The Fed response letter makes an interesting misdirection, perhaps assisted by the inquiry with regards to 31 USC 5115, by pretending that the reserve issue in question is something other than the reserve used for fictional reserve banking. The correct issue of reserves is found at 12 USC 461; FR banks are required to keep (an insignificant) reserve against their demand accounts. This required reserve balance is calculated and reported by each FR bank weekly, to the regional Federal Reserve bank. Lawful money may not be used as part of this reserve. So the letter response was intended to confuse this issue, further to their long held strategy of blurring the distinction between lawful public money, issued by the Treasury under the Constitution, and private money, issued by the Fed, which is not money, but debt obligations. I got a similar line of obfuscation from the Chief Legal Counsel of the Richmond Fed bank; under no circumstances is anyone going to get in writing the true nature of the relationship between Federal Reserve debt money and income taxes.

As to the UCC-3 Reconcilation Statement issue, I have seen a lot written on the subject of how to 'correct' your Treasury account. The IRS uses this account to track the taxes they will demand, and will hold you the natural person liable for the tax debt assigned to the trust. (The IRS has to use a trust account as they are a corporation, and cannot contract with a natural person.) This is the primary purpose of the cestui que vie trust. When you collapse the trust by making an appearance, proving that you are not dead, the trustee (Sec of Treasury) has one and only one remaining duty: to return the res to you, the rightful owner. The trustee is responsible for any debts he may have allowed the trust to accumulate while he was responsible for it, so you can just leave the wreckage of the trust in his care. (You still have the duty to pay any income taxes due for the interval when you were still using their debt money, ie, this year's taxes.) Once you remove your assets, the trust has no validity. Further, since you have severed your contract with the Federal Reserve, the trust will not accumulate any new debts; the trust is non-operational as of the date of your demand. And you have no further interest in it. If the trustee made a mess of it, through fraud, false accounting, acceptance for value of your birth certificate, etc, it is his mess to clean up. You take your estate out of the bankruptcy and back into the clean air of Constitutional money. You now have no trust in the Federal government; you use real money, not debt, and you pay for your assets in full, so the Federal Reserve does not perfect liens against your assets in the future. At this point you have no contractual relationship with the Federal Reserve; you have escaped the bankers' plot to steal your assets. Let's END THE FED.

Finally, I have seen a lot written here about how the government 'owns' your legal name. This is clearly wrong; the government has established a CQVtrust in your legal name, in which the Sec of Treasury holds legal title to your estate, and you enjoy equitable title, which means you get to use the estate, but the govt owns it. Once you collapse the CQV trust by making an appearance and demand, legal title reverts to your legal name as the fictional entity/corporate person who can contract, with you the natural person as the accommodation agent. I took the further step of registering my legal name as a dba in my state, to take it out of US jurisdiction, and to make it clear that I the natural person own the name. Now the government still has a Treasury account in my legal name, but I have no interest in it, and do not use it. This is probably a clearer explanation of what EZ means when he says that the government owns that account (but it is not correct to say that the government owns the name).