                           Chapter 9:
                     The Law of Presumption
                                
                                
     A nonresident  alien who has filed one or more Forms 1040 in
the past  is presumed  by the  IRS to  be an  individual who  was
required to file those forms.  The filed forms entitle the IRS to
presume that  this individual  either was  required to  file,  or
elected to  be treated  as one  who is  required to file.  Such a
requirement would  be triggered  by changing  to resident status,
changing to citizen status, and/or opting to derive income from a
source  inside   the  federal  zone  (like  federal  employment).
Accordingly, the IRS is entitled to presume that this nonresident
alien has "volunteered" to become a "taxpayer", that is, a person
who is  subject to an internal revenue tax.  Quite apart from the
day-to-day assumptions  we all  make about  life in  general, the
term "presumption"  has  a  very  special  meaning  in  law.    A
presumption in  law is a logical inference which is made in favor
of a  particular fact.  The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) defines
"presumption" and "presumed" as follows:

     "Presumption" or  "presumed" means  that the  trier of  fact
     must find  the existence  of the  fact presumed  unless  and
     until evidence  is introduced  which would support a finding
     of its nonexistence.
                                                 [UCC 1-201 (31)]


Black's Law  Dictionary, Sixth  Edition, defines "presumption" as
follows:

     A presumption  is a  rule of  law, statutory or judicial, by
     which finding  of a  basic fact  gives rise  to existence of
     presumed fact,  until presumption  is rebutted.  ... A legal
     device which  operates in  the absence  of  other  proof  to
     require that  certain inferences be drawn from the available
     evidence.

     There are, in law, two different and directly opposite kinds
of  presumptions:  a  conclusive  presumption  and  a  rebuttable
presumption.   A conclusive presumption is one for which proof is
available to  render some  fact so  "conclusive",  it  cannot  be
rebutted.   To "rebut"  a fact  is to  expose  it  as  false,  to
disprove it.   Thus,  a "rebuttable  fact" is  one which  can  be
disproven and  exposed as  false.   In other  words, a rebuttable
fact is  a lawyer's  way of describing a fact that is not a fact.
(1984 was  a long  time ago;   the book is even older than that.)
The opposite  kind of presumption is a rebuttable presumption.  A
rebuttable presumption  is  a  one  that  can  be  overturned  or
disproven  by  showing  sufficient  proof.    We  are  interested
primarily in  this second  type  of  presumptions  --  rebuttable
presumptions --  because the  Code of  Federal Regulations  makes
explicit certain  presumptions about  nonresident  aliens.    The
regulations have this to say about the proof of alien residence:


                         Page 9 - 1 of 8

                                                The Federal Zone:


     Proof of residence of aliens.

     (a)  Rules of  evidence.   The following  rules of  evidence
          shall govern  in determining  whether or  not an  alien
          within  the  United  States**  has  acquired  residence
          therein for purposes of the income tax.

     (b)  Nonresidence presumed.   An  alien  by  reason  of  his
          alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.

                                                 [26 CFR 1.871-4]
                                                 [emphasis added]
                                                                 
     The regulations are very clear about a key presumption which
the IRS  does make  about aliens.   Because  of their "alienage",
that is,  because of  their status  as aliens in the first place,
all aliens are presumed by Treasury regulations to be nonresident
aliens.  This presumption is built into the law, because the Code
of Federal  Regulations is  considered to  have the force of law.
(The CFR  is judicially  noticed, and  courts have ruled that the
CFR is a supplement to the published Federal Register, which puts
the general  public on  actual notice  too.)  This presumption is
not a  conclusive presumption,  however;    it  is  a  rebuttable
presumption.   The regulations  establish the rules by which this
presumption can be rebutted or disproven, as follows:


     Other aliens.   In the case of other [not departing] aliens,
     the presumption  as  to  the  alien's  nonresidence  may  be
     overcome by proof --

     (i)  That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention
          to become  a citizen  of the  United States** under the
          naturalization laws;  or

     (ii) That the  alien has  filed Form 1078 or its equivalent;
          or

     (iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite
          intention to  acquire residence  in the United States**
          or showing  that his  stay in  the United  States** has
          been of  such an extended nature as to constitute him a
          resident.
                                                 [26 CFR 1.871-4]
                                                                 
     Filing a  declaration of  intent to  become a U.S.** citizen
will "rebut  the presumption".   Acts  or  statements  by  aliens
showing a  definite intent  to acquire residence will also "rebut
the presumption".   Form  1078 is a Certificate of Alien Claiming
Residence in  the United  States**.    The  IRS  Printed  Product
Catalog describes this form as follows:





