DOCSLIB.ORG

Public's Exhibit No. 7

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public's Exhibit No. 7 FILED March 2, 2018 INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION PETITION OF NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC ) SERVICE COMPANY FOR (1) AUTHORITY TO ) MODIFY ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR GAS ) UTILITY SERVICE THROUGH A PHASE IN OF ) RATES; (2) MODIFICATION OF THE SETTLEMENT ) AGREEMENTS APPROVED IN CAUSE NO. 43894; (3) ) APPROVAL OF NEW SCHEDULES OF RATES AND ) CHARGES, GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, ) CAUSE NO. 44988 AND RIDERS; (4) APPROVAL OF REVISED ) DEPRECIATION RATES APPLICABLE TO ITS GAS ) PLANT IN SERVICE; (5) APPROVAL OF NECESSARY ) AND APPROPRIATE ACCOUNTING RELIEF; AND (6) ) AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY RATES ) CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF IND. ) CODE CH. 8-1-2-42.73 ) INDIANA OFFICE OF UTILITY CONSUMER COUNSELOR PUBLIC'S EXHIBIT NO. 7 TESTIMONY OF OUCC WITNESS BRADLEY E. LORTON MARCH 2, 2018 Respectfully submitted, 1URC PUBL\C'S 1 TiffanyT. :r~~~( REP0RTt R Attorney Deputy Consumer Counselor Scott Franson Attorney No. 27839-49 Deputy Consumer Counselor Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 1 of50 TESTIMONY OF OUCC WITNESS BRADLEY E. LORTON, CRRA CAUSE NO. 44988 NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMP ANY LLC I. INTRODUCTION 1 Q: Please state your name and business address. 2 A: My name is Bradley E. Lorton, and my business address is 115 W. Washington 3 Street, Suite 1500 South, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46204. 4 Q: By whom are you currently employed and in what capacity? 5 A: I am a Utility Analyst in the Natural Gas Division of the Indiana Office of Utility 6 Consumer Counselor ("OUCC"). For a summary of my education and 7 professional experience, and general preparation for this case, please see 8 Appendix BEL-1 attached to my testimony. 9 Q: What is the purpose of your testimony? 10 A: I testify on the cost of common equity capital, sometimes referred to as the 11 authorized return on equity ("ROE"). In its direct case, Northern Indiana Public 12 Service Company LLC ("NIPSCO" or "Petitioner") recommended a 10.7% cost 13 of equity. Based on the results of the Discounted Cash Flow ("DCF") method, 14 Capital Asset Pricing Model ("CAPM"), and macroeconomic analysis, I conclude 15 that a cost of equity of 9.0% would be a reasonable and appropriate ROE for 16 NIPSCO. II. PETITIONER'S PROPOSED COST OF EQUITY IS TOO IDGH 17 Q: What is Petitioner's current authorized ROE? 18 A: Petitioner's current ROE of 9.9% was approved by the Commission's Order in 19 Cause No. 43894 on November 4, 2010. Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 2 of50 1 Q: What is Petitioner's proposed ROE? 2 A: Petitioner's witness Mr. Vincent V. Rea recommends a return on equity of 10.7%. 3 Q: Do you agree with Mr. Rea's recommendation? 4 A: No. 5 Q: What level of ROE do you recommend? 6 A: I recommend an ROE of9.0%. 7 Q: Why do you recommend a lower authorized ROE at this time? 8 A: Neither my DCF nor my CAPM analyses yield a return as high as NIPSCO's 9 current 9.9%, let alone Mr. Rea's proposed 10.7% cost of equity. The current 10 economic condition, both nationally and in the State of Indiana, is best described 11 as a maturing recovery. Data on bond yields, dividend yields, inflation and 12 economic growth do not support projections of double-digit rates of return. 13 Moreover, regulated public utilities tend to be less risky than the market as a 14 whole. 