Whether the Petitioner's production of 'credible' evidence in the form of written admissions of unconstitutional conduct by a federal agent, citing § 7491 and thereby meeting the threshold to shift the burden of proof to the Commissioner, can be deemed insufficient by the Tax Court and the Ninth Circuit, to eliminate the Commissioner's requirement to prove the non-applicability of the claimed exception by submitting contrary evidence, as required in other Circuit Courts?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Fourth Amendment guarantees that the people shall have a right: “to be ; secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches ; and seizures.” Responding to acknowledged disadvantages of individuals and small businesses litigating against the Internal Revenue Service (‘TRS”), Congress enacted the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE RESTRUCTURING AND REFORM ACT OF 1998, otherwise known as the “TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS.” § 7491 of the Act provides that if the taxpayer introduces credible evidence with respect to any factual issue relevant to ascertaining the proper tax liability, the burden of proof shifts to the IRS for that issue. The United States Code, specifically, 1 USC §1; 22 USC §6010; 28 USC § 3002; and 29 USC §53, all essentially state, in the meaning of any Act of Congress, that a “person” includes corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, : societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals. 1. Whether the Petitioner’s production of “credible” evidence in the form of written admissions of unconstitutional conduct by a federal agent, citing ; § 7491 and thereby meeting the threshold to shift the burden of proof to the Commissioner, can be deemed insufficient by the Tax Court and the . Ninth Circuit, to eliminate the Commissioner’s requirement to prove the non-applicability of the. claimed exception by submitting contrary evidence, as required in other Circuit Courts? 2. Whether written admissions of intentional unconstitutional conduct by a federal agent constitute fraud, and thereby prohibit the collection of statutory interest, by virtue of the Federal Common Law, Equitable Doctrines, and Decisions of this Court? 3. Whether the Tax Court and Ninth Circuit, in contradiction of documentation, evidence and testimony, can assign a legal taxpayer’s ; payment for, and deduction of, a single necessary business expense to a separate employee taxpayer — not entitled to such a deduction — and thereby deny said expense, solely on the basis of using employee’s credit card, when all other business expenses charged in the same manner were approved, since the employee did not pay the credit card company for these expenses and did not attempt to deduct the expenses on his tax return? :