                         Page 9 - 2 of 8

                                           The Law of Presumption


     1078                  171951                          (Each)
     Certificate of Alien Claiming Residence in the United States

     Who May  File.   A resident  alien may file the original and
     one copy  of this  certificate with the withholding agent to
     claim  the  benefit  of  U.S.**  residence  for  income  tax
     purposes.     (A  withholding   agent  is   responsible  for
     withholding tax  from your  income.)   D:RF:F   Tax Form  or
     Instruction

                                        [page 10, emphasis added]
                                                                 
                                                                 
     Notice,  in  particular,  the  explicit  reference  to  "the
benefit of  U.S.** residence  for income tax purposes".  What are
the  benefits  of  U.S.**  residence  for  income  tax  purposes?
Recall, from  the previous chapter, the "benefits" of being under
the protection  of Congress  and thereby subject to its exclusive
jurisdiction.   The actual scope of Social Security, for example,
is limited to the federal zone, except for those outside the zone
who wish to partake of its "benefits" voluntarily.  Under the law
of presumption,  your use of a social security number can be seen
by the  federal government as proof that you have opted to obtain
benefits from the federal zone.  Form 1078 is likewise ready-made
for those  who begin  as nonresident  aliens, but  later  opt  to
declare themselves  "resident" in the United States** in order to
claim the  benefit of that "residence".  Simply stated, Form 1078
declares a  nonresident alien  to be  a "resident" for income tax
purposes.   It moves  nonresident aliens out of the square at row
2/column 2 in The Matrix, and into the square at row 1/column 2.

     There are  other ways  by which the presumed nonresidence of
aliens can  be rebutted, or disproven, thereby moving their four-
square checkers  into a  square that  is within the federal zone.
The regulations  make reference  to Form  1078 or its equivalent.
(Try to find a definition of the term "equivalent" in the statute
or its  regulations.)  If nonresident aliens sign a Form W-4, for
example, they are presumed to be government employees with income
from a  source inside  the federal  zone.  Employers are to treat
all employees  as "residents"  and to  withhold  pay  as  if  the
employers have not been instructed otherwise.

     Notice how  the presumption  has shifted.   Contrary  to the
regulations at  26 CFR 1.871-4 (quoted above), employers are told
by the IRS to make the opposite "presumption" about the residence
of their employees, even if they are not true "employees" as that
term is  defined in  Title 26.   If  individuals have W-4 and W-2
forms, the  presumption is that they were either required to sign
these forms,  or they  have  made  elections  to  be  treated  as
residents.  Recall that the instructions for Form 1040NR describe
the "election  to be  taxed  as  a  resident  alien".    This  is
accomplished by  filing an  income tax  return on  Form  1040  or
1040A, and attaching a statement confirming the "election".



                         Page 9 - 3 of 8

                                                The Federal Zone:


     An extremely subtle indicator of one's status is the perjury
oath which  is found  on IRS forms.  Under Title 28 of the U.S.**
Codes, Section  1746, there  are two  different perjury  oaths to
which penalties  attach:  one within the United States**, and one
without the  United States**  (see Appendix  R  for  the  precise
wording of  28 USC  1746).   If an  oath is  executed without the
United States**,  it reads,  "I declare ... under the laws of the
United States  of America."   If  an oath  is executed within the
United States**,  it reads,  "I declare ... that the foregoing is
true and  correct."   Thus, your  signature under the latter oath
can be  presumed to  mean that  you are  already subject  to  the
jurisdiction of the United States**.  This latter oath is the one
found on IRS Form 1040.

     It should  be clear  by now  that the IRS may well be making
presumptions about  your status  which are, in fact, not correct.
If an original presumption of nonresidence has been rebutted, for
example, because a nonresident alien filed one or more 1040 forms
in the  past, the  filed forms  do not  cast the  situation  into
concrete.   The IRS  is entitled  to formulate a presumption from
these filed  forms, but  this presumption is also rebuttable.  If
you filed  under the  mistaken belief  that you  were required to
file, that  mistaken belief,  in and of itself, does not suddenly
turn you into a person who is required to file.  Tax liability is
not a  matter of  belief;  it is a matter that arises from status
and jurisdiction.