15 Lower ROEs have become more common, and less threatening to public 16 utilities, over the past decades. Graph 1 illustrates the long term downward 17 national trend of average annual natural gas utility ROE. Each bar represents the 18 average of authorized ROE from each calendar year between 1990 and 2016, as 19 published by Regulatory Research Associates (S&P Global Market Intelligence) 20 (Attachment BEL-1). The average for 2016 was 9.5%. Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 3 of 50 GRAPHl !AVERAGE AUTHORIZED RETURN ON EQUITYj I AmmaHy, 1990 through 2016 ! 14.00% 12 67% 12.00% 10.00% ~ -~ 8.00% ~"' ::: "E 6.00% ---- f----- --- ! 2.00% 0.00% ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Calendar Year 1 Not only has the annual natural gas utility average authorized ROE been 2 below 10% every year since 2011, but in the past four calendar years the average 3 authorized ROE has been above 10% only once, in the fourth quarter of 2014. 4 Graph 2 illustrates the quarterly averages from calendar year 2013 through 2016. Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 4 of50 GRAPH2 AVERAGE AUTHORIZED RETURN ON EQUITY QUARTERLY, 2013 THROUGH 2016 14.00% ,-------------------------------, I Source: Regulatory Research Associates, "Regulatory Focus," January 18, 1017, p. 4 I 12.00% 10.28% 10;00% 9.57% 9.47% 9.60% 9·83% 9.54% 9'84% 9.45% 9.47% 9.43% 9.75% 9-68% 9.48% 9.42% 9,47% 9.60% 6.00% -- 4.00% 2.00% - 0.00% 1 Moreover, investors are aware of the trend toward lower ROE. In March 2 2015, Moody's Investors Service issued an in-depth report titled, "Lower 3 Authorized Equity Returns Will Not Hurt Near-Term Credit Profiles," 4 (Attachment BEL-2) in which Moody's posited that lowering authorized ROE's 5 will not inhibit the flow of cash to the utility: 6 The credit profiles of US regulated utilities will remain intact over 7 the next few years despite our expectation that regulators will 8 continue to trim the sector's profitability by lowering its authorized 9 returns on equity (ROE). Persistently low interest rates and a 10 comprehensive suite of cost recovery mechanisms ensure a low 11 business risk profile for utilities, prompting regulators to scrutinize 12 their profitability, which is defined as the ratio of net income to 13 book equity. We view cash flow measures as a more important 14 rating driver than authorized ROEs, and we note that regulators 15 can lower authorized ROEs without hurting cash flow, for instance Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 5 of 50 1 by targeting depreciation, or through special rate structures. 2 Regulators can also adjust a utility's equity capitalization in its rate 3 base. All else being equal, we think most utilities would prefer a 4 thicker equity base and a lower authorized ROE over a small 5 equity layer and a high authorized ROE. 6 (Moody's Investors Service, "Lower Authorized Equity Returns 7 Will Not Hurt Near-Term Credit Profiles," Sector In-Depth, March 8 10, 2015, p. 1.) (Emphasis added.) 9 Since this article was published, long term interest rates remain low inspite 10 of recent market pressures. Cost recovery mechanisms, like NIPSCO's TDSIC 11 tracker, remain common and continue to keep business risk low. 12 Moody's goes on to point out that local distribution companies' financial 13 performance has remained stable, even with declining authorized ROEs: 14 Utilities' actual financial performance remains stable. Earned 15 ROEs, which typically lag authorized ROEs, have not fallen as 16 much as authorized returns in recent years. Since 2007, vertically 17 integrated utilities, transmission and distribution only utilities, and 18 natural gas local distribution companies have maintained steady 19 earned RO Es in the 9% - 10% range. 20 (Id.) (Emphasis added.) 