The Buck Act – An obscure little law passed quietly in the 1940’s

The Last Outpost – Produced by Mosaic Media – 1994

Thanks to Richard McDonald, Mitch Modeleski, Burness J. Speakman, and Jeffery Thayer

Excerpts from the Buck Act:

S.110 (d) The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States.  

S.110 (e) The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State.

Included in the video are interviews with State Citizenship researcher, Richard McDonald; founder of the Santa Fe township and common law researcher, Jeffery Thayer; author of “The Federal Zone”, Mitch Modeleski; and author of the Buck Act Papers, Burness J. Speakman.

An obscure little law passed quietly in the 1940’s known as the Buck Act is the one major piece in the puzzle of understanding how the Federal Government has seemingly usurped most of the State’s jurisdiction.

  • How does the Federal Government get away with undermining and seemingly violating the Constitution?
  • How can the government seize property without due process?
  • How do they impose gun control laws that would seem to violate the 2nd Amendment?
  • How can they entertain the idea of forcing all Americans to purchase their health care insurance under threat of imprisonment?
  • Why does the President state (correctly) that he has the full power to order warrant-less searches and seizures and weapons confiscations in all Federally funded housing projects?

Many of these questions can only be answered after understanding the implications of the Buck Act. The Constitution gives Congress jurisdiction over the limited areas of the District of Columbia, military bases ceded to Congress by States and US territories and possessions. The Buck Act effectively extends this jurisdiction to every square inch of every state that can be called a “federal area” under the Acts provisions, and effectively destroys the sovereign rule of the several states.

Americans who mistakenly elect to be residents of a federal area instead of their sovereign states, have subjected themselves to the arbitrary rule of Congress just like the citizens of Washington DC. Federal areas include any jurisdiction created by federal agencies such as postal zones, Social Security districts, Federal Reserve regions, “state districts” and others. Each can be thought of as a clear overlay map on top of the United States, that has no regard to the duly-constituted states.

The BUCK ACT

To permit the States to extend their sales, use, and income taxes to persons residing or carrying on business, or to transactions occurring, in Federal areas, and for other purposes.

Title 4 USC Chapter 4, THE STATES

Section

101. Oath by members of legislatures and officers.

102. Same; by whom administered.

103. Assent to purchase of lands for forts.

104. Tax on motor fuel sold on military or other reservations; reports to State taxing authority.

105. State, etc. taxation affecting Federal areas; sales or use tax.

106. Same; income tax.

107. Same; exception of United States, its instrumentalities, and

authorized purchasers therefrom.

108. Same; jurisdiction of United States over Federal areas

unaffected.

109. Same; exception of Indians.

110. Same; definitions.

111. Same; taxation affecting Federal employees; income tax.

112. Compacts between States for cooperation in prevention of crime;

consent of Congress.

113. Residence of Members of Congress for State income tax laws.

Note: The Internet Tax Freedom Act added new sections up to 126 to be included real soon. Please come back and visit us again real soon!

There it is, the authority to impose income taxes. Congress knows it cannot tax those citizens (non-resident aliens) who live and work outside the territorial jurisdiction of Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, or Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2. This Act allowed any department, office or establishment of the federal government to create a “Federal Area” for imposition of the “Public Salary” Tax Act of 1939.

It is important to note that you have to contract up into this “Buck Act” state. You do this by voter’s registration, which is a declaration of citizenship, a resident driver’s license, applying for a social security number and by putting your name on the 1040 form in the box next to the word label. We’ll get to this a little later.

The “BUCK ACT,” created one huge federal state by the authority of Article I, Section 8, clause 17, incorporating the states as “federal areas” and renaming them, for example: New Mexico identifies the sovereign state and the STATE OF NEVADA, identifies the “federal area.” Title 4, chapter 4 of the United States Code, defines a “Federal Area” as:

Title 4, United States Code, §110(e):

The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency, of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State.

A “Federal area” is any area designated by any agency, department, or establishment of the federal government. This includes the Social Security areas designated by the Social Security Administration, any public housing area that has federal funding, a home that has a federal bank loan, a road that has federal funding, and almost everything that the federal government touches though any type of aid. Springfield v. Kenny, (1951 App.) 104 NE2d. 65.

