Are you in and Do you have income from within the United States?

[incometaxfreenut]

Can you offer improvements on this? Part 3 companion to:  Stop the whine1 as to where the federal income tax law begin 31 U.S. Code 3124(b); and    Stop the whine1 as to where the exempt income tax law begin 31 U.S. Code 3124(a)

3. The U.S. Attorney/IRS  can not demonstrate that the remuneration(s) we received are the subject matter od and from within the geographical area called the ?United States? for any of the income IRC 1 or 871 or employment taxes 3401, 3402 , 1401, 1402 that the Plaintiff wants and which geographical United States is defined by law at 18 USC 5 and 26 USC 7701(a)(9)&(10), 872(a) or

26 USC 864(c)(4)(A) "no income, gain, or loss from sources without the United States ...shall be treated as effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States,

26 872(a) "Gross income includes only (1) gross income which is derived from sources within the United States;
(2) gross income which is connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States.

Defendant(s) earned all the remuneration in question in this case outside the ?United States? of both Title 18 USC 5 and 26 USC 7701(a)(9)&(10).

The court is well aware of the principles of exclusive territorial jurisdiction, as well as extra-territorial jurisdiction. Title 18 is written in the well founded principle of exclusive territorial jurisdiction. Most Courts or federal agencies are familiar with:
18 U.S.C. 3042. Extraterritorial jurisdiction "Section 3041 of this title shall apply in any country where the United States exercises extraterritorial jurisdiction for the arrest and removal there from to the United States of any citizen or national of the United States who is charged with ...any offense against the United States.
3041 For any offense against the United States, the offender may, by any justice or judge of the United States, or by any United States magistrate, ...of any state where the offender may be found, and at the expense of the United States, be arrested and imprisoned or released as provided in chapter 207 of this title, as the case may be, for trial before such court of the United States as by law has cognizance of the offense. Copies of the process shall be returned as speedily as may be into the office of the clerk of such court, together with the recognizances of the witnesses for their appearances to to testify in the case.

3041 is written within the meaning of the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the United States 5, 7 and is given extra-territorial jurisdiction at 3042 where the _expression "shall apply in any country" refers to Kansas/50 States in general, which are foreign governments from the point of view of 18 U.S.C. 11 which is written in exclusive territorial terms of sections 5, 7.

18 USC 5 UNITED STATES defined "The term "United States", as used in this title in a territorial sense, includes all places and waters, continental or insular, subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, except the Canal Zone.

18 USC 11 Foreign government defined. The term "foreign government", as used in this title except in sections 112, 878, 970, 1116, and 1201, includes any government, faction, or body of insurgents within a country with which the United States is at peace, irrespective of recognition by the United States.

"The term "foreign country" when used in a geographical sense includes any territory under the sovereignty of a government other than that of the United States." 26 CFR 1.911-2(h)

It follows then that Title 26 is written generally in exclusive territorial terms as we will point out is the case of the definitions at 26 u.S.C. 7701(a)(9)&(10), 3121(e)&(b).

26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(9) "(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof-
(9) UNITED STATES- the term "United States" when used in a geographical sense included only the States and the District of Columbia.
(10) STATE.-The term "State" shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title."

The phrase of IRC 7701(a)(9) "only the States and the District of Columbia." is written in the exclusive territorial form of law by the absence of a comma after 'States" and the use of the conjunction "and" between "States" & "the District of Columbia. When you look at (10) "The term "State" shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title." settles the exclusive territorial use as you replace "States" with "the District of Columbia" in subsection (9) to make " UNITED STATES- the term "United States" when used in a geographical sense includes only the District of Columbia and
the District of Columbia", which coupled with (a) "When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof-" and (10)'s "where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title." to make the double use of "District of Columbia" in the definition of "United States" necessary and understandable to carry out the provisions of the majority of Title 26.

In Caha v United States, 152 U.S. 211, 215: "The laws of Congress in respect to those matters [application of Acts of Congress] do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government." Is said of Rule 54(c) FRCP:

Rule 54(c) FRCP: "Application of Terms. As used in these rules the following terms have the designated meanings. "Acts of Congress" includes any act of Congress locally applicable to
and in force in the District of Columbia, in Puerto Rico, in a territory or in an insular possession."

The Court is of the understanding that the majority of U.S. law is written in exclusive territorial jurisdiction terms. The Courts or federal agency already knows Title 18 is written in the well
founded principle of exclusive territorial jurisdiction except when extra-territorial jurisdiction is expressly stated. There is abundant case law to the point.

"It is true that the criminal jurisdiction of the United States is in general based on the territorial principle, and criminal statutes of the United States are not by implication given an extra- territorial effect." U.S. v. Bowman, 260 U.S. 94, 98 (1922)

"It is a well established principle of law that all federal legislation applies only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless a contrary intent appears." Foley Brothers v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281 (1949)

28 U.S.C. 3002(15) "United States" means- (A) a federal corporation;"

"The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to the states." In re Merriam, 141 N.Y. 479, 36 N.E. 505

The last case cite is a most interesting statement about the federal government and it's agencies and you have just read preceding the law upon which such is the conclusion of the courts. Since Defendant(s) live in Kansas which now must be a foreign jurisdiction and which is a foreign government from the point of view of 18 U.S.C. 11 which is written in exclusive territorial terms of 18 USC 5,7 and 26 CFR 1.911-2(h).

The U.S. Attorney/IRS  can not meet the requirement of proof required under 5 USC that where the income was earned, and worked for was geographically within the United States of 18 USC 5 or the meaning of IRC 7701(a)(9)&(10) with the proof of:

"Unless there has been a transfer of jurisdiction (1) pursuant to clause 17 by a federal acquisition of land with State consent, or (2) by cession from the State to the Federal Government,
or unless the Federal Government has reserved jurisdiction upon the admission of the State, the Federal Government possesses no legislative jurisdiction over any area within a State, such
jurisdiction being for exercise entirely by the State..." Mason Co. v. Tax Commissioner, 302 U.S. 186 (1937)"

5 U.S.C. 556(d): "Except as otherwise provided by statute,the proponent of a rule or order has the burden of proof."

All legislation is prima facie territorial.' State vs. Carter, 27 N.J.l. 499; People vs. Merrill, 2 Park.Crim.Rep. 590, 596.

"First. The canon of construction which teaches that legislation of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States,
...is a valid approach...' Foley Bros. vs. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281, 285 (1949) United States v. First National Bank, 321 F.2d 14, 23 (1963)

Therefore 26 USC 862(a)(3) "compensation for labor without the United States" and 26 CFR 1.871-7(1) "... is not subject to the tax imposed by section 1."

7. "Where the subject matter is not within the jurisdiction, the court may dismiss on its own motion." Gormaly v. McIntosh, 22 Brab (NY) 271; Robertson v. State, 10 N.E. 582, 643.

"A Court lacking jurisdiction can not render a judgement...must dismiss the cause at any stage...it being the responsibility of court to dismiss on its own motion.' McKinney v. Gannett
Co. 694 F2d 1240, 1245


Again, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America 28:1746, I state the above to be true to the best of my understanding.

[PowerPenguin]

No offense, but who cares? It all comes down to the initiation of force. That's all you need IMHO! 8-)