Categorized | Articles, Success Stories, Video

IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction

Posted on February 6th, 2015 by Marc Stevens

A big congrats to a friend I’ve been working with for several years, he stood up to the predators commonly called the “IRS” and they dropped their attack.  Thanks also for providing me with the proof below.

The criminals called the “IRS” initiated an attack claiming my friend was required to file six tax returns, or explain how he made certain payments.  We took another route, we challenged jurisdiction.  The financial information is not the business of the “IRS”.

We made calls and spoke to agents, we have a long history of doing that.  We followed up in writing asking for abatement on the grounds there was no evidence of jurisdiction.  We used the agent’s own statements against them.  You can hear examples of this here.

One of the letters we sent is below.  We did not actually make contact with an agent for the years 2008-2013, but had many calls with agents investigating other years.


We got the 45 day letter in response.  This is usually a good thing.



After a few weeks we got the following letter informing us the attack was dropped, the matter was resolved for all six years.

As you can see, they dropped the attack based on the information we provided.  All we provided was the “IRS” has no evidence to support their argument the constitution and code applied and there was jurisdiction.  We never disputed the asserted financial information.  The attacks were dropped despite the financial reports provided under threat, duress and coercion.  It was thrown out for a lack of evidence proving jurisdiction.  That is significant.

This doesn’t mean they always do the right thing, it doesn’t mean if you do the same thing and get the same admissions, then they will also drop their attack.  They are criminals.  They force people to give them money; they take what they think they are entitled to, and they are very willing to terrorize your friends, family and business associates into compliance to their whims.



But it is evidence that using logic, that challenging these sacred cows, is effective at exposing them and getting their bogus claims dropped.  Because while they had plenty of financial reports, they didn’t have a single fact to support their argument there was jurisdiction.  If jurisdiction is not proven with evidence, then nothing else is relevant.  Without evidence the argument is just vox et praeterea nihil.

Stop accepting sacred cows.  If it’s so obvious the constitution and code apply to everyone, then putting up the proof of that argument would be easy.


55 Comments For This Post

  1. NonExclusive Says:

    Great news! Someone has just proved that the Demon can be conquered.

  2. desertspeaks Says:

    well that is a bit more than TRAFFIC COURT, isn’t it!!

  3. NonEntity Says:

    Cool! 🙂

  4. Boxer Says:

    Ridiculously awesome!!

  5. Cindy Says:

    So can we see some of the responses you wrote to the IRS?

  6. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Cindy, I can post that, it basically said what I mentioned in the video. The agent we called could not provide any evidence of jurisdiction, please abate the matter. If you disagree, please assign an agent with direct contact info and provide the facts to support your argument the constitution and code apply and there is jurisdiction.

  7. Mark Says:

    Very cool indeed. Way to go.

  8. Dale Smith Says:

    I Love It! These criminals have been attacking me for years now and in my last conversation with one its agents asked about jurisdiction, through factual proof of applicability of the code. He couldn’t answer. I need to follow up with a request for abatement… (and return of the funds stolen from me?)

  9. Carroll Price Says:

    I’ve been saying it for years; Anytime federal agents of any description (including IRS agents) leave federal property, they lose all legal jurisdiction. The same thing applies to local or state agents who leave their own areas of jurisdiction and enter states or Federal areas under the legal jurisdiction of other legal entities. Anyone interesting in understanding the limits of state and federal jurisdiction should read the US Constitution where it is made clear that the two jurisdictions are entirely separate.

  10. WiseOne Says:

    Marc, I’ve been battling the IRS off and on since about 1997 and I’d have to say this is unprecedented. I’ve seen cases where they send out the “45 day” letter and then don’t send anything else but I’ve never seen a case where they actually send a letter stating that they “agree” with anyone. By the way was your client self-employed or was he an employee with W-2’s, etc. sent in by the IRS on him?

  11. Jonathan Goldblatt Says:

    Take a look at Has many examples of people who receive information returns in error (W-2, 1099) and successfully navigate the administrative process to correct the mischaracterization of their receipts as income, including the checks they have received of amounts withheld in error.

    There is also a book, Cracking the Code, that gives an overview of the law and statutory construction, as well as the appropriate statutes and court cases that gives the information a citizen needs to be on even ground with the IRS.

  12. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Jonathan, NO, people need to stay away from that stuff. Stay AWAY from this legal interpretation stuff, stick to application, the facts.

