State of ????????????? )
                       ) ss
County of ???????????? )

1.  I, ????? ?. ??????????????? , being first duly sworn, upon my

    oath do solemnly swear under penalty of perjury that:

2.  I am a U.S. Citizen, and my address is ##### ????????????

    ?????????????????????, ?? #####.

3.  I claim my right under Amendment 5 to the Constitution of the

    United States, "No person shall be held to answer for a

    capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment

    or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the

    land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual

    service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person

    be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of

    life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to

    be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life,

    liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall

    private property be taken for public use, without just


4.                           Definitions

                         (as used herein)

    USC means United States Code as used herein as Title 18 USC

       and Title 26 USC.

    CFR means Code of Federal Regulations as used herein as

       Title 26 CFR.

    IRS means Internal Revenue Service.

    FRB means Federal Reserve Bank.  Also known as the "FED".

    BPD means Bureau of the Public Debt.

    I am a person.  According to 26 USC 7701 (a)(1) "The term

       "person" shall be construed to mean and include an

       individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association,

       company or corporation."

    I am a taxpayer.  According to 26 USC 7701 (a)(14) "The term

       "taxpayer" means any person subject to any internal revenue


    IRM means Internal Revenue Manual which are guidelines to

       assist IRS employees in the performance of his/her duties.

    IMF means Individual Master File.  The IMF is a magnetic tape

       listing all taxpayers maintained at the Martinsburg Computer

       Center, West virginia.

    DLN means Document Locator Number.  The DLN is used to locate

       taxpayer tax modules in the Individual Master File.

    Wealth of Nations is a book published in 1776 and written by

       an English economist Adam Smith, the father of modern

       Capitalism which America's economy is based upon.  The first

       edition of Smith's book was re-published in 1991 by Prometheus

       Books, ISBN 0-87975-705-1.

    The Worldly Philosophers is a book written by an American

       economist, Robert L. Heilbroner and published by Simon &

       Schuster, Inc., ISBN 0-671-63318-X.


5.  The PURPOSE of this Affidavit is to declare that I am not

    liable for Income Taxes therefore I am not liable to file a

    U.S. Individual Tax Return (Form 1040).  I am also not liable

    to collect and turn over any income taxes to any government

    agency, according to the Constitution of the United States,

    the Supreme Court of the United States, Title 26 of the

    United States Code (26 USC) and Title 26 of the Code of

    Federal Regulations (26 CFR).

    The IRS is committing computer fraud in my Individual Master

    File (see paragraph 13).

6.  I also claim any monies supposedly owed by me to the Internal

    Revenue Service be returned to me that are refundable within

    the Statute of limitations. 

                             To the

                 President of the United States

7.  Mr. President: I believe the income tax is indirectly

    responsible for the majority of problems America faces today.

    In a country as rich as ours, there should not be any poverty;

    no homelessness; no unemployment.  Yet, the rich continue to

    get richer and the poor continue to get poorer.

    One reason I oppose income taxes is the same reason 56 men

    offered their Lives, Fortunes, and Honor for in the

    Declaration of Independence - "FOR imposing Taxes on us

    without our Consent"

    Mr. President: the income tax is a direct tax.  Adam Smith, in

    his book "Wealth of Nations", wrote "Capitation taxes, so far

    as they are levied upon the lower ranks of people, are direct

    taxes upon the wages of labor, and are attended with all the

    inconveniences of such taxes" [page 540].  Mr. Smith also

    wrote "The impossibility of taxing the people, in proportion

    to their revenue, by any capitation, seems to have given

    occasion to the invention of taxes upon consumable

    commodities. The state, not knowing how to tax, directly and

    proportionably, the revenue of its subjects, endeavours to

    tax it indirectly by taxing their expense, which, it is

    supposed, will in most cases be nearly in proportion to their

    revenue. Their expense is taxed by taxing the consumable

    commodities upon which it is laid out" [page 541].

    Smith also wrote "The sole use of money if to circulate

    consumable goods" [page 280].

