Robert Edward Orth v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW This case concerns statutory construction and constitutional claims arising from how Petitioner (Mr. Orth) has been barred from access to the law. Is the citizen in the statutory definition at 26 U.S.C. § 1402(b) an American, like the Petitioner? Do the individuals in § 1402(b) and 26 C.F.R. 1.1 share the same citizenship? Is 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1 an impermissible and undue expansion of the language in 26 U.S.C. § 1? If so, has the Respondent unduly acquired any authority not manifest in statutory language? Are the terms "any" and "any property" all inclusive terms when used in statutes and regulations? Is the Respondent in compliance with, or in violation of; 26 U.S.C. §§ 83, 212, 1001, 1011, and 1012 and regulations thereunder when the FMV of Petitioner's personal services are included in § 61(a) gross income? Does it violate Petitioner's rights to free speech, rights to petition for redress, or rights to due process, when he's penalized $4,000.00 for petitioning for a decision upon issues that are purely statutory, whether or not a correct interpretation is disclosed by the Respondent or by the reviewing court? Is this still true? "Taxpayers are entitled to know the basis of law and fact on which the Commissioner sought to sustain the deficiencies."