  13. Calvin Says:

    @Jonathan Goldblatt: Marc interviewed Pete Hendrickson and has worked with people, who have called into the show, who have gotten undesired follow-ups from the I.R.S. attempting to get their refunds back.

    In short; Cracking the Code is not a well developed and effective strategy when dealing with the tax machine. Remember; its all about damage control by limiting the amount of damage these arbitrary authoritarians are willing to inflict upon you and it becomes harder for them to proceed against you if they can’t make it look legitimate.

  14. wm. mcnamara Says:

    wonderful news !!! im on the same path since 97…

  15. Kerry Palmer Says:

    Yes this is true, I informed the irs that they had no jurisdiction on individuals back in 1983 and received a letter from the irs stating I did not have to file a federal return. I have the original congressional record that states the federal government only has jurisdiction on corporations because they apply for a license to do business. Also when you see movie stars getting busted for failure to file or non payment of income tax remember they all set up corporations to handle their pay, so they are liable. I think Al Capone sold booze and didn’t pay tax on it, which falls under ATF booze tax jurisdiction.

  16. Anthony Says:

    Go to the IRS web site and use the search function to find IRM6209.
    This manual shows the relationship of all IRS forms. W-2, W-4 and all 1099s are to be reported on ‘Form 709’, not ‘Form 1040’. ‘Form 709’ is a gift reporting form. What we refer to as wages are really gifts from those we contract to. There is life time tax credit of about $1.7 million dollars. No one reading this will earn enough to have a tax liability of that much. In 2001 the max life time liability was $220,000 You can bet the privileged use this. Yes, I am in the middle with this.

  17. Steve Thomas Says:

    I know Marc does not agree with Pete Hendricksons methods but he has put in allot of work and is very good at backing up his interpretations, that being said interpretations only matter if your a judge. The IRS is like a wild animal that has rabies, they have one thing on their mind and its not the law or justice. Anyone who stands up to a bully must be prepared to get beat up, wether they are correct or not, and the IRS is a very big bully with lots of dumb bullies who won’t think twice when told to steal, kidnap, or kill you. I sometimes wish I had never stood up to the criminals stealing my labor and treating me as property. Knowing what I know now, I can’t go back to being an obedient slave.

  18. Kurt Says:

    Very encouraging. So far I haven’t had success in battling these criminals. I noticed however that when I was under heavy garnishment and walked away from my job, they suddenly left me alone. I guess you cease to become a priority when you have no obvious property to steal.

  19. Mark Says:

    That’s fine if you are not a W-2 employee, if you are a w-2 employee they do a lock in letter to your employer which tells them to basically make you claim 0 dependents and file single. How can we get around that?

  20. spencer Says:

    i went to court and told the judge to prove jurisdiction and he as me if i had a drivers license and I said yes and he said then I have your signature and jurisdiction,

  21. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ spencer, the judge doesn’t prove jurisdiction, the prosecutor does. And the license is under threat, duress and coercion.

  22. R.J. Says:

    I would also like to see some of the responses to the IRS when they get posted, but will go back and listen to the recording in the meantime. My wife and I got swept up in the Pete H. movement starting back in 2008, big mistake! We received everything back for 2008, 2009 & 2010. Then things went south after that. As of last month, we’ve been hit with “14” of the $5,000 frivolous penalties totaling $70,000 for 2011, 2012 & 2013. They like to hit both spouses with the $5k penalty at the same time now. So, we have 6 x $5k penalties for 2011, 2 x $5k for 2012, and 6 x $5k for 2013. We’ve always chosen written correspondence over telephone conversations so that we would have documentation of everything. Plus, we didn’t have a way to record phone calls. Now they just keep hitting us both with $5k fees whenever we send them a letter asking for clarification of the penalties. Had we been a good little boy and girl and filed “correctly” (their term) for the last three years, we would have only owed a grand total of $3,000. Now here we sit, both 50 years old, with $70k of IRS debt hanging over our heads for friggin penalty fees, only one job between us….oh, and did I mention we had to move into a hotel? Thankfully, we have no property that they can take, but once they garnish the payroll we are sunk and no longer have a rope to even hold on to. Funny thing is, we did file “corrected” returns within the 30-day window they threatened us with in order to avoid the penalty, but low and behold they still hit us with the $5k penalties. So, do you think we have any kind of a chance in our situation if we challenge jurisdiction at this point? As long as I have air in my lungs I’m willing to do whatever it takes to obtain a successful outcome. Thanks for all you do Marc. We’ve been following your site for a couple of years now and enjoy the education.