    Mr. President: Robert L. Heilbroner, in his book "The Worldly

    Philosophers", wrote "[Adam] Smith met as well a charming and

    intelligent American, one Benjamin Franklin, who provided him

    with a wealth of facts about the American Colonies and a deep

    appreciation of the role that they might someday play.  It is

    undoubtedly due to Franklin's influence that Smith subsequently

    wrote of the Colonies that they constituted a nation "which,

    indeed, seems very likely to become one of the greatest and

    most formidable that ever was in the world" [page 50].  I

    believe that Mr. Smith also discussed the subjects of money

    and taxation with Mr. Franklin, and that Mr. Franklin passed

    that information on to the members of the Continental Congress

    which information on direct taxation became part of our

    Constitution of the United States.

    Mr. President: on April 15, 1997, Congressmen Dan Schaefer

    and Billy Tauzin stated "Americans spend more than 5.1 billion

    hours merely filling out income tax forms. None of this time

    is for productive enterprises that actually add to the social,

    economic, or moral well-being of our society.  By some

    estimates, the cost of compliance exceeds $300 billion a year

    - that's in addition to the $600 billion a year Americans also

    pay in taxes.  In effect, Americans are taxed twice by the

    IRS.  They pay a federal tax on their income, and they pay

    what amounts to a hidden sales tax -- believed to be as high

    as 10 - 15 percent -- on all retail goods and services they


    Mr. President: before you entererd on the Execution of your

    Office, you spoke the following Oath -- "I do solemnly swear

    that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the

    United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve,

    protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

    Mr. President: When our Congress votes to Abolish Income Taxes,

    10% to 15% of all individual's money problems will disappear

    overnight; 760,000 homeless men, women and children will be

    off the streets; and 36.5 million people will no longer be

    living in poverty.

    Mr. President:  defend the Constitution of the United States!

    A person's income should not be taxed!  I pray that you support

    the effort of the American people to Abolish Income Taxes !

                             To the

                   United States Supreme Court

8.  The income tax is a direct tax!

    You were correct in your decision on the Act of August 27,

    1894 (28 Stat. 553-60, Sec. Sec. 27-37).  Income tax

    provisions of the tariff act of 1894. "The tax imposed by

    Sec. Sec. 27 and 37, inclusive . . . so far as it falls on

    the income of real estate and of personal property, being a

    direct tax within the meaning of the Constitution, and,

    therefore, unconstitutional and void because not apportioned

    according to representation [Article I, Sec. 2, clause 3], all

    those sections, constituting one entire scheme of taxation,

    are necessarily invalid" (158 U.S. 601, 637).

    Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1895), and

    rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895).

    The ratification of the 16th Amendment was the direct

    consequence of the Court's decision in 1895 in Pollock v.

    Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.,(157 U.S. 429 (1895); 158 U.S. 601

    (1895)) whereby the attempt of Congress the previous year to

    tax incomes uniformly throughout the United States (Ch. 349,

    Sec. 27, 28 Stat. 509, 553) was held by a divided court to

    be unconstitutional.  A tax on incomes derived from property,

    (The Court conceded that taxes on incomes from "professions, 

    trades, employments, or vocations" levied by this act were

    excise taxes and therefore valid. The entire statute, however,

    was voided on the ground that Congress never intended to permit

    the entire "burden of the tax to be borne by professions,

    trades, employments, or vocations" after real estate and

    personal property had been exempted, 158 U.S. at 635.) the

    Court declared, was a "direct tax" which Congress under the

    terms of Article I, Sec. 2, and Sec. 9, could impose only by

    the rule of apportionment according to population, although

    scarcely fifteen years prior the Justices had unanimously

    sustained (Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1881))

    the collection of a similar tax during the Civil War, (Ch. 173,

    Sec. 116, 13 Stat. 223, 281 (1864)) the only other occasion

    preceding the Sixteenth Amendment in which Congress had

    ventured to utilize this method of raising revenue.

    During the interim between the Pollock decision in 1895 and

    the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913, the Court

    gave evidence of a greater awareness of the dangerous

    consequences to national solvency which that holding

    threatened, and partially circumvented the threat, either by

    taking refuge in redefinitions of "direct tax" or, and more

    especially, by emphasizing, virtually to the exclusion of the

    former, the history of excise taxation. Thus, in a series of

    cases, notably Nicol v. Ames,(173 U.S. 509 (1899)), Knowlton

    v. Moore,(178 U.S. 41 (1900)) and Patton v. Brady,(184 U.S. 608

   (1902)) the Court held the following taxes to have been levied

    merely upon one of the "incidents of ownership" and hence to

    be excises: a tax which involved affixing revenue stamps to

    memoranda evidencing the sale of merchandise on commodity

    exchanges, an inheritance tax, and a war revenue tax upon

    tobacco on which the hitherto imposed excise tax had already

    been paid and which was held by the manufacturer for resale.