     The best  approach is to "clean the slate".  In other words,
clear the  administrative record  of any  written documents which
may have  been filed in error, or in the mistaken belief that the
filer was  required.   In Appendix  F of  this book,  there is an
Affidavit of  Revocation which  can be  used to  clean the slate.
This affidavit  is not  meant to  be a  document  with  universal
application, because  everyone's situation  is  different.    For
example, the  affidavit makes  certain statements  about the laws
and regulations  which have  been studied  by the  individual who
signs it.  Not everyone has read these same laws and regulations.
The affidavit  does, however,  cover  a  wide  range  of  factual
matters  which  will  serve  to  educate  the  reader  about  the
constructive fraud  which Congress  and other  federal  officials
have perpetrated  on the  American  people.    Various  qualified
organizations are  now available  to assist  individuals with the
procedure for  executing this  affidavit, filing it with a County
Recorder, and serving it on the appropriate government officials.
The  Save-A-Patriot   Fellowship  in   Maryland   is   one   such
organization.   Their address  is in  the list  of  organizations
found in Appendix M of this book.

     Now, let's  have a  little fun with this law of presumption,
as it  is called.   The law works both ways.  This means that you
can use  it to your advantage as well as anyone else can.  One of
the most  surprising and  fascinating  discoveries  made  by  the
freedom movement in America concerns the bank signature card.  If
you have  a checking  or savings  account  at  a  bank,  you  may


                         Page 9 - 4 of 8

                                           The Law of Presumption


remember being  asked by  the bank  officer to  sign your name on
several documents  when you  opened that  account.   One of these
documents was  the bank  signature card.   You may have been told
that the  bank needed  your signature in order to compare it with
the signatures  that would  be found  on the checks you write, to
detect forgeries.   That  explanation sounded  reasonable, so you
signed your name on the card.

     What the bank officer probably did not tell you was that you
signed your name on a contract whereby you agreed to abide by all
rules and regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury.  You see,
bank signature  cards typically contain such a clause in the fine
print.   These rules and regulations include, but are not limited
to Title  26 (all  2,000 pages  of it)  and the  Code of  Federal
Regulations for  Title 26  (all 6,000  pages of it).  These rules
may also  include every  last word  of the  Federal Reserve  Act,
another gigantic statute.  Now, did the bank have all 8,000 pages
of Title  26 and  its regulations  on exhibit  for you to examine
upon request,  before you  signed the  card?  Your bank should be
willing, at  the very  least, to  identify clearly what rules and
regulations adhere to your signature.

     You are  presumed to  be a person who knows how to read, and
who knows  how to read a contract before signing your name to it.
Once your signature is on the contract, the federal government is
entitled to  presume that  you knew  what you were doing when you
signed this contract.  Their presumption is that you entered into
this contract  knowingly, voluntarily,  and intentionally.   Why?
Because your  signature is on the contract.  That's why.  Is this
presumption rebuttable?  You bet it is.  Here's why:

     Instead of  telling you  that the bank needed your signature
to catch  forgeries, imagine  that the bank officer described the
signature card as follows:


     Your  signature   on  this   card  will  create  a  contract
     relationship between  you and the Secretary of the Treasury.
     This Secretary  is not  the U.S.  Secretary of the Treasury,
     because the  U.S. Treasury  Department was bankrupted in the
     year 1933.  The Treasury Department referred to on this card
     is a  private corporation  which has  been set up to enforce
     private rules  and regulations.  These rules and regulations
     have been  established to  discharge the  bankruptcy of  the
     federal government.   Your  signature on  this card  will be
     understood to  mean that  you are  volunteering  to  subject
     yourself to  a foreign jurisdiction, a municipal corporation
     known as the District of Columbia and its private offspring,
     the Federal  Reserve system.   You  accept the  benefits  of
     limited liability  offered to  you by  this corporation  for
     using their  commercial paper,  Federal  Reserve  Notes,  to
     discharge your  own debts  without  the  need  for  gold  or
     silver.
                                                 [continued ... ]


                         Page 9 - 5 of 8

                                                The Federal Zone:


     By accepting these benefits, you are admitting to the waiver
     of all  rights guaranteed to you by the Constitution for the
     United States  of America,  because that Constitution cannot
     impair any  obligations in  the contract  you will  enter by
     signing this  card.   Your waiver  of these  rights will  be
     presumed to  be voluntary  and  as  a  result  of  knowingly
     intelligent acts  done  with  sufficient  awareness  of  the
     relevant circumstances and consequences, as explained by the
     Supreme Court  in the  case of  Brady vs  U.S.    With  your
     signature on  this card,  the Internal  Revenue  Service,  a
     collection agency  for the  Federal Reserve  system, will be
     authorized to  attach levies  against any  and all  of  your
     account balances  in order to satisfy any unpaid liabilities
     which the  IRS determines  to exist.   You  will  waive  all
     rights against self-incrimination.  You will not be entitled
     to due  process in  federal administrative  tribunals, where
     the U.S.  Constitution cannot  be invoked  to  protect  you.
     Your home,  papers and  effects will  not be secured against
     search and seizure.  Now, please sign this card.


