SSN Not Required

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

"Rare is the case that an employer actually needs an SSN. Indeed the Social Security Administration admits the numbers are actually their property and further that “no one needs an SSN to work in the United States.”

This latter fact isn't widely known, but NOT knowing and demanding an SSN where no authority to demand exists could get the employee demanding same, and his employer, involved in a civil action. Our recommendation is frankly to not push the SSN issue with employees. If an employee provides an SSN even on taxation forms it should only be done voluntarily and with NO adverse actions taken in case he refuses.

Form I-9: To our knowledge the only spot that asks for an actual SSN (and not an implied TIN) is on form I-9. However nothing in the law actually states the employee must provide the number. Because primarily government forms are intended for government employees, the majority of "spots for information" are considered voluntary when used by the general population NOT engaged in federal employment.

A twist: Indeed, the restrictions of public law regarding I-9 disclosures can actually RESTRICT the employer from using that number on ANY other form. In other words, do not assume you have the employee's permission to use that number on any other form or in any other way simply be virtue of its disclosure on Form I-9. You could possibly be in violation of the laws behind Form I-9!

Form W-4, Form W-2, Form W-3 and Form W-9: 

Let's examine W-4 first. The title of the form identifies it as an "allowance" certificate. Its only purpose is as a permission slip to ALLOW the non-governmental employer to withhold, (take) some money from the employee's compensation on behalf of government. If you think that ALLOWANCE implies a voluntary-act, you are correct! If the form is voluntary for those outside governmental employment, then what of its content including the spot for a number? We repeat: The submission of a W-4 form or any other alternative AND ITS CONTENTS is considered a voluntary act!

Common sense will dictate that one cannot make demands on behalf of government for:

(1) a form signed under oath, with:

(2) a severe penalty of perjury jurat for non truth when:

(3) someone is simply exchanging labor for compensation and when:

(4) the person demanding is not an authorized withholding agent of government.

Hint: Were you given a badge or written delegation of authority?

BEWARE: The IRS has consistently confused these two definitions especially in their publications and forms. Unfortunately-- as employers on our distribution list have identified--the IRS does not come to the aid of employers relying on IRS publications; the IRS is under the Executive Branch of government and that branch does NOT make law.

Thus, non-governmental employers make a BIG mistake if they automatically convert or assume one number for the other without the expressed permission of the employee. It is better to err on the side of safety and to simply refuse to "do the work of government”: In a government-declared "system of voluntary compliance by the making of a return", the non-governmental employer is without authority to create a "taxpayer": that responsibility is left to another. Our recommendation is that you as an employer should NOT attempt to "create taxpayers" from non-governmental employees.

REMEMBER: NON-GOVERNMENTAL EMPLOYERS CAN ONLY REQUEST AND NOT DEMAND!

Remember that the SSN is not "owned" by the employee and further your "need" is only to satisfy his benefit if he chooses to participate in government Social Security insurance and the government withholding program. Thus, if an employee refuses to include an SSN on any government form, that right is his own. These forms are creations of government and their existence and content cannot be made mandatory outside those in government employment.

Further, you need not inquire of his reasons. His reasons might range from religious "mark" aspects to simply never applying for an SSN or to not wanting to be forced to make an oath under penalty. And you as an employer have NOTHING to fear from not including an SSN on any government form you submit to government.

The fine for EACH employee is $50 and this can be waived by simply including this statement on the "transmittal document" you send with Form W-2 and W-3: "I requested an SSN [or Form W4]. This non-federal employee did not provide the number [or Form W4]. To my knowledge he is not a federal employee or government "individual" nor does he engage in federal (26 USC) "trade or business".

No law compels a work eligible man or woman to submit a form W-4 or W-9 (or their equivalent), nor disclose an SSN as a condition of being hired or keeping one's job.

With the exception of an order from a court of competent jurisdiction issued by a duly qualified judge, no amounts can be lawfully taken from one's pay (for taxes, fees or other charges) without the worker's explicit, knowing, voluntary, written consent.

Section 7 of Public Law 93-579 provides that:

(a)(1) It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State or local government agency to deny any individual any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose Social Security account number.

There is no law requiring you to obtain or use the Social Security Number. The Social Security System is a voluntary System. The Social Security Act does not require a person to have an SSN to live and work in the United States of America, nor does it require an SSN simply for the purpose of having one.

If there was a law for the SSN, why does a major food chain, Taco Bell, have "optional" printed by the SSN on their applications?