21 As detailed later in my testimony, my DCF and CAPM results for 22 NIPSCO are both below 9%; therefore, I recommend 9.0% as a reasonable cost of 23 common equity in NIPSCO's capital structure. 24 Q: Do you believe your recommendation will allow Petitioner access to capital 25 on reasonable terms? 26 A: Yes. As I have noted, the long term, national trend has been toward lower ROEs, 27 and specifically ROEs below 10%. As I elaborate in Section III of my testimony, I 28 use the same Combination Utility proxy group as Mr. Rea, and add a Gas Utility 29 proxy group to my analysis. Graph 3 compares the proportion of long term debt Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 6 of50 1 in the capital structures of each company in Mr. Rea's Combination Utility Group 2 to that of NIPSCO. Graph 4 makes the same comparison of NIPSCO to 3 companies in the Gas Utility Group. GRAPH3 'i,m1g Term Debt Ratio 2018 I Combination Utility Group J 70.0% Source: Value Line, December 1, 2017 60.0% .g 50.0% i::, ~· ~ 40.0% Cl 34.0% 33.5% 30.0% ] 30.0% ~ sS 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Public's Exhibit No. 7 Cause No. 44988 Page 7 of 50 GRAPH4 Long Term Debt Ratio 2018 I Gas Utility Group I 60.0% Source: Value Line, December 1, 2017 50.0% -- 49.5% ---- __48.0% __ ----47..5-%- -- -------o-· -- - - ------- - - - -- - - - --- - ----- - ------ - - --- 45.5 1/o 45.0% 44.0¾ ~"" 40.0% I:::; .::;; "' ~ 30.0% ~ e~ ~ 20.0% ~ 10.0% ! I I 0.0% , Spire, Inc. Southwest Gas South Jersey New Jersey Northwest Atmos Energy NIPSCO L_______________ In_d_us_tr_ies __ R_e_so_ur_ce_s __N_a_tu_raJ_G_a_s ___c_o_rp_. _______, 1 Q: Why is a 9.0% ROE reasonable? 2 A: My DCF model indicated an ROE of 9.0% for the combination utility proxy 3 group and 8.8% for the gas utility proxy group. My CAPM analysis results 4 indicated an ROE of 7.12% for the combination utility proxy group, and 7.48% 5 for the gas utility proxy group. 6 As bond yields have remained in a historically low range, my review of 5- 7 year, 10-year, 20-year and 30-year constant maturity Treasury bonds do not 8 produce a CAPM risk free rate above 3.0%.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Consolidated Primary Election Results Summary
    03/02/2004 Consolidated Primary Election Results - Sonoma County Page 1 of 18 Sonoma County Consolidated Primary Election March 2, 2004 Final Official Canvass PRESIDENT DEM Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage John F Kerry 48,667 62.6% John Edwards 14,118 18.2% Dennis J Kucinich 6,881 8.8% Howard Dean 3,427 4.4% Wesley Clark 1,730 2.2% Joe Lieberman 921 1.2% Al Sharpton 601 0.8% Carol Moseley Braun 583 0.7% Dick Gephardt 388 0.5% Write-in candidate(s) 350 0.5% Lyndon LaRouche 111 0.1% PRESIDENT REP Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage George W Bush 32,813 94.4% Write-in candidate(s) 1,945 5.6% PRESIDENT AI Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage Michael A Peroutka 562 69.0% Write-in candidate(s) 252 31.0% PRESIDENT GRN Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 03/02/2004 Consolidated Primary Election Results - Sonoma County Page 2 of 18 Vote Count Percentage Peter Miguel Camejo 2,087 73.8% Lorna Salzman 307 10.9% Write-in candidate(s) 203 7.2% David Cobb 197 7.0% Kent Mesplay 34 1.2% PRESIDENT LIB Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage Gary Nolan 330 54.0% Aaron Russo 141 23.1% Michael Badnarik 101 16.5% Write-in candidate(s) 39 6.4% PRESIDENT NAT Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage Write-in candidate(s) 25 100.0% NO CANDIDATE HAS FILED 0 0.0% PRESIDENT PF Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage Leonard Peltier 147 62.8% Walter F Brown 67 28.6% Write-in candidate(s) 20 8.5% PRESIDENT DEM DTS Completed Precincts: 454 of 454 Vote Count Percentage John F