    Because of such endeavors the Court thus found it possible to
    sustain a corporate income tax as an excise "measured by

    income" on the privilege of doing business in corporate form.

    (Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107 (1911)).  The adoption

    of the Sixteenth Amendment, however, put an end to speculation

    whether the Court, unaided by constitutional amendment, would

    persist along these lines of construction until it had reversed

    its holding in the Pollock case.  Indeed, in its initial

    appraisal (Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R., 240 U.S. 1 (1916);

    Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916); Tyee Realty

    Co. v. Anderson, 240 U.S. 115 (1916)) of the Amendment it

    classified income taxes as being inherently "indirect." "[T]he
    command of the amendment that all income taxes shall not be

    subject to apportionment by a consideration of the sources

    from which the taxed income may be derived, forbids the

    application to such taxes of the rule applied in the Pollock

    case by which alone such taxes were removed from the great

    class of excises, duties, and imports subject to the rule of

    uniformity and were placed under the other or direct class."

    Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R., 240 U.S. 1, 18-19 (1916).

    "[T]he Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation

    but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power

    of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning

    from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to

    which it inherently belonged." (Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co.,

    240 U.S. 103, 112 (1916)).

    Building upon definitions formulated in cases construing the
    Corporation Tax Act of 1909, (Stratton's Independence v.

    Howbert, 231 U.S. 399 (1913); Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co.,

    247 U.S. 179 (1918)) the Court initially described income as
    the "gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both

    combined," inclusive of the "profit gained through a sale or

    conversion of capital assets"; (Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S.

    189 (1920); Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U.S. 170 (1926))

    in the following array of factual situations it subsequently

    applied this definition to achieve results that have been

    productive of extended controversy.

    Rendered in conformity with the belief that all income "in the

    ordinary sense of the word" became taxable under the Sixteenth

    Amendment, the earliest decisions of the Court on the

    taxability of corporate dividends occasioned little comment.

    Emphasizing that in all such cases the stockholder is to be

    viewed as "a different entity from the corporation," the Court

    in Lynch v. Hornby, (247 U.S. 339, 344 (1918). On the other

    hand, in Lynch v. Turrish, 247 U.S. 221 (1918), the single and

    final dividend distributed upon liquidation of the entire

    assets of a corporation, although equaling twice the par value

    of the capital stock, was declared to represent only the

    intrinsic value of the latter earned prior to the effective

    date of the Amendment, and hence was not taxable as income to

    the shareholder in the year in which actually received.

    Similarly, in Southern Pacific Co. v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330

    (1918), dividends paid out of surplus accumulated before the

    effective date of the Amendment by a railway company whose

    entire capital stock was owned by another railway company and

    whose physical assets were leased to and used by the latter

    was declared to be a nontaxable bookkeeping transaction between

    virtually identical corporations) held that a cash dividend

    equal to 24 percent of the par value of the outstanding stock

    and made possible largely by the conversion into money of

    assets earned prior to the adoption of the Amendment, was

    income taxable to the stockholder for the year in which he

    received it, notwithstanding that such an extraordinary

    payment might appear "to be a mere realization in possession

    of an inchoate and contingent interest . . . [of] the

    stockholder . . . in a surplus of corporate assets previously

    existing."  In Peabody v. Eisner, (247 U.S. 347 (1918)) decided

    on the same day and deemed to have been controlled by the

    preceding case, the Court ruled that a dividend paid in the

    stock of another corporation, although representing earnings

    that had accrued before ratification of the Amendment, was also

    taxable to the shareholder as income.  The dividend was likened

    to a distribution in specie.

    Two years later the Court decided Eisner v. Macomber, (252 U.S.

    189, 206-08 (1920)) and the controversy which that decision

    precipitated still endures.  Departing from the interpretation

    placed upon the Sixteenth Amendment in the earlier cases, i.e.,

    that the purpose of the Amendment was to correct the "error"

    committed in the Pollock case and to restore income taxation

    to "the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently

    belonged," Justice Pitney, who delivered the opinion in the

    Eisner case, indicated that the sole purpose of the Sixteenth

    Amendment was merely to "remove the necessity which otherwise

    might exist for an apportionment among the States of taxes

    laid on income."  He thereupon undertook to demonstrate how

    what was not income, but an increment of capital when received,

    could later be transmitted into income upon sale or conversion

    and could be taxed as such without the necessity of

    apportionment.  In short, the term "income" acquired to some

    indefinite extent a restrictive significance.

