State of California )
County of Hollister )
1. I, Juan De Leon, 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 P.O. Box 291,
Hollister, CA 95024.
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
(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.
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 !
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".
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
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
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
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
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 !!!!!
Secretary of the Treasury
10. According to the Financial Management Service's 1997 financial
Report to the Citizens:
TOTAL RECEIPTS, 1997: 1.579 TRILLION
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
TOTAL SPENDING, 1997: $1.601 TRILLION
Major Spending by Category
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 !
The federal government obviously does not need to collect
income taxes to operate the federal government.
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.
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.
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 567-15-3235.
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
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 am illegally classified as a "TC 148 HOLD IS P" on my IMF
for tax years 1993, 1992, 1991, 1990, 1989 which is a
"tax protester". I pay taxes. I am not a tax protester,
I am a "income tax protester". Income taxes are direct taxes,
not indirect taxes.
Manually input a Trans Code 149 to be posted to the IMF to
reverse the TC 148 on the above years and on all previous
tax years and on the upcoming tax year 1997.
A Lien is shown on the following:
TAX PERIOD 30 9312 LIEN DLN 89210-203-26606-5
TAX PERIOD 30 9212 LIEN DLN 89254-556-18012-6
TAX PERIOD 30 9112 LIEN DLN 89247-657-00225-5
TAX PERIOD 30 9012 LIEN DLN 89247-657-00224-5
TAX PERIOD 30 8912 LIEN DLN 89254-493-18558-6
The third digit in the DLN of all three LIEN DLNs is a "2".
The third digit is the tax class.
All five 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 five DLNs constitutes fraud.
Nullify all taxes due as the result of the incorrect tax
class in the five 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
TAX PERIOD 30 9312
TAX PERIOD 30 9212
TAX PERIOD 30 9112
TAX PERIOD 30 9012
TAX PERIOD 30 8912
Reverse CRINV- 130.
The IRS may respond within thirty (30) working days from
April 20, 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 20, 1998.
April 20, 1998 Juan De Leon Affiant
State of California )
County of Holister )
Sworn to and subscribed by ____________________ in my presence
this ______ day of ________________, 19_____________.