    [Show full text]
  • CONSOLIDATED PRIMARY ELECTION MARCH 2, 2004 Results As of 03/24/2004 Certified Election Results
    CONSOLIDATED PRIMARY ELECTION MARCH 2, 2004 Results as of 03/24/2004 Certified Election Results PRECINCTS COUNTED - TOTAL Completed Precincts: 132 of 132 Reg/Turnout Percentage REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL 45,734 BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 18,027 39.42% BALLOTS CAST - DEMOCRATIC 7,330 16.03% BALLOTS CAST - REPUBLICAN 9,031 19.75% BALLOTS CAST - AMERICAN INDEPENDENT 228 0.50% BALLOTS CAST - GREEN 29 0.06% BALLOTS CAST - LIBERTARIAN 43 0.09% BALLOTS CAST - NATURAL LAW 6 0.01% BALLOTS CAST - PEACE AND FREEDOM 2 0.00% BALLOTS CAST - DEM DECLINE TO STATE 119 0.26% BALLOTS CAST - REP DECLINE TO STATE 95 0.21% BALLOTS CAST - AI DECLINE TO STATE 17 0.04% BALLOTS CAST - NONPARTISAN 1,127 2.46% PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE DEMOCRAT AND DECLINE TO STATE Vote For: 1 Completed Precincts: 132 of 132 Candidate Name Vote Count Percentage JOHN F. KERRY 4,280 63.54% JOHN EDWARDS 1,616 23.99% HOWARD DEAN 276 4.10% JOE LIEBERMAN 122 1.81% CAROL MOSELEY BRAUN 120 1.78% AL SHARPTON 102 1.51% WESLEY CLARK 86 1.28% DICK GEPHARDT 62 0.92% DENNIS J. KUCINICH 55 0.82% LYNDON LAROUCHE 17 0.25% PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS ONLY Vote For: 1 Completed Precincts: 132 of 132 Candidate Name Vote Count Percentage JOHN F. KERRY 4,219 63.68% JOHN EDWARDS 1,578 23.82% HOWARD DEAN 271 4.09% JOE LIEBERMAN 122 1.84% CAROL MOSELEY BRAUN 118 1.78% AL SHARPTON 101 1.52% WESLEY CLARK 86 1.30% DICK GEPHARDT 62 0.94% DENNIS J. KUCINICH 51 0.77% LYNDON LAROUCHE 17 0.26% PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE DECLINE TO STATE VOTERS ONLY Vote For: 1 Completed Precincts: 132 of 132 Candidate Name Vote Count Percentage JOHN F.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Republic Magazine Issue 3
    Republic Magazine Issue 3 www.republicmagazine.com 1 Republic Publishing, LLC PO Box 10577 Newport Beach, CA 92658 tel: 714.436.1234 or 866.437.6570 fax: 714.455.2091 Volume I Issue 3 Publisher In This Issue George Shepherd Duty, Honor, Country 2007 Managing Editor An Open Letter to the New Generation of Military Officers Gary Franchi Serving and Protecting Our Nation Design/Layout Manager By Dr. Bob Bowman 4 Samuel Anthony Ettaro Constitiutional 6 Copy Editor Discipline Glenn Craven Militia By Michael Badnarik Contributing Writers Property of We The People 7 Jack Blood By Mark Gregory Keornke Michael Badnarik 10 Preserving the Mark Gregory Keornke 4th Estate Samuel Anthony Ettaro Barie Zwicker We Are The Media. G. Edward Griffin Salute to By Jack Blood Gary Franchi Aaron Russo Jelena Zanko Larry R. Bradley 18 By G. Edward Griffin George Shepherd Perspective Making alternative energies Advertising mainstream choices. George Shepherd Toll Free: 866.437.6570 By Samuel Anthony Ettaro email: 23 george @republicmagazine.com Interview A Discussion With Louder Constitutional Red Alert! Subscriptions/Bulk Than Words House passes Activist Orders By Jelena Zanko 25 www.republicmagazine.com 20 By Lee Rogers or call: 866.437.6570 Mail-In Orders When Your Party PO Box 10577 We Were Born 28 Fails You Newport Beach, CA 92658 30 Kings By Larry Bradley Cover Design By Samuel Anthony Ettaro By George Shepherd Republic Magazine is Published Bi-Monthly Publisher’s Disclaimer: The Republic Magazine staff and Republic Publishing, LLC have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the infor- Advertise Your Business mation presented within these pages.