  23. Andy Says:

    A Driver’s License is a psychopath deterrent. To be clear, it won’t do much to deter a run-o-f-the-mill psychopath. It is a useful deterrent against government psychopaths.

  24. NonExclusive Says:

    When dealubg with psychipaths, the constant lying can always be used agaibst them, so that’s why we should always stick to the facts….. From “Government Indicted”

  25. NonExclusive Says:

    When dealing with psychopaths, the constant lying can always be used against them, so that’s why we should always stick to the facts. … from “Government Indicted”

  26. NonExclusive Says:

    Marc, the code and the constituion applies to all of us… “Magically” .. ( Of course is a sarcasm )

  27. NonExclusive Says:

    There is proof the constitution and code applies to all of us.. a loaded gun, a nifty badge and a Taser. Need more proof? You can get killed in an instant without hesitation in any place with the minimum provocation.

  28. Bill Mikulin Says:

    I used that argument in tax court (property tax) – show me the evidence that your property tax code applies to my private land. They showed a copy of the deed. Since the deed’s legal description says Harris County, Texas, they claim that is evidence of my private land being located “in this state”. The judge in open court ruled against me (I did not use an attorney)but there was never an order signed to that effect and the court record shows a continuance until May 20th. At the first court date the judge told me I had to hire an attorney. I told her I definitely was not hiring an officer of her court to present the fact that there is no evidence that their little tax code applies to me. It is still an ongoing battle. Any suggestions?

  29. Michael Scharen Says:

    No surprise, the psychopaths at the IRS are no longer even making a pretense of following their own ‘laws’. They are confiscating bank accounts as they please wherever they feel someone might just have some ‘illegal earnings’. No notice, no kangaroo court, and no apologies.

  30. Lysander Venible Says:

    Conspicuously missing from the documents is the one you sent to the Service. I’m not suggesting you are not telling the truth, but if you are concerned about your credibility, leaving out your half of the conversation doesn’t do much to add to it.

    The target in this case could simply have sworn that someone else paid his mortgage for him and the outcome could easily have been the same. I’m not saying he did, but since we don’t know exactly what he did send, what is a skeptic to think?

  31. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Lysander I’ll get it posted as soon as I can.

  32. Kurt Says:

    @ Bill Mikulin – Did you object? I would always object. What FACTUALLY is “Harris County” other than a legal opinion? Is the judge holding the prosecutor to his/her burden of proof? If not, object! Ask if the judge is legislating from the bench.

  33. Lysander Venible Says:

    I appreciate that Marc. I’ll definitely watch for it.

  34. Bill Mikulin Says:

    Thank you. Someone here in Texas made the same argument. It went to appeal and the appellate court upheld that the deed showing a legal description of Harris County, Texas was sufficient evidence to prove the private property was located “in this state” and therefore taxable. We know “in this state” has nothing to do with boundary lines. The Texas Transportation Code defines “state” as Puerto Rico, District of Columbia, and even a province of Canada. The Texas TAX CODE: TITLE 2; SUBTITLE E; CHAPTER 151; SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS; Sec. 151.004. “IN THIS STATE”. “In this state” means within the exterior limits of Texas and includes all territory within these limits ceded to or owned by the United States. A recent court case elaborates on this definition within the tax code to include “domiciled in Texas AND doing business in Texas”. Again, how does “doing business” have anything to do with the boundary lines?

  35. Kurt Says:

    Bill, objection, these are legal opinions. How do they affect anyone? Do the prosecutors or judges think they personally own any of the land allegedly owned by “the State”? Do they think they own anyone as human livestock? Have them demonstrate how anyone signing any documents because of the “State of…” is NOT under threat, duress, coercion.

  36. cynthia Says:

    Last I heard snipes won his IRS case as well I just hope he is counter suing for them forcing jail time, full return on previous pillaging on his labor and intellect and time as well as other damages.

  37. Randy Says:

    @ Anthony: Actually that is only partially correct. There is one other item that is included along with Gift taxes and that is “other information returns” under Tax Class Five. The rest of your claim is patriot myth. Marc is right about Jurisdiction and the rest is the withholding agent and who they are required to withhold from. Go look it up here:

    and here:

    (16) Withholding agent
    The term “withholding agent” means any person required to deduct and withhold any tax under the provisions of section 1441, 1442, 1443, or 1461.

    If you aren’t one of those 3 entities then the IRS has no jurisdiction over you unless you are an employee of a political subdivision, State, or Federal Government or an Officer of a Corporation.

