PDA

View Full Version : Company beats IRS penalties with Lawful Money



JohnnyCash
09-12-12, 02:59 AM
Here's a traditional corporation, with EIN, bank account & W4/W2 employees - your typical small business ensnared in the system. The company was a weekly depositor of federal withholding & employment taxes. For example, If payday was Tuesday then company was required by statute to pay US Treasury the following Tuesday. In 2011 company was late with payments (some weeks over a month late) and racked up penalties over $4800. Here's the timeline, attachments are below...

April 2012- IRS sends CP161 notice (Company ignores that one)
June 2012 - IRS sends CP504B letter, Notice of Intent to Levy (yeah whatever)
July 2012 - IRS sends FNOITL, Final Notice Of Intent To Levy

Are you thinking this should be an easy win for the IRS? that they'll steamroll right over the company? No so fast, the company was experimenting with redeeming Lawful Money. Company calls the IRS to negotiate a deal, rep says cannot do it, suggests the Form 843. So in July 2012 company files that Request for Abatement. They attach several reasons (Line 7), most were pretty lame in my estimation, one cites the weak economy and one only asks for 1-day subtraction & recalculation of penalties. Except one argument was, I'm paraphrasing, "our bank account contains lawful money pursuant to 12 USC 411 and you shouldn't assume it's yours to take. Legal issues may result ...". Company also attached copy of a stamped lawful money (http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/6742/redeemedbills.jpg) bank deposit.



http://jesse2012.com/CP161_.jpg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://jesse2012.com/CP504B.jpg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://jesse2012.com/FNOITL.jpg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://jesse2012.com/f843.jpg

JohnnyCash
09-12-12, 03:01 AM
August 2012 - IRS sends LTR2645 "we need more time" 45-day letter signed by a "Mary Hannah."



http://jesse2012.com/LTR2645_.jpg
Sept. 2012 - IRS folds. IRS decides to comply with the law and sends CP210 letter (http://jesse2012.com/CP210.jpg) from Odgen. Company owes zero:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://jesse2012.com/CP210.jpg

David Merrill
09-12-12, 10:08 AM
Thank you for sharing that. It seems incomplete. Where is the Demand?

As I understand the supplements (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?677-Lawful-money&p=7794&viewfull=1#post7794) there is a Deposit Slip with the Demand and a Memorandum/Attachment to the IRS Form with this quote:



III. We should not presume the IRS has the right to seize our property, as proposed. If the IRS were to levy our bank account property interesting legal and jurisdictional issues would result considering that a portion of said account contains redeemed lawful money pursuant to 12 USC Section 411.

Please sanitize and show us those Demand related items too.

JohnnyCash
09-12-12, 12:39 PM
Ah yes. Here are the Form 843 attachments. (Bear with me as I get it uploaded. NOTE to other posters: "attachments" taller than 600 pixels are reduced to that size by forum software. But if your image is external, sitting on the internet, you can use the IMAGE tag and get it full size.)

And to head off the questions, this is not my company (no ownership), nor am I an employee.

http://jesse2012.com/f843attach.jpg

David Merrill
09-12-12, 04:57 PM
I am glad the IRS backed down. But as far as the science goes - the Attachment is loaded with great arguments to forgive. Too bad about that.

I call it shotgunning. There are a lot of good results but...

The downside to shotgunning is that a trained attorney opposing will grab on to the weakest argument like a pit bull and the good arguments seem to fade off somewhere.

stoneFree
09-12-12, 09:29 PM
You haven't heard? The IRS now grants abatements for funniest Line 7 arguments yet. It's called the Golden Egg Abatement :D Lemme tell ya, tough economy and arguments about geese mean nothing to the IRS. That company violated the statutes by paying late and should've been penalized or levied. That third reason was the winner; of course you are right though, the company left the IRS multiple reasons to grant abatement and we can't say that conclusively. Line III also seems like a veiled threat at litigation - the govt hates to litigate!

It's reminiscent of my early days discovering Planet Merrill. I fought a traffic ticket using some common law strategy and documents I barely knew. But it seemed to cause the court to schedule me into a special hearing day where no accusing law enforcement showed and all appealers were let off with "Not responsible, lack of prosecution". My take is they didn't want to entertain, link, or give any credit to, my use of the LEGAL NAME/Common Law defense.

David Merrill
09-12-12, 11:01 PM
I am quite certain that the lawful money redemption is the winner.

I am hopeful that soon we will have somebody confident enough to let the one argument ride solo.

martin earl
09-13-12, 01:24 AM
I spent the last few days going over income tax cases. I was specifically looking for cases which were 'wins' against the IRS, or income taxes dating back to the civil war era.

I honestly could find no common thread/defense/reason for the 'wins'. I have personally spoken to people who have won in such cases, again, nothing that would be a 'general rule' for winning. I use the word "win" but they still spent months if not years tied in a battle with the machine, not good.

In fact, it is the lack of serious opposition, discussion (other than loud thunderings from at-turners on internet sites) or anything from the IRS on the matter of redemption per 12-USC 411.

It would seem it is the ONE subject they have ignored or attempted to discredit off the record. That is very, very telling to me. Thank you to Johnny Cash for this information and for all of those willing to demand their lawful right to redemption from the Federal peonage system.

David Merrill
09-13-12, 02:37 AM
A new suitor filed a LoR in California on Monday. It took three hours!

The case has yet to show up on PACER.

JohnnyCash
09-13-12, 02:12 PM
You're welcome. I see on that final notice the Ogden campus has fired-up their time machine again; traveling forward to Sept. 17th to print the letter and then back again to mail it so company could receive it on Sept 10th. HELLO! If they're fudging the record on that, what else are they making up, huh?

And 10 to 1 there's no Mary Hannah working at the IRS. Next time you call the IRS and the representative answers, ask if that's their real name.

John Howard
09-13-12, 02:54 PM
I am quite certain that the lawful money redemption is the winner.

I am hopeful that soon we will have somebody confident enough to let the one argument ride solo.

I have been experimenting with IRS for 30 years now. It has been a very expensive hobby. So here we go, lawful money alone. Stay tuned.

David Merrill
09-13-12, 03:12 PM
You're welcome. I see on that final notice the Ogden campus has fired-up their time machine again; traveling forward to Sept. 17th to print the letter and then back again to mail it so company could receive it on Sept 10th. HELLO! If they're fudging the record on that, what else are they making up, huh?

And 10 to 1 there's no Mary Hannah working at the IRS. Next time you call the IRS and the representative answers, ask if that's their real name.

Indeed! It makes you wonder.

The new suitor's case showed up on PACER this morning.





I have been experimenting with IRS for 30 years now. It has been a very expensive hobby. So here we go, lawful money alone. Stay tuned.

I gather that you are in administrative process/accusation by the IRS and are ready to duplicate the Form 842 Abatement with only one item on the Attachment?

Good for you! Thank you for sharing.

John Howard
09-13-12, 03:52 PM
Is my name going to be a second issue? I plan on filing as True Name DBA Legal Name.

David Merrill
09-13-12, 04:30 PM
Is my name going to be a second issue? I plan on filing as True Name DBA Legal Name.


Gathering that you will be filing the Form 842, Attachment and Transaction with a Redeemed Lawful Money stamp I do not imagine that your doing business as the legal/full name is an issue. The small company in the example here was doing business as too. In other words the remedy is designed for banking institutions and your legal entity is like that.

Communication is synonymous with creation; and only beings of like kind can truly communicate.

David Merrill
09-16-12, 07:54 AM
You haven't heard? The IRS now grants abatements for funniest Line 7 arguments yet. It's called the Golden Egg Abatement :D Lemme tell ya, tough economy and arguments about geese mean nothing to the IRS. That company violated the statutes by paying late and should've been penalized or levied. That third reason was the winner; of course you are right though, the company left the IRS multiple reasons to grant abatement and we can't say that conclusively. Line III also seems like a veiled threat at litigation - the govt hates to litigate!

It's reminiscent of my early days discovering Planet Merrill. I fought a traffic ticket using some common law strategy and documents I barely knew. But it seemed to cause the court to schedule me into a special hearing day where no accusing law enforcement showed and all appealers were let off with "Not responsible, lack of prosecution". My take is they didn't want to entertain, link, or give any credit to, my use of the LEGAL NAME/Common Law defense.


Yet wouldn't it be a wonderful demonstration that by projecting love into the IRS the forgiveness was issued?

The letter is dated tomorrow - September 17. Is there something special about tomorrow? Wouldn't that be prophetic if the IMF and World Bank imploded or otherwise forgave all debt simply because debt cannot be utilized sustainably as money? - And that, eleven years and one week after the original Demand for Redemption (http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/8445/billofexchange.pdf) came to Judgment?


Love,

David Merrill.

John Howard
09-18-12, 02:17 PM
I sent the package yesterday. It consisted of a cover letter, a pile of 843s, copies of the back of some checks, and one $1 redeemed FRN. No shotgun, just a sling and a stone.

martin earl
10-21-12, 03:48 PM
I sent the package yesterday. It consisted of a cover letter, a pile of 843s, copies of the back of some checks, and one $1 redeemed FRN. No shotgun, just a sling and a stone.

"I would show unto the world that faith is things which are hoped for and not seen; wherefore, dispute not because ye see not, for ye receive no witness until after the trial of your faith."

Most are not willing to walk by faith, you are, and you will receive your witness, is my prayer.

David Merrill
10-21-12, 08:34 PM
"I would show unto the world that faith is things which are hoped for and not seen; wherefore, dispute not because ye see not, for ye receive no witness until after the trial of your faith."

Most are not willing to walk by faith, you are, and you will receive your witness, is my prayer.

Especially with it already in the mail, I want you to truly feel forgiveness. Know and understand what it is in your head and feel it in your stomach and heart too.

Please get back to us when you hear from the IRS.

John Howard
10-22-12, 02:25 PM
"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Some would say we have an unfair advantage over them.

David Merrill
10-22-12, 03:16 PM
Come to think of it by "you" I meant everybody conscious of Martin Earl's mailing.

John Howard
12-03-12, 06:59 PM
Please get back to us when you hear from the IRS.

I suppose no news is good news in this case.

I was going through some old notices and the thought occurred to me, do they expect me to create money out of thin air? Then I remembered, that's what Federal Reserve banks do.

For thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for naught, and ye shall be redeemed without money. Isaiah 52:3

Darkmagus
12-04-12, 06:05 AM
Yeah, I doubt it. No Maureen Greene either! You know her don't you? Ogden location? lol

And 10 to 1 there's no Mary Hannah working at the IRS. Next time you call the IRS and the representative answers, ask if that's their real name.[/QUOTE]

David Merrill
12-05-12, 08:32 AM
Great points!

This brings to mind my $20M lien and Bill of Exchange for all the debt in the world.

Gregory Harold
01-06-13, 02:53 AM
It has been my experience that the IRS generally allows a one time penalty abatement. I think this also has to be considered in this case.

Greg

JohnnyCash
01-06-13, 05:12 AM
This company actually received IRS late notices for 3 quarters of 2011, 2nd QTR, 3rd QTR, and 4th QTR. The company filed three separate Form 843 Abatement requests (with similar 4-point argument and lawful money demand attached) and then received three separate notices of forgiveness. Total victory of over $8k.

Nice try though, Greg. Play again?

martin earl
01-15-13, 02:57 AM
This company actually received IRS late notices for 3 quarters of 2011, 2nd QTR, 3rd QTR, and 4th QTR. The company filed three separate Form 843 Abatement requests (with similar 4-point argument and lawful money demand attached) and then received three separate notices of forgiveness. Total victory of over $8k.

Nice try though, Greg. Play again?

Johnny'onthemoney'Cash!! :D

JohnnyCash
01-15-13, 10:21 PM
heh. Just like to address some misconceptions I've seen about this victory. Some have indicated the Company paid in full eventually so this was just a standard penalty abatement, no big deal. No. Company paid late. Every agreement/contract calling for timely payments includes PENALTIES for late payments. This is standard contract law - without late penalties there's no incentive to pay on time. Here the company paid late, admits to paying late, and by all outward appearance SHOULD HAVE BEEN PENALIZED by statute. Something scared the banking cartel/IRS off. Did I tell you the company paid LATE? 56 days late.


The "Statement of Adjustment to Your Account" from the IRS states that it is the result of "your inquiry of July 19, 2012."

But the "suitor" doesn't supply a copy of that, either.

So we don't know what the suitor said, and we don't know why the IRS did what it did, and from that we are supposed to believe that the abatement was due to some gibberish about "lawful money"?Thanks to Quixote, the Q (http://jesse2012.com/qool-aid.jpg) has discovered this success. The quote above is from LPC (Denial B. Evans). My answer: I did supply a copy of that. The "inquiry of July 19, 2012" was the Form 843 with attachments (4 arguments with Lawful Money deposit ticket). That's it. The date on the Form 843 must've been redacted but that was all company sent. Then "Mary Hannah" responding for the IRS calls it "correspondence" (huh? since when is a 843 filing correspondence?) but it was just that 843 with attachments that was sent. Finally then, on Sept 10th company received a 2-page reply (page1 shown & page2 was just a mostly blank page with a cut-out $0 due coupon on bottom). That's it. Does LPC actually think the IRS is gonna admit the SCAM? Oh yeah, we granted your abatement because lawful money is outside the Fed Reserve system. Not gonna happen, as that would reveal the scam!

Here's how I imagine it went down in the Odgen Service Center:
Counsel1: This one's attached evidence of lawful money.
Counsel2: Shat.
Counsel1: What?"
Counsel2: It's the past tense of...
Counsel1: No! this looks like the real deal, like that STSC group in Colorado.
Counsel2: What are our options?
Counsel1: We could bluff 'em.
Counsel2: But if they persist it's litigation and we'd lose.
Counsel1: Yep, and our loss would be plastered all over the internet.
Counsel2: I think we have to let this one go.
Counsel1: Yeah. Full abatement.

JohnnyCash
02-25-13, 11:40 PM
Update; seems this company still has trouble following the statutes with regard to payroll taxes:

http://s12.postimage.org/wx0jgbonh/CP276_B.jpg

David Lyn
02-26-13, 12:49 AM
I have been experimenting with IRS for 30 years now. It has been a very expensive hobby. So here we go, lawful money alone. Stay tuned.

Is there any update John Howard?

freedomfighter
03-09-13, 05:50 PM
Ah yes. Here are the Form 843 attachments. (Bear with me as I get it uploaded. NOTE to other posters: "attachments" taller than 600 pixels are reduced to that size by forum software. But if your image is external, sitting on the internet, you can use the IMAGE tag and get it full size.)

And to head off the questions, this is not my company (no ownership), nor am I an employee.

http://jesse2012.com/f843attach.jpg

What is the deposit slip for? I dont understand this.. or how this piece works.. can you explain what was deposited and to where for how much and why? and how to use the stamp.. thanks in advance for your time.. have an awesome day! :cool:

JohnnyCash
03-18-13, 03:34 PM
Welcome freedomfighter. As I understand, the company banked some of its income as lawful money by stamping the backside of deposited checks like this: http://jesse2012.com/boaCHECK.jpg Also called a 'restricted endorsement.' The similar stamped receipt shown probably functions as a reminder or indicator of that lawful money deposit. The amount appears to be over $116,000.

John Howard
03-18-13, 05:34 PM
Is there any update John Howard?

It seems they don't want to play anymore.

David Lyn
03-18-13, 11:49 PM
It seems they don't want to play anymore.

So they are leaving you alone? How long now?

John Howard
03-19-13, 03:40 PM
You do know that these posts are dated, right? And that the Philistines read them? Apparently word got back Goliath that I was approaching the battlefield with my sling and stone. They did not show up. He who attacks must vanquish, he who defends must merely survive.

David Lyn
03-19-13, 06:31 PM
You do know that these posts are dated, right? And that the Philistines read them? Apparently word got back Goliath that I was approaching the battlefield with my sling and stone. They did not show up. He who attacks must vanquish, he who defends must merely survive.

Yeah, realized that after I posted.. Stupid question

John Howard
03-20-13, 12:11 AM
Don't sweat the small stuff. :cool:

John Henry
03-24-13, 06:05 PM
I am just curious if the IRS has come back to anyone who has applied the demanding lawful money process and disallowed the process? I have been doing the process for three years now and have success in two of those three years and have not gotten the refund check yet for 2012. I am just wondering what others in the group may have experienced in applying this process that have done it for more years.

Sometimes the IRS comes back after several years and disallows a process. Has anyone in the forum that has been doing the process had such contact from the IRS? I am not doubting the process, I am just wondering what others may have experienced? I am not very computer savy and I hope I am doing this right to get on the forum. Let me know if I am doing anything wrong. Thanks all, John Henry

David Merrill
03-24-13, 11:01 PM
I am just curious if the IRS has come back to anyone who has applied the demanding lawful money process and disallowed the process? I have been doing the process for three years now and have success in two of those three years and have not gotten the refund check yet for 2012. I am just wondering what others in the group may have experienced in applying this process that have done it for more years.

Sometimes the IRS comes back after several years and disallows a process. Has anyone in the forum that has been doing the process had such contact from the IRS? I am not doubting the process, I am just wondering what others may have experienced? I am not very computer savy and I hope I am doing this right to get on the forum. Let me know if I am doing anything wrong. Thanks all, John Henry

I do not spend much time sanitizing documentation. So you have likely seen all the examples I have around here.

Your post shows up fine!

I am glad you are having success. Lots of folks are. There is a lot to be said for taking this risk without all the confidence building.

I do not go into the statistics of suitors in detail for reasons that I do not disclose. Only one suitor has been billed the $5K FrivPen but he began to espouse Ed RIVERA's dichotomized government doctrine on his Clerk Instruction. Big mistake! I feel it was borderline entrapment considering that he now has that bill as a bill of indictment against the IRS agent.

Treefarmer
03-26-13, 03:02 AM
I am just curious if the IRS has come back to anyone who has applied the demanding lawful money process and disallowed the process? I have been doing the process for three years now and have success in two of those three years and have not gotten the refund check yet for 2012. I am just wondering what others in the group may have experienced in applying this process that have done it for more years.

Sometimes the IRS comes back after several years and disallows a process. Has anyone in the forum that has been doing the process had such contact from the IRS? I am not doubting the process, I am just wondering what others may have experienced? I am not very computer savy and I hope I am doing this right to get on the forum. Let me know if I am doing anything wrong. Thanks all, John Henry

I think that's a legitimate concern about the IRS.
The best way to experiment would be on returns which would get a refund no matter how you file them.
If the IRS threatens frivolous filing penalties a few years down the road, then replace the LM return with a "conventionally" filed return and since it will still show a refund is due, there should be no interest charges.

I've also noticed that the IRS seems to expand its confiscatory grasp ever more, where it could not reach before.
This may be due to court decisions in their favor, or secret international treaties due to the nature of the IMF, or some processes which I don't know anything about.
They seem to be able to stick their greedy covetous hands ever deeper into the bank account holders' pockets.
For example, some non-conventional ways of filing such as Pete HENDRICKSON's, worked for many years and then quit working for people.

JohnnyCash
08-07-13, 12:49 PM
It has been my experience that the IRS generally allows a one time penalty abatement. I think this also has to be considered in this case.
No Greg. Here's an example of a one-time penalty abatement:

http://jesse2012.com/168C.jpg
page 2 here: http://jesse2012.com/168C_2.jpg

David Merrill
08-07-13, 01:12 PM
Thanks for the image Johnny!

Chex
10-30-16, 09:53 AM
You're welcome. And 10 to 1 there's no Mary Hannah working at the IRS. Next time you call the IRS and the representative answers, ask if that's their real name.

"My kids think I am going crazy to keep ranting about what has happened and what damage and uncertainty they face may come if there is no understanding of the issues.
As a single parent, and grandparent, homelessness for no credible reason except intentional deprivation of life, liberty and freedom, and intentional falsification of presumed grounds to justify such actions taken in bad faith and with intent to deprive another of any other unconditional right to hold or own anything but debt.
That the violations of citizens rights get worse when a complaint is filed. I have been waiting for over 3 years while being harassed , stalked , threatened and intimidated . Just going food shopping I am targeted with psychologically and emotionally traumatizing acts. The only logical conclusion is that I am a victim of a cover up of the crimes I have suffered from , as no agency has even acknowledge receiving my complaint. I have contacted all levels of my government ( U.S. ) , my representatives , and the abuse of my Rights and Dignity continue even in the privacy of my own residence".

42 U.S. Code ยง 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights.

Information to the public. Biographies for the Northern New Jersey Working Together Tax Institute Information - Seton Hall University, New Jersey.

Mary Hannah (https://www13.shu.edu/academics/setonworldwide/nj-working-together-tax-institute-bios.cfm)
ACS Program Manager
IRS/SB/SE/Campus Compliance Services
11501 Roosevelt Boulevard
Philadelphia, Pa. 19152
mary.hannah@irs.gov
(215) 516-3672

Mary has the responsibility of the largest SB/SE Automated Collection Service Site, overseeing 350 employees on two shifts. She began her career in 1981as a part time tax examiner for Submission Processing, Error Correction. Her career changed paths when she moved over to Compliance Services in 2002 as the Collection Operation Manager. She came to ACS in 2005. Mary and her husband have three children and live in New Jersey.

All problems start with a revenue agent and their "persons".