The IRS only requires the employer/payer to request the SSN. If the employee/payee refuses to give or doesn’t have an SSN, the employer sends an affidavit to the IRS stating that they requested the SSN and the employee refused, (Indemnification Letter). The penalties will not be assessed against the employer.

See also:

Nowlin vs. D.M.V. 53 Cal. App. 4th 1529 Apr. 2, 1997

For video, see - http://constitutionclub.ning.com/

[joseph cronin jr.]

Hey Morton, how ya do'in ? Between this IRS stuff and the sovereignty stuff, I feel like a dog chasing his tail; oh yeah and then there's the court procedure stuff; at least I'm not bored. They ( my parents ) left me in the hospital, some nice people adopted me and I've had a happy if somewhat confused life so far; not knowing my heritage I proudly consider myself an American mutt.

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

I would be able to tell you your national origin if I could meet with you. I can tell what someone's heritage is just by seeing them in person. I'm very good at it.

ps - a DNA test could do it even more accurately.

[VIRGINIA GOMEZ]

So Morton:

How does the employer take out for taxes?? Or am I not clearly understanding what you are saying regarding the SSN issue.....?  Since no penalties are assessed on employer, won't there be a penalty assessed on me?  If the employer is not going to withhold money for my soc. security taxes then how will I fill out my yr end taxes ?

Sorry if my questions don't sound intelligent.

[Wayne Bachmann]

Are you a government worker? Do you work for a different corporation? The only people who are required to pay the IRS didly-squat are government workers, and since other corporations are linked to the corporation of the UNITED STATES, I will, for the sake of this discussion, include all other corporations.

I am not Morton, but I highly suspect Morton is busy, so I will help out.

If one is employed by a corporation, one might want to think about working for one's self. In 1903 there was only 3% of the workforce that worked for someone else. Nowadays, it is reversed. There are only 3% that are not working for someone else. If you work for the government corporation, you are required to do what that corporation dictates. If you do not work for a corporation, you call your own shots. If you want to include the government in any contracts, that is your business, but I would not make such a choice.

When you file 1090s, 1099s, 1040s, etc., W2s, W4s, you are filing/signing contracts. That is what they are. If you apply for a bank card and you put a check in the box that you are a citizen of the U. S. , that is a contract binding you into servitude with the corporation of the UNITED STATES. I am an American, but I am NOT a citizen of the UNITED STATES, United States, United States of America, or any other corporately registered name in Delaware (I have copies of those corporately registered names).

Fortunately, you have to re-register every year which also gives you the opportunity to decide to not contract with them the next year. Unless you contract with them, there is no contract. It is just that simple.

If you do decide to contract with them through your employer, that makes him/her an agent for the IRS. You can't be penalized, but your employer can be, as they have just made themselves the agent responsible for collecting taxes from you. If you work for the corporation, especially the government, you may still get hung. Separate yourself from all corporate activity. That is what I have done.

Google up: 31 Questions and Answers about the Internal Revenue Service, go to page 4, question 7.

[Osceola Renegade]

Ye be absolutely correct Wayne;

Question:  In 1913 IRS Corporation was born.  Registered in Puerto Rico.

Also, either along then, or in 1933 Roosevelt created the Corporation of the United States, Inc.  Obama is weaseling around under this charter claiming to be a Constitutional Scholar operating under the Constitution of the US.  he is a liar extra ordinary.

Roberts posted an Opinion of Obamacare that it did not fall under Interstate Commerce; and it was not a tax since the bill did not originate in the House but under REID in the Senate.  Roberts then weaseled out by stating that it had to be called other than a TAX.

However, the method of implementation violates the Sherman Anti Trust Act of 1890 and many of the other legislation designed to protect citizens against monopoly businesses.

It stands to reason that Sherman Act is violated by Obamacare and the different EO decisions to delay mandates, and to exempt Unions, the City of New York, Las Vegas and many other exemptions, forcing the draw of money from hard working Americans while feathering the beds of the bastards that will not work or hold a job.  Which can be interpreted to violate many statutes.

A federal anti-monopoly and anti-trust statute, passed in 1890 as 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7 and amended by the Clayton Act in 1914 (15 U.S.C. § 12-27), which prohibits activities that restrict interstate commerce and competition in the marketplace.

Then we find that:  the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1011-15 vested regulatory authority of the insurance industry on the states; thus, the federal reach of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and the Federal Trade Commission Act is applicable to the “business of insurance” only to the extent where: (1) such business is not regulated by state law [§ 1012], or (2) there are insurer or acts of, “boycott, coercion, or intimidation” [§ 1013].

