1
View single post by Undrstm8ed | |||
Posted: Tue Nov 21st, 2017 03:50 am |
|
||
Undrstm8ed Seasoned... ![]() Joined: Sat Oct 21st, 2017
Location: Near The Pointy End , USA
Posts: 1299
Status:
Offline
Reputation: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Reputation Points: $user_rep
![]() |
A "person". A typical definition of "person" in a statute usually looks something like this: Person - The term person includes an individual, partnership, joint venture, limited liability company, association, cooperative, corporation whether or not organized for profit, estate, or trust.The first thing that is important to note about that definition is that other than the word "individual" (which we will discuss in a moment), every one of the entities listed is clearly a "statutory legal fiction". A statutory legal fiction is a legal entity (called a "person") that exists because the legislature has allowed it to come into existence by passing a law that authorizes its creation. The most commonly recognized "statutory fiction" is a corporation. We would suggest that you re-read the bolded sentence as many times as is necessary, and let it sink in. [A quick and easy test to determine if something is a legal fiction is this: If it can sue you in court, but it has no flesh and blood, it's a legal fiction.] Because statutory fictions are created by the State, they are subject to absolute regulation by the State solely on the basis of "public policy" considerations. [In this article we will only be addressing statutory fictions. There are non-statutory fictions, such as Common Law Trusts, which are not generally subject to State regulation as are statutory fictions.] Once again, we would suggest that you re-read the bolded sentence above as many times as necessary to lock it in your mind. Some corporations are referred to as "private corporations". This phrase is misleading. A "private corporation" is not "private" in the way most people use that word. In law, the phrase "private corporation" is merely a way of distinguishing a corporation as not being listed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for "public trading" of its shares on a stock exchange. Because corporations (and all other statutory fictions) are created by the State, they are never "private" in the way most people understand and use the word "private". Since all of the words used within the definition of "person" appear to be "legal fictions", how then should we view the word "individual"? And remember, we are ascertaining the proper meaning and application of a tax statute through context. The first question that we would ask is whether or not an "individual" is a Citizen. [See the [url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051215083200/http://www.originalintent.org:80/edu/citizenship.php]Citizenship[/url] page within this site for details on "Citizen".] Since a Citizen of a state of the Union is definitely not exercising a privilege when buying or selling his own property in a private transaction, then a Citizen cannot be the "individual" in a definition dealing with an excise [privilege] tax - at least not in his private capacity. But what if the "individual" is a man (Citizen or not) who holds a position of authority and responsibility within one of those legal fictions (such as a corporate officer)? Let's see if that theory holds water! Chapter 75 of the Internal Revenue Code specifies various criminal tax offenses. The term "person" is used in virtually every section of the chapter. After all, since a "legal fiction" can't be put in jail, there has to be someone that the government can ultimately hold accountable for wrongdoing. So what is the definition of "person" for IRS tax crimes? 26 USC §7343: Person - The term ''person'' as used in this chapter includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.Ah...so when a real-live-flesh-and-blood person (known in law as a "natural person") is held accountable for criminal non-compliance with the law, he is held accountable only in his capacity as the officer or employee, under a duty to perform, on behalf of the "legal fiction". Does it not then seem reasonable that the "individual" listed in the sales tax statute is simply a natural person who is under a duty to perform, or not perform, an act regarding the tax being imposed upon the legal fiction?
____________________ "Be never first, never last and never noticed." - Unknown "The slave is held most securely when he is held by the chains of his own will and of his own fears, and when he is locked down by his own slavish desires for a comfortable life." - Michael Bunker "Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur" - ~ attributed to Petronius (Gaius Petronius Arbiter (ca. 27–66 AD)) Roman courtier during the reign of Nero. "Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it." - Thomas Paine ~ Undrstm8ed Truckumentry Write Up Pg. ~ Undrstm8ed Trailermentry Write Up Pg. . |
||
|