Rudy posted the following video on his YouTube today:
It’s a Certificate of Incorporation for “Internal Revenue Tax and Audit Service, Inc.” Click the link to open up a PDF of this Certificate of Incorporation. I (Deana Holmes) briefly discussed this on January 24, but it’s worth mentioning again because Rudy thinks this is some sort of big deal. It’s not.
Here’s what a federal judge in Missouri had to say about this particular little folklore of tax protesters in footnote 2, pages 4-5 in the case Acevedo v. US:
2 The only purportedly “private” entity named as a defendant in this action is the Internal Revenue Tax and Audit Service, Inc. a/k/a “IRS Corp.” Plaintiff contends that his social security benefits, once levied for payment of his delinquent taxes, were “passed on” to the “IRS Corp.” There is no allegation in the complaint that the “IRS Corp.” acted in an unlawful manner. As such, plaintiff fails to state a claim for relief against the “IRS Corp.” *To the extent, however, that plaintiff is claiming that the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the government, but rather, a private corporation, known as the “IRS Corp.,” the Court notes that this line of reasoning has been consistently negated by several other courts.* See, e.g., Snyder v. IRS, 596 F.Supp. 240 (N. D. Ind. 1984); Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984); Salman v. Jameson, 52 F.3d 334 (9th Cir. 1995). *Moreover, the claim that “[t]he Service is not an agency of the United States government but rather a private corporation or an agency of a State or Territory without authority to administer the internal revenue laws” has been identified by the IRS as a “frivolous position” that can result in a penalty of $5,000 when asserted in a tax return or included in certain collection-related submissions*. Notice 2007-30, 2007-14 I.R.B. 883.
Here is a link to IRS Notice 2007-30 which lists out the frivolous positions that will get you in trouble.
In short, don’t claim this in court, because while the judge will grant you leave to file in forma pauperis, she will not issue process based on this complaint because the argument is legally frivolous or fails to state a claim.