This “Federal area” attaches to anyone who has a social security number or any personal contact with the Federal or State Governments. Now we begin to discover the real fraud. The federal government has usurped the Sovereignty of the People and state Sovereignty by creating these federal areas within the boundaries of the state under the authority of the Federal Constitution, Article I, Sec. 8, cl. 17, and legislate these local laws according to the dictates of Article IV, Sec. 3, cl. 2, which states:

“The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States, and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

The U.S. citizens [citizens of the District of Columbia] residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an “individual entity” Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773.

Under the “Buck Act” 4 U.S.C.S. §§ 105-110, the federal government has created a “Federal area” within the boundaries of all the states. This area is similar to any territory the federal government acquires through purchase, conquest, or by gift as in a will, thereby imposing federal territorial law upon those in this “Federal area”.

The “BUCK ACT” was originally passed in 1939 over Yellowstone National Park to permit the collection of sales and use taxes within the park as a “federal area.” The 76TH Congress, 1st Session, the House of Representatives put out Report No. 1267:

“To authorize levy of State, Territory, and District of Columbia Taxes in United States Parks, Military and other Reservations, July 22, 1939—Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed. Mr. Frank Buck, from the Committee on Ways and Means, submitted the following Report to accompany H.R. 6687.”

You’ll notice that State, Territory and District of Columbia Taxes are all included and have the same meaning. So this Tax is a District of Columbia Tax, and includes the State and Territory. It is a fictional State created in the District as a corporation doing business as the STATE OF NEVADA.

We are non-resident aliens living upon the Land in the freely associated compact states. And as such we live on the land described within the boundaries of the Nevada state constitution. In this capacity, Congress cannot pass any law that would impair our “Rights” secured and guaranteed under Article IV, Section 2. Knowing that we have this capacity there has to be some form of remedy in which our status cannot be jeopardized.

I want to show you where our remedy lies within the above-mentioned Report:

“The application of such taxes to the gross receipts of a retailer from sales in which delivery is made to an area over which it is asserted the United States possess exclusive jurisdiction is being vigorously contested even though the retailer’s place of business is located off the Federal area and the negotiations leading to the sale are conducted and the contract of sale is executed at the retailer’s place of business. Despite the existence of these facts, which are generally sufficient to give rise to liability for the tax, and which, insofar as the theory of the tax is concerned, should, in the opinion of your committee, be sufficient to impose tax liability, exemption from the tax is asserted upon the ground that title to the property sold passes on the Federal area and, accordingly, the sale occurs on land over which the State lacks authority.”

Let’s dissect this paragraph, breaking it down in common language so that we can understand it. First, it says that the tax applies to gross receipts of retailers who are making deliveries to an area over which the United States possess exclusive jurisdiction. What is this exclusive jurisdiction according to the Express Constitutional Trust? Here are the exclusive jurisdictions:

Article I, Section 8, clause 17:

“To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding over ten miles square)…”

Article IV, Section 3, clause 2:

“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needed Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be construed as the Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

Article III, Section 1:

“The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish….” and…..”

Article III, Section 2, clause 2:

“In all cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be a Party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

The exclusive jurisdiction asserted by Congress is over the District of Columbia. This exclusive jurisdiction is over property belonging to the United States. The exclusive legislative jurisdiction was extended to the State or Territory by the “Buck Act.” This State was created on paper in the District of Columbia and they are claiming a property interest over it.

The Report tells us that despite the existence of the fact that the retailer’s place of business is outside or not on any Federal area, they say it is sufficient to give rise to liability for the tax….. Why do they say this? Because the state-created corporations started paying taxes under the Corporation Tax Act of 1909. They knew that the people didn’t have a clue as to how the Constitution operates or what it gave them. They passed it on us and it was ever so slight, by merely changing capitalization and re-arranging the appearance of how states were identified. There are two of everything. Two sets of definitions for literally everything that government does. So, we are not subject to their laws as non-resident aliens and they have to provide us with a remedy. The Report goes on to state:

“…the theory of the tax concerned, should, in the opinion of your committee, be sufficient to impose tax liability, exemption from the tax is asserted upon the ground that title to the property sold passes on the Federal area and, accordingly, the sale occurs on land over which the State lacks authority.”

