<P> Under the following tax protester argument, the term "state" is used in an international meaning of "nation" or "sovereign ." The argument is that this meaning refers to the foreign status of each state to every other state including the federal state, under private international law . Under this argument, all court opinions on the subject of states being foreign to each other (and also to the federal state and possessions) have upheld this concept, and have distinguished between meanings of foreignness by using the terms private international law and public international law . Under this argument, the latter term deals with the authority the 50 States delegated to the United States government to represent American interests outside of America, grouping all those that are bound by the United States Constitution as one body, relative to those that are not bound, such as France or Britain . Under this argument, the term "private international law" signifies the foreignness of the sovereign states, or nations, of the United States system to each other, within the system . </P> <P> Tax protesters argue that the importance of the definition applies where the term "state" is the reference to the federal state as defined within a subpart or generally, then when "state" is referenced in other definitions (such as "employee") within relevant places, it has the same meaning . There are two Code sections that define "employee" within the whole of the Internal Revenue Code and both are found in parts of the Title where "state" is governed by this "special" definition . Tax protesters argue that each section defines the term "employee" as being limited to someone who works within or in the employ of a state, or who is an officer of a corporation, while the courts have ruled that the term "employee" is not limited to those persons . The definition of "wages" is that remuneration which is earned by an "employee ." Tax protesters argue that normal income taxes are taxes on wages and some laws that require things like filing a return are only required of employees . </P> <P> Tax protesters argue that there are also no conflicting definitions of "state" or "United States" to this interpretation in Title 26 of the United States Code (the Internal Revenue Code)--that both of the two times either of these terms are defined as "the 50 states," the terms are localized to the subpart . Under this argument, in those two subparts that define "state" as the 50 states, there is no mention of the District of Columbia or any territories in that definition . </P> <P> The Internal Revenue Code general definition of the term "state" in section 7701 is as follows: </P>

Where is the law that requires income tax