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Becket Fx: 413-623-6036
    557 Main Street, Becket, MA 01223 ph: 413-623-8934 Town of Becket fx: 413-623-6036 Presidential Primary Minutes 3/2/04 Pursuant to the foregoing warrant, the PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY was held at the Becket Town Hall on March 2, 2004, from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Prior to opening, the Ballot Box was publicly opened, examined and found to be empty; the register was set at zero. The polls opened at 7:00 a.m. Results of the votes for the candidates of political parties are as follows: DEMOCRATIC VOTES Presidential Preference Blanks 0 Richard Gephardt 0 Joseph Lieberman 2 Wesley K. Clark 0 Howard Dean 17 Carol Moseley Braun 0 John Edwards 17 Dennis J. Kucinich 12 John F. Kerry 70 Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. 0 Al Sharpton 0 NO PREFERENCE 0 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 118 State Committee Man Blanks 17 Peter G. Arlos 50 Matt L. Barron 51 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 118 State Committee Woman Blanks 38 Margaret Johnson Ware 80 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 118 Town Committee Blanks 3565 Albert Barvenik 58 Francis E. Barvenik 57 Giles (Gil) T. Falcone 71 Jane P. Falcone 65 Joan Samuels Kaiser 64 Judith A. Loeb 64 James Soluri 59 Sally M. Soluri 59 Maryellen D. Lake 65 Write Ins: 3 TOTAL VOTES 4130 (Town Committee) Group Blanks 64 GROUP 54 TOTAL VOTES 118 REPUBLICAN VOTES Presidential Preference Blanks 0 George W. Bush 6 NO PREFERENCE 1 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 7 State Committee Man Blanks 7 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 7 State Committee Woman Blanks 7 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 7 Town Committee Blanks 70 Write Ins: 0 TOTAL VOTES 70 GREEN-RAINBOW VOTES Presidential Preference
    [Show full text]
  • Third Parties in the U.S. Political System: What External and Internal Issues Shape Public Perception of Libertarian Party/Polit
    University of Texas at El Paso DigitalCommons@UTEP Open Access Theses & Dissertations 2019-01-01 Third Parties in the U.S. Political System: What External and Internal Issues Shape Public Perception of Libertarian Party/Politicians? Jacqueline Ann Fiest University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd Part of the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Fiest, Jacqueline Ann, "Third Parties in the U.S. Political System: What External and Internal Issues Shape Public Perception of Libertarian Party/Politicians?" (2019). Open Access Theses & Dissertations. 1985. https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd/1985 This is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UTEP. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UTEP. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THIRD PARTIES IN THE U.S. POLITICAL SYSTEM WHAT EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL ISSUES SHAPE PUBLIC PRECEPTION OF LIBERTARIAN PARTY/POLITICIANS? JACQUELINE ANN FIEST Master’s Program in Communication APPROVED: Eduardo Barrera, Ph.D., Chair Sarah De Los Santos Upton, Ph.D. Pratyusha Basu, Ph.D. Stephen Crites, Ph.D. Dean of the Graduate School Copyright © by Jacqueline Ann Fiest 2019 Dedication This paper is dedicated to my dear friend Charlotte Wiedel. This would not have been possible without you. Thank you. THIRD PARTIES IN THE U.S. POLITICAL SYSTEM WHAT EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL ISSUES SHAPE PUBLIC PRECEPTION OF LIBERTARIAN PARTY/POLITICIANS? by JACQUELINE ANN FIEST, BA THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at El Paso in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO May 2019 Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Frequently Asked Questions