     How does  the law of presumption help you in this situation?
First of  all, you  presumed that your signature was required, to
compare it  with the  signatures on  checks you planned to write.
This was  a reasonable  presumption, because that's what the bank
officer told  you, but  it  is  also  a  rebuttable  presumption,
because of what the fine print says.  That fine print can be used
to rebut,  or disprove, your presumption when push comes to shove
in a court of law.  The federal government is entitled to presume
that you  knew what you were doing when you signed this contract.
Well, did  you?   Did the  bank officer explain all the terms and
conditions attached  thereto, as  explained above?   Did you read
all 8,000  pages of  law and  regulations before deciding to sign
this contract?   Did  you even  know  they  existed?    Was  your
signature on this contract a voluntary, intentional and knowingly
intelligent  act  done  with  sufficient  awareness  of  all  its
relevant consequences  and circumstances?   The Supreme Court has
stated clearly that:


     Waivers of Constitutional Rights not only must be voluntary,
     but must  be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient
     awareness  of   the  relevant   circumstances   and   likely
     consequences.

               [Brady vs United States, 397 U.S. 742, 748 (1970)]


     Fortunately, the  federal government's presumption about you
is also  rebuttable.  Why?  Because the feds are guilty of fraud,
among  other  reasons,  by  not  disclosing  the  nature  of  the
bankruptcy which  they are using to envelope the American people,
like an  octopus with  a suction  tentacle in everybody's wallet,
adults and  children alike.   The banks become an unwitting party


                         Page 9 - 6 of 8

                                           The Law of Presumption


to this  fraud because  the Congress  has obtained  a controlling
interest in  the banks  through  the  Federal  Deposit  Insurance
Corporation and  their traffic in Federal Reserve Notes and other
commercial paper  issued by  the Federal  Reserve banks, with the
help of their agent, the private Treasury Department.

     Social Security  is another  example.  Your signature on the
original application  for Social  Security,  the  SS-5  Form,  is
presumed by the federal government to mean that you knew what you
were getting  into, namely,  that you knew it was voluntary, that
you knew  it wasn't  an insurance program, that you knew it was a
tax, and  that you  knew it  would render  you a  subject of  the
Congress because  you knowingly,  intentionally  and  voluntarily
chose to  accept the  "benefits" of this government program.  Now
ask yourself  the 64,000  dollar questions:   How  could you have
known any  of these  things, if  nobody told  you?  How could you
have known,  if the  real truth was systematically kept from you?
How could  you have known, if all applicable terms and conditions
were not disclosed to you before you joined the program?  And how
could you have made a capable, adult decision in this matter when
you signed  the form  as a  minor, or  your parents signed it for
you?   The answers to these questions are all the same:  there is
just no way.

     For the  record,  Black's  Law  Dictionary,  Sixth  Edition,
defines "fraud" as follows:

     An intentional  perversion  of  truth  for  the  purpose  of
     inducing another  in reliance  upon it  to  part  with  some
     valuable thing  belonging to  him or  to surrender  a  legal
     right.   A false representation of a matter of fact, whether
     by words  or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations,
     or by  concealment of that which should have been disclosed,
     which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he
     shall act upon it to his legal injury.
                                                 [emphasis added]
                                                                 
The law  with respect  to fraud  is crystal clear.  "Constructive
fraud as well as actual fraud may be the basis of cancellation of
an instrument."   El Paso Natural Gas Co. vs Kysar Insurance Co.,
605 Pacific 2d. 240 (1979).
     
     How do  you reverse  these ominous  presumptions  which  the
federal government  is entitled  to make about the "contract" you
signed at  your friendly local bank, or the "contract" you signed
to apply  for Social Security?  Spend some time to read carefully
the Affidavit  found in  Appendix F of this book.  This Affidavit
is normally  served on  the Secretary of the Treasury.  You might
also be  motivated to  obtain and  study some  of the other books
listed in  the Bibliography  (Appendix N)  and/or to join some of
the organizations  listed in  Appendix M.   The  situation  is  a
serious one,  but knowledge  can help  to set  you free.   It  is
better to  light a  candle than to curse the darkness.  And light
always drives out darkness;  darkness never drives out light.


                         Page 9 - 7 of 8

                                                The Federal Zone:


Reader's Notes:























































                         Page 9 - 8 of 8