    You are wrong in calling an income tax an "indirect tax".

                             To the

              United States House of Representatives

9.  Amendment 16 to the Constitution of the United States says

    "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on

    incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment

    among the several States, and without regard to any census or


    Repeal Amendment 16.  Abolish Income Taxes !!!!!

    Consider "The Barber Plan":

    Part A - Fee on Transfers

    A1. One half of one percent is collected on the FRB's daily

        total of funds and securities transfers.

    A2. One half of one percent is collected on ALL monetary

        transfers except on loans from the government (not

        including loans from Government Sponsored Enterprises

        (GSEs).  GSEs pay the fees.

    A3. One half of one percent is collected on ALL State's

        daily Gaming and Lottery monies wagered. 

        Part A should do it.  Or at least half of the budget.

        If not, then we implement Part B.

    Part B - Apportioned PPR

    B1. The federal government determines fiscal budgeted

        tax requirements.

    B2. People and businesses give voluntarily to the State

        government anonymously to reduce apportioned tax

        requirement to the several States. 

        Since there will be no federal income taxation, this

        step will offer the underground economy, individuals

        and businesses to contribute as much as they desire

        to the State to reduce the federal tax liability to

        the State. 

    B3. The federal tax liability balance is apportioned

        among the several States. 

        What does Apportioned mean? Both the Constitution

        for the united States Of America and The Federalist

        Papers discuss apportionment concerning taxation.

        Apportionment under The Barber Plan means that the

        balance of revenues needed after Social Security,

        Unemployment Insurance, Payroll Taxes and donations

        have been subtracted from the federal tax requirement

        until 2004, are allocated to each State according to

        population.  After 2004, apportionment under The

        Barber Plan means that the balance of revenues needed

        after donations have been subtracted from the federal

        tax requirement, are allocated to each State according

        to population.

             Phase I - Abolish Federal Income Taxes

                       Individual and Corporate (1999)

             Phase II - Abolish Unemployment and Payroll


             Phase III - Abolish Social Security Taxes (2003)

    B4. A Purchase Percentage Rate (PPR) is collected at

        the State level. 

        What is PPR ?  PPR is Purchase Percentage Rate.

        The PPR may be variable and change at a moments

        notice. The PPR is taxed on price and not on the

        total sale as is currently being done with sales

        taxes. The PPR tax is collected until a State has

        meet the allocated apportioned amount of revenue

        needed from that State. The federal government and

        States may collect SURPLUS monies using the PPR

        tax method.

                      Example PPR Chart

               Purchase Price                 %

               $.01 - $3                      0
               $3.01 - $10                    1
               $10.01 - $25                   2
               $25.01 - $50                   3
               $50.01 - $100                  4
               $100.01 - $250                 5
               $250.01 - $5,000               6
               $5,000.01 - $10,000            7
               $10,000.01 - $20,000           8
               $20,000.01 - $30,000           9
               $30,000.01 - $40,000          10
               $40,000.01 - $50,000          11
               $50,000.01 - $100,000         12
               $100,000.01 - 500,000         13
               $500,000.01 - 1,000,000       14
               $1,000,000.01 and over        15

    Vote to Abolish Income Taxes !!!!!

                             To the

                    Secretary of the Treasury

10. According to the Financial Management Service's 1997 financial

    Report to the Citizens:


    Receipts by Source                           Billion  Percentage

         Individual income taxes                  $737.5     46.7

         Social insurance taxes & contributions    539.4     34.1

         Corporate income taxes                    182.3     11.5

         Other receipts                             62.9      3.9

         Excise taxes                               56.9      3.6


    Major Spending by Category
                                                 Billion  Percentage

    Social Security                               $365.3     22.8

    Other expenses                                 300.6     18.8

    National defense                               270.5     16.9

    Interest                                       244.0     15.2

    Medicare                                       190.0     11.9

    Unemployment, disability, and

      other income security payments               135.3      8.4

    Medicaid                                        95.6      6.0

    (See internet website:

    The Bureau of the "Public Debt borrows more than $2 trillion

    each year by conducting more than 160 auctions, as well as

    through the continuous sale of savings bonds."  Its mission

    "is to borrow the money needed to operate the Federal

    Government and to account for the resulting debt."

