Do you receive an income?

A man tells me he wants his house remodeled. I agree to do the remodel. I use my energy(currency) to perform the changes. He, in exchange, gives me a check.

What he gives me is used to refill my energy bank. I view this as reimbursement for something I had used from my stores of current(energy).

I used something I already possesed in exchange for value of a different form. I loaned it until such time as he paid back what was determined to be equal value.

The current went 2 directions, out and back in. From my energy bank and then back in.

There was no wage, no pay, and no income. It was simply an exchange of currency whereby balance is achieved.

My records are balanced. There is no profit. There is no excess.

Agreeing to a tax on the check is insanity.

I explained this to the bank woman while I was setting up a new account and her eyes grew big. She said she would have never thought of it that way. I wonder what a revenue agent would say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osbogosley

A man tells me he wants his house remodeled. I agree to do the remodel. I use my energy(currency) to perform the changes. He, in exchange, gives me a check.

What he gives me is used to refill my energy bank. I view this as reimbursement for something I had used from my stores of current(energy).

I used something I already possesed in exchange for value of a different form. I loaned it until such time as he paid back what was determined to be equal value.

The current went 2 directions, out and back in. From my energy bank and then back in.

There was no wage, no pay, and no income. It was simply an exchange of currency whereby balance is achieved.

My records are balanced. There is no profit. There is no excess.

Agreeing to a tax on the check is insanity.

I explained this to the bank woman while I was setting up a new account and her eyes grew big. She said she would have never thought of it that way. I wonder what a revenue agent would say.

---

Beard v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777-79 (1984)

On the face of your argument, I think yoiu are correct, but you deny the trust.

This subject is not to be taken lightly. One must research the legal terms and be cognizant of the contracts and agency you have entered in to before that question could be answered. As well as your status as either within the United States, or without the United States.

I can only speak for myself, and my cognizance, but I do not have any “income” that is effectively connected to a “trade or business” (public office within the District of Columbia). Therefore, I receive no “income”, I am not “employed” nor do I have an “employer”, nor am I “self employed” as those legal terms are defined in Title 26. As one who was born without the United States, on one of the 50 states united, I revoked the election to be treated as citizen of the United States (federal citizen) for tax purposes by the lawful process the US Congress provided in Title 26. That first election was way back when I was under the age of majority and didn't know any better. I see no benefit in being treated that way, so I have no intent to ever occupy that “public office” again.

Sadly, since revoking the election, I can no longer receive the benefit of filing a 1040 FIT, and since the jurat on the 1040 is from within the United States, I would perjure myself and be falsely impersonating a “public officer” if I did file. Living without the United States, and not as a "public officer" is sometimes more difficult, but very rewarding in my relationship with my Creator.

I read the link Michael Joseph posted. My take is the Petitioner unknowingly testified against himself. Just from the first 2 pages alone, it was over before it began. He is listed as a “resident”, admitted “wages” and “income”, provided a SS# (for federal personnel within the District), filled out a W-4 (for federal employees), probably had a DL, passport, and voter registration identifying himself as a US citizen and resident. He even uses FRNs within the District in his “official” capacity as a federal reserve bank or federal reserve agent. What he is, is a mere “Kelly girl”, who walked up to the federal employer, provided his federal identification as being one who holds a "public office", filled out the federal application forms, received the federal privilege of being paid “income” in FRNs for holding his “public office” (trade or business), then he didn't return the portion of his income as a payment for that privilege. Sadly, this guy is the exact definition of a "taxpayer" and who is engaging in the activity of being a "tax protester”. Not a good idea. If he no longer wants to hold that certain "office", and assuming he was born on one of the 50 states (therefore eligible), he should resign by exercising the lawful means that Congress provided in Title 26.

I had an IRS agent use that case in his argument to me concerning a zero filing that was previously issued. I explained Beard's argument and explained my position and the matter was easily resolved. I think that a computer must be scanning the returns. If Zero return, it is kicked out as a possible frivolous return under RIFEN v. US and BEARD v. COMMISSIONER.

I appreciate your argument Casper. In Rickman v. US, Rickman made a similar mistake. So too in MILAM. If I argue, I keep my words few and I stay on point.

Further, Beard argued he had no INCOME. That is absurd. Even if I redeem the notes, I still received notes [income]. What matters is my demand. Said another way, if I was 62 and eligible for social security, IF I do not apply, it ain't coming.

Shalom,
MJ

Your comments are always appreciated Michael Joseph. I learned quite a bit from you and David on this board and the talkshoe call you did. Good stuff. I am now a "redeemer" of lawful money. However I will have to admit I am an "idiot" (outsider) when it comes to the law society and their legalese. So my intent is to stay out (keep being an idiot). When one realizes the statutes and codes are there for commercial interstate commerce purposes, and for those that volunteer to enter that "beast" in a certain capacity, one realizes he has always had the option to come out of her. And I thank my "Kinsman-Redeemer" for the price He paid for redeeming me.