    I have a screen shot of a program the “State” of Oregon uses and on one page it actually designated me as a “federal name and address”, and I think that makes them think they have jurisdiction.

    … but anyway.

  38. Boxer Says:

    @ The Honorable Marc Stevens:

    With regards to the psychopaths DBA “IRS”; do you suggest not completing their paperwork at all (even if signed under threat, duress, and coercion)?

  39. Boxer Says:

    @ Bill Mikulin

    Plenty of ways to go about this (some of which I am trying). Based on what you described, I am also attempting to demonstrate, through written evidence, that the “deed” which they refer to is forced. In other words, assuming you have a loan, you can have the individual broker who put the loan documents together, state that if you had not signed the “deed” as is, you would never have been approved for the loan. This certainly demonstrates that you signed under threat, duress, and coercion (i.e. if you don’t sign this “as is”, you’ll be living on the streets, homie).

  40. Jr Says:

    I heard and read that challenging Jurisdiction must be decided before the court can proceed yet people are getting threats of contempt of court because the respondent can’t get an answer first. So I guess challenging the Jurisdiction on a Motion to Dismiss seem good on paper before going to court. Hopefully this will work for my brothers child support hearing and we can send testimony to the success and not a contempt.

  41. Lysander Venible Says:

    I want to thank you for posting those documents. I’ve never seen a letter like that closing notice from the service, and I see a lot of letters from them.

    I also want to note for the benefit of R.J. who commented on Feb. 12 above, that if he has submitted “corrected” forms 1040 for the years that got all those frivolous penalties, that there is amnesty available for the penalties. He can pay them off for a single payment of $500, and they will even finance that if he needs them to. See revenue ruling 2012-43 and look up IRS form 14402 or he can contact me at lysandervenible at startmail dot com.

  42. NonEntity Says:

    Boxer sed: “…if you had not signed the “deed” as is, you would never have been approved for the loan. This certainly demonstrates that you signed under threat, duress, and coercion (i.e. if you don’t sign this “as is”, you’ll be living on the streets, homie).”

    Sorry Boxer, you are leaping to the conclusion that the loan officer is under some obligation to provide you with housing. NOT. You APPLY for a loan. If you don’t want the loan, don’t apply for it. There is no threat involved here. You are operating in the “entitlement” mindset here. The world does not owe you anything.

    Please note that I am in no way supporting the banking criminal cartel here, I’m only attempting to show you the failure in your thinking.

  43. Kurt Says:

    @ NonE: If you can find decent residences and decent jobs WITHOUT signing documents CONTROLLED by government regulation let me know. Otherwise I’d agree with Boxer. Mortgage companies and employers don’t owe you a living, but it’s damn hard to engage with them and make a productive living if you don’t agree to the rules they comply with under threat, duress, coercion. These companies are under TDC which they roll down hill to you the “consumer”, “peon” whatever, you with little influence.

  44. NonEntity Says:


    I hear you. It’s sorta philosophically complex in that what we have is basically a fascistic system wherein the banker does not force you, but the government does, but the government is somewhat acting as an arm of the banking cartel… and so on.

    Ultimately I think the solution is to “route around the problem” by finding means of avoiding dealing with them all. Bitcoin and similar ideas may help in this. As Bastiat said, don’t try to topple the king, just quit supporting him and he’ll fall of his own bloated weight (my bad paraphrase.)

    Still, I do believe it is important to keep our minds clear on the issues and the reality so as to be able to find the most effective means of finding happiness and success. Whining about injustice, no matter how justified, is not going to lead to greater life satisfaction. Clarity of vision is a prerequisite for finding more satisfactory means of achieving life success.

    That’s just sorta my thoughts on the issue at this point.

  45. Brian Says:

    Bill Thornton uses a similar tactic when he goes to court. His method is to file counter claims, thereby converting yourself into a plaintiff, and challenge jurisdiction. I’d like to see some of the letters you wrote to find out if the methods are compatible.

  46. leatherlips Says:

    Eric Williams who runs the yahoo group whoru has a three letter method that will make the IRS go away and never contact you again. He also has a challenge to the jurisdiction of the State for any court case you are invited to get envolved in. I’ve been dealing with the IRS since 99, and have about 8 of the 45 day letters. All that did was slow them down a little. Eric’s letters have killed them off.

  47. Siddique Sayid Bey Says:

    Me and my brother has filed a petition in United State Tax court and IRS had the case dropped due to “lack of jurisdiction”, i will continue to use their own statement that they lack jurisdiction because they don’t have it over a flesh and blood man, they can only tax “corporations”.