Wasn't Health Insurance regulated by state until the OBOMACARE got going.

I do believe that would make the OBOMACARE illegal from word go.

What I am leading up to is if a group want to form a STUDY GROUP under Constitution Club to research different aspects we could.  This puppy is too big and his puddle is too big to mop up with one mop. 

If Sherman Act thought, merged with the other ammendments and acts, then the IRS as a corporation may as well not exist as far as Obama Care goes.

Need Help:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzwLSVJTCWc

OR

[Osceola Renegade]

I have never located a Congressional Decree that Business Owners must withhold taxes.

Only that CPA's and Lawyers say it is true.

That puts the Owner of a Business into TAX COLLECTOR ROLE and you are not paid - which could mean that it is a CONTRACT under UCC that is invalid since you do not have to be part of a contract you do not agree with.

And Since IRS is a Corporation, you should be billing them for all work done to collect and report taxes.

People have become accustom to just doing what they are told by the Government under the wrong Color of Law.

Here is a good example.  There is a handbook out by SS and IRS telling Employers how to submit Electronic filing information on W2s so it can be injected and processed.

If your software errors, then you are liable for a big healthy fine for making the Government work twice on the same problem.

The Handbook tells a developer how to create the Wage Record for IRS and the State Record for the States.

However, the State is too stupid to understand that the IRS File has the information in the State Record and can read the State Record to get their information.  Some states want it on their toilet paper in their sh****t format.  Which complicates the problem.

Then, if your Accounting System cannot build the E-Media, you have to contract with a third party to create the MAG Media for submission, and that will cost you $1.00 for each W2 included ($1.00 for State, and $1.00 for IRS).

If you have a 30,000 payroll, then you have a $60,000.00 extra expense (tax) laid on you by IRS at the end of the year.

It took me almost 5 years to show IRS that their software failed and they wanted to fine us over $100,000 for an error.  The error was simple.  Back at the time, they had a 1W record for the Withholding Record - and one individuals last digit on his SSAN was 1 and his Name was Wright.  Ergo when parsing for a 1W and you hit nnnnn...1Wright you had a 1W record.  I told IRS 5 Years in a row where their error was without ever seeing their system.  Finally they put a techie on the phone and he laughed, "We've been looking for that error for over 10 Years".

End of Story.

Bottom line Virginia, you would have to make a decision on whether or not to withhold employee taxes and submit them to IRS, there is no lawyer or Accountant in the US that will help you.

[Wayne Bachmann]

I have not contracted with the IRS for years, roughly 35, and I never will again!

[Leldon Thomas Oates]

Read carefully 26USC83 until you understand that. 26USC 61 SAYS EXCEPT AS EXCLUDED BY LAW. 26USC83 is where wages and compensation are excluded by law. Also Congress never named me as subject of the income tax, the secretary named me in the regulations, thereby expanding regulations beyond the language of the statutes which is fraud. Filling out and signing a 1040 form is participating in the fraud and you cannot be compelled to participate in fraud. The law does not allow impossibilities. See also, takefromcaesar.us. Also non assumpsit can be added to your signature.

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

Very good Leldon,

"The Great IRS Hoax" - by Chris Hansen, is a good guide to the rest of this story. The 861 Source issue has been at the core of many a tax battle. Your freedom to contract or refusal to contract is at the core of your sovereignty and pursuit of happiness.

You have no choice but to follow the law which clearly states in no uncertain terms that you and I as average everyday individuals are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of this tax.

[Leldon Thomas Oates]

section 83 is what i was referring to. i am familiar with 861 and it does not apply to my situation so it is a moot point to argue it. i believe that is why so many have lost on that argument.i believe it applies to government employees, if i remember correctly. that was years ago when i stopped researching that path.

[Morton Thomson Jr.]

Of Course Leldon,

I did not address your section 83 reference. So if I understand the statute correctly, they can't sell your property to anyone if you have a lien on it unless they pay you first and Allodial Title is your proof that you actually "own" the land and all buildings outright. Is that the gist of your legal argument?

[Leldon Thomas Oates]

i was referring to internal revenue code. they can only tax the excess paid over the value of your property (labor or services). see takefromcaesar.us for the book on section 83. very good. Dept. of Justice sought and got a protective order to keep from having to answer David Myrland's Criminal Complaint against IRS.