I realize that this fictional “State of Confusion” is hard to understand so I will attempt to illustrate and explain this STATE as follows:

The united estates of America are identified in lower case. In the English language we capitalize proper names. Congress identifies the freely associated compact states as countries, capitalizing the proper name of that country which means state by definition as in: Nevada state or the state of Nevada.

The capitalized State identifies the federal area and extension of the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress asserted over the District of Columbia. The STATE OF NEVADA is how this state is identified and it exists up off the land, within the exterior boundaries of the existing state.

By re-arranging the capitalization of the states to the one huge border-to-border STATE, the District of Columbia as the Capital of the United States is identified in uppercase. All capital letters or capitalization of the first letter creates the capital State, in proper English a separate and distinct area that has a different definition.

This separate and distinct area is up off the land and the sovereign state still exists. Both exist, one real upon the land under a state constitution and the other STATE as a Federal area and an insular possession of the United States. The word “of” is possessive and means, belonging to. The STATE OF NEVADA belongs to the United States, because it denoted the capital, which is the District of Columbia.

The Ways and Means Committee is exactly what it looks like. This Committee looks into the Ways and Means certain Acts of Congress can be instituted. When they are acting on behalf of the District, writing legislation, their authority is outside of and without any jurisdiction of the freely associated compact states. That is why it is in the exterior boundaries. Congress has authority over the states in Article I, Section 8, clauses 1-16 ONLY!! This ACT was created in the District and within the exterior boundaries of the Constitution.

After the Committee Reports were all reviewed the “Buck Act” was amended to read as follows:

Title 4, Chapter 4 § 105. State, etc. taxation affecting Federal areas; sales or use tax.

(a) No person shall be relieved from liability for payment of, collection of, or accounting for any duly constituted taxing authority therein, having jurisdiction to levy such a tax, on the ground that the sale or use, with respect to which such tax is levied, occurred in whole or in part within a Federal area, and such State or taxing authority shall have full jurisdiction and power to levy and collect any such tax in any Federal area, within such State to the same extent and with the same effect as though such area was not a Federal area.

The language here is kind of confusing. Especially the part of the taxing authority having full jurisdiction and power to levy and collect any such tax in any Federal area, within such State to the same extent as though such area was not a Federal area.

The “Buck Act” is really a work of art. By this single act of congress, the international bankers have stolen, not only our lands, but also our labor and the future labor of our children. This act completely placed us back under the feudal system, making the international bankers the Landlords. I’m sick, how about you? Let’s go on…..

In Howard v. Commissioners of Sinking Fund, 344 U.S. 624, 626, 73 S.Ct. 465, 467 (1953), the Supreme Court held:

When the United States, with the consent of Kentucky, acquired the property upon which the Ordinance Plant is located, the property did not cease to be a part of Kentucky. The geographical structure of Kentucky remained the same. In rearranging the structural divisions of the Commonwealth, in accordance with state law, the area became a part of the City of Louisville, just as it remained a part of the County of Jefferson and the Commonwealth of Kentucky. * * * The fiction of a state within a state can have no validity to prevent the state from exercising its power over the federal area within its boundaries, so long as there is no interference with the jurisdiction asserted by the Federal Government. (Emphasis added)

Notice how the Court referred to both “Kentucky” and the “Commonwealth of Kentucky” in the same passage. The term “Commonwealth of Kentucky” identifies the “Federal area”. Notice the reference to the “City of Louisville” as being a part of the “Commonwealth of Kentucky”, and therefore also a “Federal area”.

When I lived in Nevada, I found this peculiar use of terms in defining “Federal areas” within the meaning of the Buck Act in the definitions of “State” and “United States” located in the General Provisions of the Nevada Revised Statutes:

NRS 64.100 “State” defined. “State” when applied to the different parts of the United States includes the District of Columbia and the territories.

Any definition which includes the District of Columbia, is the District of Columbia for purposes of Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the United States Constitution. Therefore, the “State” of Nevada is a “Federal area” within the meaning of the Buck Act.

NRS 64.110 “United States” defined. “United States” may include the District of Columbia and territories or insular possessions.

When I lived in New Mexico, I found a similar definition as follows:

NMSA 1978 31-5-3. United States’ territories as parties to compact.