    “Income taxes statutes apply only to state created creatures known as corporations no matter whether state, local, or federal.”[Colonial Pipeline v. Traigle, 421 US 100]

    I don’t know how to post the US Tax court paperwork that they sent back to us dropping our case for lack of jurisdiction.

    The paperwork I was filing against the IRS Commissioner she refuse to answer me back under a belief that she can obligate a man to any allege religious foreign code of the IRS, I simply asked her to “explicitly” prove to me how I as a man “expressly” written in some sort of a code between them and I?

    And they have been running from me when I asked that question.

    I have even gotten my home (Mortgage “Discharged” saying Mortgage Loan was “PAID IN FULL”!!!)

    And I never ever finished paying the house off, so this is proof of so much fraud and extortion that’s going on, I even stated on my court paperwork that my property to my home is “private property” and NO has any right to administrate my private property/private land and charge me a fee for it, that would denote that I’m sone type of slave who actually renting my property then to own it.

  48. Eileen Says:

    I got a similar response in 2014. I asked for an adjudicative hearing and declaratory order that I am subject to the codes, pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act. When they deny the hearing, they have denied due process, and no court has jurisidiction after that. I had asked some questions about their jurisdiction, challenged the applicability of the code to me in the private sector, nonresident to United States, and specifically, I challenged the “taxable year liability.” I was under investigation. They thought I had prepared some tax returns for others using some unapproved method. Anyway, they wrote a letter saying they had ended the investigation.

    Last year they came back again with a new offer, saying I owed an outlandish amount of tax for 2011 and 2012. That is a ploy to get you to argue about the amount instead of challenging jurisdiction. So I sent them another demand for adjudicative hearing and jurisdictional challenge. They went silent for a few months, and then sent another demand, so I sent them a Notice of Default and order to cease and desist. Waiting to hear back from them on that one. Didn’t think to ask for an abatement, but I think my demand was clear.

  49. cynthia Says:

    Just thought – the word jurisdiction means juris = oath promise or pledge + diction = spoken, so can fairly say “Where is the evidence proof that “I” have an oath promise or pledge that is valid by full disclosure and meeting of the minds with any self expressed “body politic and corporate” much less “corporate” i.e. U.S. not to be confused with America or united States much less U.S. Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (third party collections), or International Monetary Fund which U.S. Treasury and IRS are Under, or Social Security Administration in fact ‘managed’ by Queen of England in fact – do the deep digging in “government” documentation and you will find it True

  50. Randall Says:


    Nicely played. 😀

  51. Non-Loser Says:

    @ Mr. Bey
    please go back and read your quoted court case
    bogus “quotes” from Citations harm many people

  52. Kenneth Zobel Says:

    Could you please send me any copies of these letters from the IRS I would love to see them and any other info you have

  53. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Zobel, they are in the article.

  54. Peter Digiacco Says:

    Mark can you help me get the irs off my back. I can use all the help I can get.

  55. Marc Stevens Says:

    I may be able to help. Contact me by email marcstevens(at)mail(dot)com

9 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP - Feb 7, 2015 - Says:

    […] I.R.S. drops their six-year legal attack after they are persistently asked for the evidence they rel…. […]

  2. IRS Drop Case After 6 years Based On 1 Question | You Are Law Says:

    […] See the documents and proof HERE […]

  3. NSP - Feb 14, 2015 - Co-host: JT - Says:

    […] Sociopath‘s fear of being exposed is one of the few ways to effectively counter their malicious attacks. […]

  4. IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction | Freedom's Floodgates Says:

    […] By Marc Stevens […]

  5. NSP - Feb 21, 2015 - Says:

    […] IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction. […]

  6. NSP - Apr 25, 2015 - Says:

    […] Ice Creation’s recent repost of Marc’s “IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction” article. Tack och KOPIMI! […]

  7. More IRS Defense – Additions | Freedom Truth Says:

    […] on each letter to enlarge.  Suggest download for reference in case this link is ever removed. IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction – NETWORKING His Advocates To get educated on legal issues regarding taxation and […]

  8. WE COME TO BRING DEATH | there is no debt Says:

    […] IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction […]

  9. NSP - Sept 26, 2015 - Says:

    […] Documented proof that challenging jurisdiction is effective: IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction. […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream now broadcast via You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.

Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.

Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter

Advertise Here