stat. 489

12 13

Chapter 43: Internal Revenue Agents

14

Section 4000 Appointment

15 16

The Commissioner may, whenever in his judgment the necessities of the service so require, employ competent agents , who shall be known and designated as internal revenue agents, and, except as provided for in this title, no general or special agent or inspector of the Treasury Department in connection with internal revenue, by

17

18

19

whatever designation he may be known, shall be appointed, commissioned, or employed .

20

“Competent agents”? What a joke! If they were “competent”, then they would: 21

1. Know and follow the law and be fired if they didn’t.

22

2. Work as an “employee” for a specific Congressman in the House of Representatives who was personally accountable 23 for their actions. “Taxation and representation” must coincide to preserve the original intent of the Constitution and 24 the separation of powers doctrine. 25 3. Have delegated statutory authority of law to serve. 26 4. Would be public officials with a fiduciary duty to the public who they serve. 27

You can read the above statute yourself on the Family Guardian website at: 28

http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Govt/HistoricalActs/HistFedIncTaxActs.htm 29

If “Revenue Agents” are not “appointed, commissioned, or employed”, then what exactly are they? We’ll tell you what 30 they are: They are independent consultants who operate on commission. They get a commission from the property they 31 steal from the American People, and their stolen “loot” comes from the Department of Agriculture. See the following 32 response to a Freedom of Information Act (F.O.I.A.) request proving that IRS agents are paid by the Department of 33 Agriculture: 34

http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Evidence/OrgAndDuties/USDAPaysIRS.pdf 35

Why would the Congress NOT want to make Revenue Agents “appointed, commissioned, or employed”? Well, if they are 36 effectively STEALING property from the American people and if they are not connected in any way with the federal 37 government directly, have no statutory authority to exist under Title 26, and are not “employees”, then the President of the 38 United States and all of his appointees in the Executive Branch cannot then be held personally liable for the acts and abuses 39 of these thieves. What politician in his right mind would want to jeopardize his career by being held accountable for a 40 mafia extortion ring whose only job is to steal money from people absent any legal authority? 41 The upside of all this is that if IRS agents are not “appointed, commissioned, or employed”, then they have no authority to 42 obligate the government to anything. This is true of EVERYONE in the IRS who serves below the IRS Commissioner. 43 The implications of this are HUGE. Most people become statutory “taxpayers” through the operation of private/special 44 law, as we said earlier. This happens usually by them signing an “agreement” of some kind that makes them subject to the 45

65 Indiana State Ethics Comm’n v. Nelson (Ind App), 656 N.E.2d. 1172 , reh gr (Ind App) 659 N.E.2d. 260, reh den (Jan 24, 1996) and transfer den (May 28, 1996).

Requirement for Consent

316 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________