    Libertarian Party Presidential Nominating Convention Atlanta 2004 M I N U T E S Geoff Neale gaveled the Libertarian Party Presidential Nominating Convention to order at 10:12 on Friday, May 28, 2004 in Atlanta at the Marriott Marquis hotel following the keynote address by Dr. Mary Ruwart. Geoff introduced Gary Johnson, chair of the credentials committee. Credentials Committee Gary Johnson introduced the members of the committee, which included: Gary Johnson, chair Emily Salvette, secretary BetteRose Ryan Dena Brudigam Jack Tanner Rock Howard Chris Ferris James Hudler Ray Acosta Rich Maroney He then reviewed the criteria for validating delegates as outlined in the Party bylaws. On hand for this session were 465 delegates. Gerhard Langguth of Arkansas moved to postpone convention order of business item #4, retention of planks from the previous platform, until after order of business item #7, the platform committee report. Gerhard offered this as a means of allowing additional time for delegates to complete (and tabulate) their platform plank ballots. Libertarian Party Presidential Nominating Convention Minutes, Atlanta 2004 Page 1 of 41 The motion failed. Aaron Starr of California moved to suspend the rules eliminating order of business item #4 and accept all platform planks ratified in Indianapolis in 2002. The motion failed. A next motion proposed to accept all platform planks en masse by a voice vote. The motion failed. Ken Bisson of Virginia moved to accept the agenda as printed in the convention binder. This motion passed. Treasurer’s report Bill Redpath discussed the improving financial position of the Libertarian Party. Regrettably, at the end of 2003 liabilities exceeded assets by $200k.
    [Show full text]
  • An Economic Analysis of the Prime Time Access Rule
    BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In re: Review of the Prime Time Access Rule, Section 73.658 (k) of the Commission’s } MM Docket No. 94-123 Rules AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE PRIME TIME ACCESS RULE March 7, 1995 ECONOMISTS INCORPORATED WASHINGTON, D.C. CONTENTS I. Introduction……………………………...……………………………………………1 II. Is ABC, CBS or NBC Dominant Today? A. No single network dominates any market...........................................................5 B. Factors facilitating the growth of competing video distributors ................................................................................................7 1. Cable penetration ....................................................................................7 2. Number and strength of independent stations.........................................9 3. Other video outlets................................................................................12 C. Competing video distributors............................................................................13 1. New broadcast networks .......................................................................13 2. New cable networks..............................................................................16 3. First-run syndication .............................................................................17 D. Impact on networks of increased competition ..................................................18 1. Audience shares ....................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • SEDM Exhibit Catalog
