Freedom Law School and the Definitions Argument

Alex: Welcome back to the show. Today we're digging into something a lot of people have never heard of, a small school in Florida called Freedom Law School, and the surprising argument it makes about the federal income tax.

Jordan: And it is surprising. Their headline claim is that most Americans are not legally required to file a federal income tax return or pay the federal income tax. That is their position, not mine, and definitely not legal advice, but it is what they teach.

Alex: Right, and they lay it out as a seven step program. We're not going to walk through all seven steps today. We want to focus on the core of their case, because everything they teach really hinges on one thing, the legal definitions of two phrases, United States, and State.

Jordan: This is the part I found genuinely interesting, whatever you think of their conclusions. They start with the tax code itself, title twenty-six, section seventy-seven-oh-one. That is the definitions section for the whole Internal Revenue Code.

Alex: Paragraph nine says, quote, the term United States, when used in a geographical sense, includes only the States and the District of Columbia. And paragraph ten says the term State shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.

Jordan: The phrase that does the heavy lifting for them is includes only. Only the States and the District of Columbia. Their question is, only as opposed to what? And why would the very next paragraph have to stretch the word State just to cover the District of Columbia?

Alex: Right. Their logic is, if State already meant the fifty states, paragraph ten would be unnecessary. Whether a court would buy that is another matter entirely, but that is the argument.

Jordan: And here is where they bring their strongest material. Their point is, when Congress wants those words to mean the fifty states, it knows exactly how to say so, and they quote the laws that prove it.

Alex: Take the Fair Labor Standards Act, the federal minimum wage law. Title twenty-nine, section two-oh-three, subsection c. It says, quote, State means any State of the United States or the District of Columbia or any Territory or possession of the United States.

Jordan: Any State of the United States. Explicit. No guessing required.

Alex: Exactly. Then there is title seven, section sixty-eight-oh-two, which says State means each of the several States of the United States, plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and others. And title seven, section nineteen-ninety-one, says State shall include each of the several States, plus Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.

Jordan: So the pattern is, in law after law, Congress spells it out. Each of the several States. Any State of the United States. But in the tax code's own definitions section, that language never appears.

Alex: That is the contrast they want you to sit with. Their argument is, if Congress meant the fifty states in the tax code, it would have said the fifty states, the way it does everywhere else.

Jordan: Now, a big caveat, and we should be clear about this. This is Freedom Law School's interpretation. The I R S, the courts, and mainstream tax professionals read these statutes very differently. We are describing their case, not endorsing it, and nothing here is legal advice.

Alex: Absolutely. And to their credit, that is also their pitch. One of the options they lay out is basically, do it yourself. They say you do not have to take their word for it. Go read the actual law. Every statute we just quoted is public. You can pull up the official U S Code online and check our quotes yourself.

Jordan: That is the spirit of step two of their whole approach. Read the actual law. I actually respect that as a method, even if people land in different places. Primary sources beat somebody's summary, every time.

Alex: They present the whole thing as seven steps, and the idea is that each step builds on the last, starting with these definitions and ending with what they say is a lawful way to stop filing. Again, their claim, not ours. And alongside that, they are upfront that you can also just do the reading yourself. Their materials point you to the statutes, the definitions, and the cases they rely on.

Jordan: So where does this leave a curious person? Freedom Law School offers its seven steps as a structured way to work through all of this, and they also offer a membership program for people who want guidance. But the starting point they push is the same, read the definitions yourself and decide what you think they mean.

Alex: And if you want to look into it, their site is freedom law school dot org. That is where they publish their materials and explain the seven steps in full.

Jordan: So to recap, Freedom Law School teaches that the income tax laws, as written, hinge on narrow statutory definitions of United States and State, that other federal laws show Congress knows how to say the fifty states when it means the fifty states, and that you can verify every quote yourself in the public U S Code.

Alex: Their case, their words, worth understanding even if you disagree. Thanks for listening, and we'll catch you next time.