    (See internet website:

    Adding together what the federal government borrows and

    collects in taxes equals $3,500,000,000,000 !

       Borrow  $2,000,000,000,000

       Taxes   $1,500,000,000,000


               $3,500,000,000,000 !!!!!

    The federal government obviously does not need to collect

    income taxes to operate the federal government.

                             To the

           Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service

11. According to IRM 1218 Policies of the Internal Revenue Service,

    P-1-1 "Tax matters will be handled in a manner that will

    promote public confidence."  The IRS is not promoting public

    confidence in tax matters.

    According to IRM 1218 Policies of the Internal Revenue Service,

    P-2-7 "Reasonable cause for late filing of return or failure to

    deposit or pay tax when due" - is not applicable to me.  I am

    unable to determine amount of deposit or tax due because I am

    not liable to pay income taxes.

                             To the

             Director, Internal Revenue Service Center

12.  According to IRM 5300 Balance Due Account Procedures, 5311

     Assessment Authority "(1) The initial step in the collection

     process is to establish an account against a taxpayer by

     assessing the amount due and unpaid."  This does not apply

     to me.  I am unable to determine amount of deposit on tax due

     because I am not liable to pay income taxes.

                             To the

            Distric Director, Internal Revenue Service

13. "18 USC 287. False, fictitious or fraudulent claims

    Whoever makes or presents to any person or officer in the

    civil, military, or naval service of the United States, or to

    any department or agency thereof, any claim upon or against

    the United States, or any department or agency thereof,

    knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent,

    shall be imprisoned not more than five years and shall be

    subject to a fine in the amount provided in this title."

    The IRS is committing computer fraud in my Individual Master


    My ACCOUNT NO is ###-##-####.

    IRS "*IMF MCC TRANSCRIPT-SPECIFIC*" is the printed document

    used to show my tax module status.

    IRS "ADP and IDRS Information 1997 Document 6209" is used to

    De-Code the IMF entity and tax modules.

    IRM 9781 Handbook for Special Agents page 9781-300 (1997)

    states "451 Definition and Purposes (1) Definition - An excise

    tax is a duty or impost levied upon the manufacture, sale, or

    consumption of commodities within the country, and upon

    certain occupations."

    IRM 9781 Handbook for Special Agents page 9781-300 (1997)

    states 452.1 "Income taxes are based on net income or net

    profits, and are graduated.  Excise taxes are not graduated..."

    The IRS is collecting an excise tax, not an income tax.

    I do not have a net profit.

    I pay taxes.  I am not a tax protester, I am a "income tax

    protester".  Income taxes are direct taxes, not indirect


    The third digit in the DLN of all three LIEN DLNs is a "2".

    The third digit is the tax class.

    All three LIEN DLNs are incorrect in that the third digit

    is a "2".  The third digit should be a "4".  The "2" indicates

    Individual Income Tax, Fiduciary Income Tax, Partnership

    return.  The "4" indicates Excise Tax.

    The incorrect tax class in the three DLNs constitutes fraud.

    Nullify all taxes due as the result of the incorrect tax
    class in the three LIEN DLNs.

    Nullify all LIENs against my ACCOUNT NO.

    Each of the following tax periods indicate that I am

    classified "CRINV- 130" which means my entire account is frozen

    from refunding:

       TAX PERIOD 30     9612
       TAX PERIOD 30     9512
       TAX PERIOD 30     9412
       TAX PERIOD 30     9312

    Reverse CRINV- 130.

    The IRS may respond within thirty (30) working days from

    April 13, 1998.  Not responding to paragraph 13 will mean

    that the IRS has nullified all LIENs and all illegal taxes

    due; reversed "CRINV- 130" and reversed "TC 148 HOLD IS P".

    A Stay of Execution of Collection and/or Prosecution is

    in effect beginning April 13, 1998.

April 13, 1998                   Karl Frank Kleinpaste     Affiant                              

State of Pennsylvannia )
                       ) ss
County of Alleghany    )

Sworn to and subscribed by ____________________ in my presence                  
this ______ day of ________________, 19_____________.           
                                    NOTARY PUBLIC                  


Make your own free website on