    SEDM Exhibit Catalog EXHIBIT CATALOG Back to home Web capture of this page (right click and select "Save As"). Includes active hotlinks for offline use TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. INDEX OF EXHIBITS BY EXHIBIT NUMBER 1.1 Citizenship, Domicile, and Residency 1.2 Legislative Intent 1.3 Law 1.4 Jurisdiction 1.5 Enforcement Authority 1.6 Money 1.7 Franchises 1.8 Corporatization and Privatization of the Government 1.9 Taxation 1.10 Discovery 1.11 Government and Legal Profession Corruption, Secrecy, and Scams 1.12 Scam Watch 2. TOPICAL INDEX OF EXHIBITS This page contains a listing of all the evidence and exhibits available for use in crafting either State or Federal tax notice response letters. In the right hand column, it also lists which items in our Member Bookstore that the exhibits are currently used in. To view an exhibit, simply click on the Exhibit number. You will need to have the free Adobe Acrobat reader installed on your system to view the exhibits. If you don't heed our advice and upgrade to the latest Acrobat Reader, then you most certainly will get tons of weird errors when trying to open most but not all of the files listed below. The Topical Index of Exhibits at the bottom of this page organizes the exhibit by subject, which will help you locate an exhibit that relates to a particular subject. For additional evidence useful in preparing your response letter, consult the following: Tax Deposition Questions, Form #03.016 (OFFSITE LINK)-Family Guardian Website. Over 700 additional exhibits to use in your Response Letters Sovereignty Forms and Instructions Online, Form #10.004, Evidence Section (OFFSITE LINK)-many useful exhibits in Acrobat format COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Some of the content on this page derives from third party sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Results Summary Report
    GEMS ELECTION RESULTS Page 1 of 29 Election Summary Report 03/23/04 DIRECT PRIMARY ELECTION 14:53:40 Summary For Jurisdiction Wide, All Counters, All Races March 2, 2004 – Official Final Registered Voters 679145 Num. Report Precinct 1096 - Num. Reporting 1096 100.00% PRESIDENT DEM DEM Total Number of Precincts 1096 Precincts Reporting 1096 100.0 % Total Votes 202777 JOHN F. KERRY DEM 127586 62.92 % JOHN EDWARDS DEM 33502 16.52 % DENNIS J. KUCINICH DEM 18443 9.10 % HOWARD DEAN DEM 8495 4.19 % AL SHARPTON DEM 6224 3.07 % WESLEY CLARK DEM 2888 1.42 % JOE LIEBERMAN DEM 1899 0.94 % CAROL MOSELEY BRAUN DEM 1542 0.76 % DICK GEPHARDT DEM 661 0.33 % LYNDON LAROUCHE DEM 377 0.19 % Write-in Votes 1160 0.57 % PRESIDENT D-DEC DEM Total Number of Precincts 1096 Precincts Reporting 1096 100.0 % Total Votes 188589 JOHN F. KERRY DEM 120124 63.70% JOHN EDWARDS DEM 30844 16.36% DENNIS J. KUCINICH DEM 16098 8.54% HOWARD DEAN DEM 7764 4.12% AL SHARPTON DEM 5807 3.08% WESLEY CLARK DEM 2642 1.40% JOE LIEBERMAN DEM 1780 0.94% CAROL MOSELEY BRAUN DEM 1453 0.77% DICK GEPHARDT DEM 639 0.34% LYNDON LAROUCHE DEM 345 0.18% Write-in Votes 1093 0.58% PRESIDENT D- DTS DEM Total Number of Precincts 1096 Precincts Reporting 1096 100.0 % Total Votes 14188 file://A:\official%20final%20summary.htm 4/29/2004 GEMS ELECTION RESULTS Page 2 of 29 JOHN F. KERRY DEM 7462 52.59% JOHN EDWARDS DEM 2658 18.73% DENNIS J.
