IRS master file considers everyone as operating (individual) business within territories

Shown below is a court entry/notice from the Laugenours.

Related Judgement not in their favor: https://casetext.com/case/us-v-laugenour-7

Key Points

1. It is the standard operating procedure of the Internal Revenue Service to falsely state, on the Individual Master File and the Individual Master File’s underlying documents, that individuals domiciled in the several states of the United States are actually operating a business in one of the Territories of the United States.
2. A notice of lien is an inchoate article requiring other action to perfect the lawful taking of property.
   1. Taking property or even encumbering property based solely on a mere notice of lien is a felony crime.
   2. An IRS levy does not apply to people in the private sector.
3. The United States Supreme Court, in the case of Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916), determined that:
   1. the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution authorized no new taxing powers for Congress which were not inherent in the Constitution form the very beginning,
   2. that the income tax is an indirect tax in the nature of an excise,
   3. that nowhere is found support for the contention that the Sixteenth Amendment authorized some heretofore undiscovered tax lying between the two great area of taxation,
   4. and the purpose of the Sixteenth Amendment was to harmonize the operation of the two great areas of taxation.
4. Every single criminal or civil suit filed by the United States involving IRS form 1040 was a fraud absent a procedurally proper, lawful assessment including identifying the type of tax owed such as an impost, custom, duty, or an excise tax.

Related

• W-9 tax form proves ‘Individual’ means ‘Sole-proprietor’
• Amazon asks ‘Are you a U.S. Person?’ and reveals Individual means a business — sole-proprietor
• The income tax is an excise tax. A tax on status or federally-connected activity. Amount of tax measured by the income.

Full Notice

Case 2:06-cv-00183-4B-KJM   Document 76 Filed Ot1/2007

David E. Laugenour Debra L. Laugenour
Location redacted
Location redacted
Phone redacted

EAS BY FILED FEB 2 1 2007

u S, DISTAICT COURT OS RIGT OF CALIFORNIA.IAA

DE UTY RK

In The District Court of the United States
For the Eastern. District of California
United States of America,

Plaintiff,

1. No. 2:06-CV-00183-GEE-KIM

David E. Laugenour, and Debra L. Laugenour as Defendants and Plaintiffs on the cross-claim

VS.

McGregor W. Scott and Goud P. Maragani

Defendants on the cross-claim
David E. Laugenour and Debra L. Laugenour’s

notice to the Court
under authority of Federal Rules of Evidence r 201(d) —
mandatory judicial notice of adjudicative facts

Plaintiff, The United States of America, by and through McGregor W. Scott and Goud P. Maragani, has confessed the following adjudicative facts:

1. The records of the Internal Revenue Service are business records as defined in the Federal Rules of Evidence.
2. Business records as defined Federal Rules of Evidence are hearsay absent qualification for entry into the record of a lawsuit through the business records exception.
3. The only business record which authorizes IRS collection activity is the summary record of assessment.
4. Other records such as the IRS form 4340 and RACS 006 cannot serve as the assessment because these forms lack requisite information such as the type of tax owed.
5. The term type of tax owed refers to an impost, custom, duty, or excise tax.
6. “Income” and “1040” are not types of tax.
7. Federal Law found at 26 U.S.C. § 72140(1)(2)8(7) makes it a felony crime for any officer or employee of the United States to compel any person to pay a tax on IRS 1040.
8. Every time an IRS or Tax Division attorney from the Unite States Department of Justice makes any sort of demand relative to IRS form 1040, they are committing a felony crime.
9. An Impressed Fund Account exists for the purpose of rewarding those who assist in IRS prosecutions.
10. The Impressed Fund Account allows for up to $25,000.00 to be paid for assistance in prosecutions relative to IRS forms 1040.
11. Anyone is eligible to receive rewards from the Impressed Fund Account including federal judges, federal magistrates, and federal prosecutors.
12. On one or more occasions a federal judge has been financially rewarded for a prosecution involving an IRS form 1040.
13. On one or more occasions a federal magistrate has been financially rewarded for a prosecution involving an IRS form 1040.
14. On one or more occasions a federal prosecutor has been financially rewarded for a prosecution involving an IRS form 1040.
15. Two or more rewards paid to two or more federal judges, magistrates, or prosecutors for a prosecution involving an IRS form 1040 would constitute racketeering.
16. Use of the courts to prosecute actions involving IRS form 1040 has the intent and purpose of federal judges, federal magistrates, and federal prosecutors receiving money and not for the purpose of putting money into the United States Treasury.
17. The United States Supreme Court, in the case of Brushaber v. Union Pacific R. Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916), determined that:
    1. the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution authorized no new taxing powers for Congress which were not inherent in the Constitution form the very beginning,
    2. that the income tax is an indirect tax in the nature of an excise,
    3. that nowhere is found support for the contention that the Sixteenth Amendment authorized some heretofore undiscovered tax lying between the two great area of taxation,
    4. and the purpose of the Sixteenth Amendment was to harmonize the operation of the two great areas of taxation.
18. The United States Supreme Court has reviewed Brushaber more than sixty times without reversing the Supreme Court’s determinations in Brushaber.
19. Neither any federal district court, nor any federal circuit court, and certainly no United States Tax Court has authority to overrule the United States Supreme Court’s determinations in the Brushaber case.
20. Every single criminal or civil suit filed by the United States involving IRS form 1040 was a fraud absent a procedurally proper, lawful assessment including identifying the type of tax owed such as an impost, custom, duty, or an excise tax.
21. A notice of lien is an inchoate article requiring other action to perfect the lawful taking of property.
22. Taking property or even encumbering property based solely on a mere notice of lien is a felony crime.
23. An IRS levy does not apply to people in the private sector.
24. Every single dollar taken away from a person without a procedurally proper summary record of assessment, every single parcel of property taken away from a person without a procedurally proper summary record of assessment, and every hour of imprisonment for an alleged tax crime where there was no procedurally proper summary record of assessment is owed back to the people from whom the money was extorted; and as a matter of common law fraud, the people are entitled to treble damages.
25. Many of the people who have worked for the Internal Revenue Service or the United States Department of Justice, many federal judges, federal magistrates, and federal prosecutors have played a role in taking money or property under the false pretense that many millions of Americans and others who happened to be domiciled within the United States or its territories actual owed some sum to the United States Treasury where no procedurally proper assessment verified a valid tax debt, are nothing in the world but common criminals.
26. The basis for calculating an individual’s tax bill is the Individual Master File for the respective individual.
27. It is the standard operating procedure of the Internal Revenue Service to falsely state, on the Individual Master File and the Individual Master File’s underlying documents, that individuals domiciled in the several states of the United States are actually operating a business in one of the Territories of the United States.
28. Congress has made an alliance with the federal court system to the effect that if the federal judiciary will enforce the collection of the 1040 tax, the federal system can operate extra-legally for the purposes of fraud and extortion.
29. Personnel within the United States Department of Justice have actual knowledge that federal judges and prosecutors receive kickbacks, dividends, and bonuses from Corrections Corporation of America and have a stake in sending people to prison for tax crimes that are never proved.
30. The CID, “criminal investigation division” of the Internal Revenue Service maintains a file on every single federal judge and federal prosecutor to extort compliance with IRS fraud.
31. There are no summary records of assessment, IRS form 23-C, for each and every year that the Internal Revenue Service alleges that David F. and/or Debra L. Laugenour owe a sum certain to the United States Treasury.
32. There are no certified mail receipts, or parcel verifications, or process servers certifications verifying that David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour were noticed of a known duty, the breach of which, would warrant legal action in re: the summary records of assessment, IRS form 23-C, for each and every year that the Internal Revenue Service alleges that David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour owe a sum certain to the United States Treasury.
33. There are no Individual Master Files for David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour which would be the basis for claiming that David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour owed some sum to the United States Treasury.
34. There are no Individual Non-Master Files for David B. and/or Debra L. Laugenour which support the claim that David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour owed some sum to the United States Treasury.
35. There are no documents underlying any Individual Master Files for David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour and Individual Non-Master Files for David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour.
36. There are no notices of deficiency directed to David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour to prove that the IRS exhausted administrative remedy before suing the Laugenours.
37. There are no mail or parcel certifications and/or service of process verifications proving that the IRS provided David E. and/or Debra L. Laugenour with notice of a known duty relative to a notice of deficiency.
38. There are no Treasury delegation orders directed to Goud P. Maragani, Guy Patrick Jennings, and/or McGregor W. Scott.
39. Goud P. Maragani and McGregor W. Scott fabricated tax bills for David E. and Debra L. Laugenour.
40. Goud P. Maragani and McGregor W. Scott are nothing in the world but common criminals with a pattern of fraud and extortion that exceeds the requisites for criminal and civil racketeering warranting:
    1. Inquiry to determine how many U.S. Attorneys, IRS agents, federal judges, federal magistrates, federal clerks, and federal circuit court judges are engaged in this racket,
    2. Prosecution of all U.S. Attorneys, IRS agents, federal judges, federal magistrates, federal clerks, and federal circuit court judges involved in the racket to the full extent of the law including five years in prison per count to be served consecutively [after all these are the “keepers of the law”],
    3. the United States of America returning all that has been taken from the American people for a so-called 1040 tax,
    4. exoneration of all those imprisoned for a so-called 1040 tax issue,
    5. compensating all those who have been imprisoned relative to a so-called 1040 tax, and
    6. executing each and every U.S. Attorney, IRS agent, federal judge, federal magistrate, federal clerk, and federal circuit court judge whose acts in re: the so-called 1040 tax were the proximate cause of the death of the target of IRS racketeering — See 18 U.S.C. § 241 providing: