YesToHellWith Podcast Por and may TRUTH reign supreme! arte de portada

YesToHellWith

YesToHellWith

De: and may TRUTH reign supreme!
Escúchala gratis

OFERTA POR TIEMPO LIMITADO | Obtén 3 meses por US$0.99 al mes

$14.95/mes despues- se aplican términos.
YesToHellWith is determined to expose the wrongful conviction and imprisonment of Orlando Carter. We are asking that President Trump review this injustice and exonerate Carter.

yestohellwith.substack.comyestohellwith Ciencia Política Política y Gobierno
Episodios
  • A Legitimate Federal Excise Tax

    A Legitimate Federal Excise Tax
    Jan 29 2026
    It is January 29. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.If you want to understand what a lawful federal excise tax actually looks like, you start with one where Congress does everything out in the open.That example is the federal excise tax on air transportation.The taxing statute is 26 U.S.C. § 4261.This is not enforcement.This is not procedure.This is the levy itself.THE TAX IMPOSED (STATUTORY TEXT)26 U.S.C. § 4261(a) states:“In general.—There is hereby imposed upon the amount paid for taxable transportation of any person a tax equal to 7.5 percent of the amount so paid for such transportation.”That sentence alone matters.Congress does not suggest a tax.Congress does not imply a tax.Congress says, plainly:“There is hereby imposed.”That is a lawful levy.The statute then continues.26 U.S.C. § 4261(b) adds:“Domestic segments.—In the case of taxable transportation which begins and ends in the United States, there is hereby imposed a tax of $3.90 for each domestic segment of such transportation.”(amount adjusted over time)Then Congress defines the scope.26 U.S.C. § 4261(c):“Taxable transportation.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘taxable transportation’ means transportation by air—(1) which begins and ends in the United States, or(2) which begins or ends in the United States.”Nothing vague.Nothing assumed.The taxable event is fully defined.Now comes the most important part — the part most tax statutes avoid.WHO IS LIABLE (STATUTORY TEXT)26 U.S.C. § 4261(d) states:“By whom paid.—The taxes imposed by this section shall be paid by the person making the payment for such transportation.”That is the liable party.Not “citizens.”Not “residents.”Not “United States persons.”Not “taxpayers” by assumption.The person who pays for the airline ticket.No payment = no tax.No ticket = no liability.NOW THE LD ANALYSIS (WHY THIS IS LEGITIMATE)This statute passes every LD requirement cleanly and honestly.1. AUTHORITYCongress has undisputed authority to:regulate interstate and international air transportation,tax activities occurring within federally regulated airspace,impose excises on transportation.Authority is explicit and constitutional.2. JURISDICTIONJurisdiction does not arise by status.It arises by voluntary conduct.You buy airline transportation →you enter a federally regulated commercial domain →jurisdiction attaches.No purchase, no jurisdiction.No jurisdiction, no tax.This is not coercion.It is choice.3. STATUSNotice what Congress does not do.It does not:ask who you are,ask where you were born,ask your residency,ask your citizenship.Why?Because this is a transaction-based excise, not a status-based tax.Your status is temporary and provable:you are a purchaser of taxable air transportation.That is enough.4. OBLIGATIONOnly after:the taxable event occurs,jurisdiction is triggered by conduct,the liable party is identified,does obligation arise.Not penalties.Not enforcement.Obligation.This is the correct order:authority → jurisdiction → status → obligation.This is what lawful federal taxation looks like:The tax is clearly imposed by CongressThe taxable event is clearly definedThe liable party is explicitly namedJurisdiction is voluntary and limitedNo human being is taxed by existenceNo status is presumedCompare that with systems where:status is assumed,jurisdiction is implied,definitions are skipped,obligation is asserted first.That is not taxation.That is presumption.The Liberty Dialogues does not reject federal taxation.It rejects taxation without structure.The airline excise tax is legitimate because:Congress imposed it openly,confined it narrowly,and tied liability to voluntary participation in a federally regulated activity.That is law done correctly.And that is the benchmark every claimed tax must meet. Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Más Menos
    6 m
  • Why You Are NOT a U.S. Person, after all.

    Why You Are NOT a U.S. Person, after all.
    Jan 28 2026

    It is January 28, 2026, Welcome to yestohellwith.com.

    The Internal Revenue Code does not regulate human beings.It regulates legal constructs.

    That distinction is not philosophical.It is structural.

    Congress does not write statutes to govern living men or women as such.It writes statutes to govern defined statuses that exist within its delegated authority.

    That is why the Code begins with definitions.

    Before any obligation can exist, the Code must first establish who it applies to.

    The term “person” is defined in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(1):

    “The term ‘person’ shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.”

    This definition is inclusive, not universal.

    It does not describe what exists in nature.It identifies what Congress has chosen to treat as a legal subject for purposes of Title 26.

    Most of the listed items are plainly artificial:trusts, estates, partnerships, corporations.

    One term causes confusion: “individual.”

    An individual, as used in the Code, is not the living man or woman.It is a statutory abstraction—a legal role through which regulation may occur if jurisdiction exists.

    Inside Title 26:

    an “individual” is treated no differently than a corporation,

    it is a juridical unit, not a human being,

    it exists only by operation of statute.

    The real man or woman exists before the Code.The “individual” exists only inside it.

    The Code does not automatically convert one into the other.

    UNITED STATES PERSON — THE JURISDICTIONAL CLASS

    The Code then narrows further.

    A “United States person” is defined in 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(30):

    “The term ‘United States person’ means—(A) a citizen or resident of the United States,(B) a domestic partnership,(C) a domestic corporation,(D) any estate (other than a foreign estate), or(E) any trust”(meeting specified federal control and supervision requirements).

    This definition does one thing:

    It identifies which “persons” Congress claims federal tax jurisdiction over.

    A United States person is not a descriptive label.It is a jurisdictional designation.

    A “person” is merely a statutory subject.A United States person is a statutory subject inside federal tax jurisdiction.

    That distinction matters because:

    many operative provisions of the Code apply only to United States persons,

    federal tax obligations attach only to those within that defined class.

    Without United States person status,Title 26 has no jurisdictional hook.

    THE INVERSION — HOW PRESUMPTION OPERATES

    Administratively, the system reverses this order.

    Instead of first establishing:

    authority to act,

    jurisdiction over the subject,

    and status as a United States person,

    the system begins by asserting obligation.

    The living man or woman is treated as though they are already:

    a statutory individual,

    therefore a person,

    therefore a United States person,

    therefore liable.

    None of that sequence is shown.It is presumed.

    That presumption collapses critical distinctions:

    between the real and the artificial,

    between existence and status,

    between jurisdiction and obligation.

    The Liberty Dialogues rejects that collapse.

    LD restores the order Congress wrote into the Code.

    First: AuthorityWho is acting, and under what delegated power?

    Second: JurisdictionWhere does that authority lawfully reach?

    Third: StatusIs there a statutory “person” under § 7701(a)(1)?If so, has that person been shown to be a United States person under § 7701(a)(30), placing it within federal tax jurisdiction?

    Only after those questions are answeredcan obligation even be discussed.

    Not penalties.Not enforcement.Obligation.

    Because obligation follows jurisdiction.And jurisdiction follows definition.

    THE CORE DISTINCTION

    A real man or woman does not owe duties by presumption.Only a defined legal status does.

    The Code governs its creations.It does not own the living.

    When definitions are honored,law replaces assumption.When jurisdiction is proven,order replaces coercion.

    That is not evasion.It is statutory discipline.

    And that is what structure looks likewhen presumption is no longer allowed to run first.



    Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Más Menos
    6 m
  • Are You a "Person?" Think Again!

    Are You a "Person?" Think Again!
    Jan 28 2026

    It is January 28, 2026. Welcome to yestohellwith.com.

    The Internal Revenue Code does not regulate human beings.It regulates legal constructs.

    That distinction is structural, not philosophical.

    Before the Code can require anything from anyone, it must first define who it applies to.

    Under 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(1), the Code defines a “person.”That term includes individuals, trusts, estates, partnerships, and corporations.

    An individual in the Code is not the living man or woman.It is a statutory abstraction — treated no differently than a corporation.

    The real man or woman exists outside the Code.The “individual” exists only inside it.

    The Code then narrows further.

    Under 26 U.S.C. § 7701(a)(30), the Code defines a “United States person.”

    That definition is not descriptive — it is jurisdictional.

    A United States person is the class of persons Congress claims federal tax jurisdiction over.Without that classification, Title 26 has nothing to operate on.

    But administratively, the order is reversed.

    The system assumes the living man or woman is already:a person,a United States person,and therefore obligated.

    None of that is shown.It is presumed.

    The Liberty Dialogues restores the lawful order.

    Authority first.Jurisdiction second.Status third — person, then United States person.

    Only after thatcan obligation even be discussed.

    Because obligation does not create jurisdiction.Jurisdiction creates obligation.

    And law begins with definition —not assumption.



    Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Más Menos
    2 m
Todavía no hay opiniones