    [Show full text]
  • Calif Freedom July04200dpi
    C reedom July 2004 The official publication of the Libertarian Party of California LPC Treks to Atlanta Helps Select Pres. Nominee Photo: Elizabeth C. Brierly Photo: he 2004 convention of the books and tapes in the vendor Libertarian Party, held area. T May 27–31, in Atlanta, The LPC once again had Georgia, was one of the most many spots left open in its del- exciting in recent years. The egation, so everyone is heartily California delegates in atten- encouraged to run for a dele- dance found ourselves being in- gate slot in 2006, and to absorb spired by libertarian speakers that year’s convention and the and celebrities, learning new joys of a long weekend im- political tactics in myriad in- mersed in like–minded philoso- formative workshops, dancing phers, activists, friends, and to lively rock and blues music, teachers. and grudgingly but happily The national LP convention opening our wallets to support is the ideal occasion at which the Party and our hard–working to renew our resolve, to share candidates. And joined by what’s working in our state and about a thousand fellow what’s not, collect great ideas Libertarians from all over the and new ways of looking at our country, of course we debated issues and goals, and to just • On the convention floor, LPC delegates hold a quick vote to credential a fellow delegate, by day on the convention floor, plain have fun. • May 30. and by night waxed philosoph- ical with the diehards among us. We worked hard to carry out California–Based Libertarian TV Talk Show the business of the convention, voting for new Platform planks, new Party leadership, and most Tapes Interviews at National Convention enthralling of all, electing the 2004 Presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rejuvenation of the Libertarian Party of West Virginia
    Published for friends & supporters of the Libertarian Party Libertarian National Committee, Inc. + 2600 Virginia Ave, NW, Suite 200 September 2007 Washington, DC 20037 4. Phone: (202) 333-0008 ♦ Fax: (202) 333-0072 The Rejuvenation of the Libertarian Party of West Virginia Active state and county affiliates of the Liber- the Acting Chair of the LPWV. The group made a tarian Party are essential for our success. Libertar- public call for LP members in the state to attend, ian Party affiliates engage voters in outreach, in- and held a meeting with 21 people where they be- spire activists, and strengthen the Libertarian com- gan amending the bylaws proposal Kirsten had munity, essentially fueling the Libertarian grass- created. Shortly afterward, with the help of Dr. Jim roots movement. The success of a Libertarian Lark, the bylaws were adopted, and the group Party affiliate is dependent upon the generous ef- moved on to member enrollment, the election of forts of volunteers. However, volunteers often get officers and the question of ballot access. discouraged due to the daunting tasks they face, Gubernatorial ballot access in West Virginia leading affiliates to become dormant. This is what requires 2 percent of the votes cast for governor in happened to the Libertarian Party of West Virginia. the previous election (14,889 valid signatures are But thanks to the efforts of a few dedicated Liber- needed for 2007). Unfortunately, West Virginia is a tarians, especially Kirsten Milligan, the Libertarian difficult state in which to petition, as it is very rural Party of West Virginia (LPWV) is coming back to and has heavy snow and rain during the winter life! and spring.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 2 Fall C 09-01-06.Indd
    TIPS FOR TECH JOBS LET’S GET STUDENTS “LIFE IN TRAVELLING FOR KINKY ABROAD2 GRADS3 HELL”5 AGAIN6 : Sept. 5 - Sept. 18, 2006 Newspaper for the University of Houston-Downtown Fall Volume 37 Issue 2 SD t uateline d e n t - R u n s iD n cowntown e v o l u m e o n e No Taxation CURRENT EXHIBITION Joan Wich & Company (without an explanation) Gallery The Things I See the money also make the rules,” A Documentary said Russo. Preview of Russo explains in an September 8 - October interview with the Conscious 14, 2006 America: Freedom Media Network that, while many to Fascism people believe the Federal Reserve Reception for the is a governmental institution Artist necessary for the survival of the Friday, September 8 By Tayvis Dunnahoe U.S. economy, the Fed actually 6 - 8 pm Staff Writer exists as a central bank much like what was prescribed in the 4411 Montrose Blvd. Communist Manifesto. In nearly What do politics, war, a century of control, the Federal economics, and legislation have Reserve, in conjunction with large in common? In 2006, these corporations, have successfully events develop rapidly and often geared an economy where average FLOYD NEWSUM, UHD ARTS AND HUMANITIES PROF. under the radar of mainstream citizens are laden with debt, overly media. The feeling that the world taxed, and sustain themselves is developing a new personality with a currency that is virtually that is somewhat augmented by worthless without its historically same year was passed in an effort unconstitutional.” He goes further and political status within the technology, political control, intended gold-backing.
    [Show full text]