The above statute makes specific mention of the compact of the freely associated compact states described in 28 U.S.C. § 297.

NMSA 1978 31-2-4 “State” includes the District of Columbia.

NMSA 1978 66-1-4.16, L “State” means any state, territory or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia or any province of the Dominion of Canada.

NMSA 1978 66-1-4.9, C. “Jurisdiction”, without modification, means “state”

NMSA 1978 66-1-4.6. E. “Foreign jurisdiction” means any jurisdiction other than a state of the United States or the District of Columbia.

This last definition is a real winner. Oh, but there is more, California has the same identical definitions. In fact I would venture to say that all states have almost identical definitions.

In Title 31, entitled Money and Finance, chapter 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations there are two sets of definitions. Part 51.2, identifies the fictional State and Part 52.2 identifies the sovereign state. Please see the “Political Paper” tab. I’ll just show you two of the definitions so you can compare them. These definitions have been removed since 1988 and unless you have an older version of the Code of Federal Regulations, you cannot find them.

§51.2 Definitions §52.2 Definitions

(i) “Governor” means the (f) “Governor” means the Governor of

Governor of any of the 50 any of the 50 states and the chief

State Governments or the Executive officer of the Commonwealth

Mayor of the District of of Puerto Rico, and the territories of

Columbia. American Samoa, Guam, and the

Virgin Islands of the United States.

There’s much more sections that have been added by the “Internet Tax Freedom Act.” Come back and see the latest update. Also please take a look at Title 26 U.S.C. tab and click on the “Political Paper” tab.

Supplemental:

The federal zone- cracking the code of internal revenue

31 Questions and Answers about the IRS

Cracking the Code: How to Win Hearts, Change Minds, and Restore America’s Original Vision

White Paper On State Citizenship

The Constitution is an Express Trust

http://thelastoutpost.com/law-seminars/the-buck-act.html

8 thoughts on “The Buck Act – An obscure little law passed quietly in the 1940’s

  1. Passing proclamations without the consent of the people and in opposition to the US Constitution is not a law. Additionally it is moral to resist these proclamations with deadly force.

    1. I am unable to agree.

      One may proclaim any thing it wishes. The “government” does not require consent. It has it. At least the presumption of. That is Law In Fact. I am unaware how this is in “opposition to” anything including the US Constitution(a private corporations by-laws).

      Waging war with force may be one remedy for some people. Accepting for value on condition of proof of claim may just get you farther.

      Its business for profit. You are either creditor, debtor or accommodation party so long as contracts are involved. YOU MUST CLAIM your position. It will not be gifted.

  2. “How does the Federal Government get away with undermining and seemingly violating the Constitution?
    How can the government seize property without due process?
    How do they impose gun control laws that would seem to violate the 2nd Amendment?
    How can they entertain the idea of forcing all Americans to purchase their health care insurance under threat of imprisonment?
    Why does the President state (correctly) that he has the full power to order warrant-less searches and seizures and weapons confiscations in all Federally funded housing projects?”

    The answer to all of the above is ACQUIESCENCE!

    Communists don’t ask, they just do.

    1. ac·qui·es·cence
      ˌakwēˈesəns/Submit
      noun
      the reluctant acceptance of something without protest.
      “in silent acquiescence, she rose to her feet”
      synonyms: accept, consent to, agree to, allow, concede, assent to, concur with, give the nod to; comply with, cooperate with, give in to, bow to, yield to, submit to; informalgo along with
      “despite my misgivings, I have acquiesced in some of the administration’s proposals”
      consent, agreement, acceptance, concurrence, assent, leave;
      compliance, concession, cooperation, buy-in;
      submission
      “slaves could buy their freedom, but only with the acquiescence of their masters”
      good one nwo hatr

    2. Since we’re all, ostensibly, members of the corporation, I can see how they feel justified in making those statements.

      But one veto[.45 cal ball] at a board meeting should’ve been tabled at it’s first instance……

      1. “We” are not “members of the corporation”.

        One may become a member but that is unlikely. You can become a Member Agent. In fact that is often what they claim you are. An employee.

        A Sovereign Man would either claim ‘separate from’ or ‘beneficiary’ status.

Join the Conversation

Your email address will not be published.


*