Being an "idiot" (outsider) of the federal tax code, take this for what its worth. But if I was one who held that office with that income subject to that code, as the orginal poster's comment suggests, one could look at the Title 26 Section 83 and ask a few questions. How does Section 83 operate in your conclusion that I owe tax on my labor? Where is your authority to exclude from any money or property the value of my labor? Then show a few court cases that demonstrate someone may be misinterpreting the term "any property". Those may be some difficult questions to answer by any agent of Trust #62 out of Puerto RICO, since Trust #62 never applies it. If you ever do get a response, please post it for our amusement.

This guy explains Section 83 argument:
http://youtu.be/c1u8KjfLX1o?t=7m

"Income" as defined by the IRS? No. FRN's are debt notes. Notes of debt are not income. http://freedom-school.com/money/nod.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

Beard v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777-79 (1984)

On the face of your argument, I think yoiu are correct, but you deny the trust.

---

Beard also claimed PROPERTY rights. That is a tort. He has no access his claim is faulty. Those who fail to stake a claim are by necessity subject to the claims of others. Therefore one lacking a claim lacks property rights and is therefore subject to an ESTATE. Now the question remains does said one have an interest in the Estate? And if so to what degree?

The claims have been perfected - the wife [states] have submitted themselves to the Husband [U.S.]. The leadership of the states [husband] are one with their citizens [wife]. The TWO become ONE. Therefore the state then as wife submits to the U.S. and again the two become one in Trust.

Ye have been bought. Just as Levi tithed to Melchizedok in the loins of Abraham, so too I was in the loins of my grandfather when he was purchased. See Genesis 47 and Amos 8.

Amo 8:6 That we may buy impoverished ones for silver, and a needy one for a pair of shoes; yea, and sell [as good wheat] the refuse of the wheat?

There is nothing new under the Sun.

Now the question remains where in to place my trust? Shall I place it in the princes of this age? I think not. Egypt has nothing to allure me. Who then allowed me to be bought and sold? The same one that created me! There remains only ONE remedy. To return to the Trust of my Elohim.

Deu 32:6 Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish People and unwise? Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee? Hath He not made thee, and established thee?

Deu 32:17 They sacrificed unto demons, not to God; To gods whom they knew not, To recent gods that came recently up, Whom your fathers feared not.

Deu 32:18 Of the Rock That begat thee thou art unmindful, And hast forgotten God That formed thee.

Deu 32:27 Were it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy, Lest their adversaries should mistake it, And lest they should say,Our hand is high, And the LORD hath not done all this.

Deu 32:28 For they are a nation void of deliberation, Neither is there any understanding in them.

Deu 32:29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, That they would consider their latter end!

====

Rev 15:2 And I saw as it were a glassy sea mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, standing on the sea of glass, having ... harps of God.

Rev 15:3 And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are Thy works, O Lord God The Almighty; just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of nations.

====

Their law is copy protected - it is private to their claim. You may dock to the great ship if you like - a dingy has been prepared for you - according to the uses established, whereupon said uses are governed by an Administration.

So now go to and consider yourself in the mirror:

Did you establish the flesh tabernacle that you reside within? It was provided FOR YOU and said flesh is subject to certain uses and restrictions established. Will you rebel yet again in its uses? The Holy Spirit of El Elyon has the Administration subject to the Word of Father El Elyon. For, with Wisdom [Holy Spirit/El Shaddai] El Elyon brought forth the Word [Yehoshuah]. Therefore, He and She are TREES OF LIFE. I see a TRUSTOR, CREATOR, SETTLOR, DIRECTOR, TRUSTEE and BENEFICIARY. A three-party contract. And I may become co-heir [beneficiary] only if I subject myself to the bylaws [trust agreement].


Therefore how can one say I HAVE NO TRUST IN YOU, and yet we find commercial evidence to the contrary? Which is it? Why don't the words match the actions?

One undertaking within an Estate established by another is subject to the TERMS OF USE governing the Estate.

The subjects of the King were set at LIBERTY. However, NEVER did the King release his interests in the Estates properly formed by claim. Please produce the evidence of your claim so that you can be recognized. If you lack a claim, then most likely you are undertaking within Estates formed by another. Your Husband or Lord!

Consider the way of the wife, citizen, congregation, it is submission. Have you never considered the vows? "Do you PROMISE to honor and obey till parted by death?"

OBEY, huh?

Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves servants for obedience, ye are servants to him whom ye obey....

Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve. You say, I will stake my claim and rule. Think again. You will become the SERVANT - KING. And your life will not be your own. Husbands love your wives.

Therefore SUBMIT to each other - in Public Trust, according to the Common Law of the realm within the established Law Boundaries of the kingdom. As such, where have you pledged your trust? Is it to a banker?

My claim is in El Elyon by Yehoshuah. Therefore my life is pledged in trust to Jesus Christ. My estate shall not be probated. I am therefore subject to the Common Law of the Kingdom. I, therefore, am subject to the Will of Father, El Elyon.

Col 3:3 For ye died, and your life has been laid up in store with Christ in God.

I have an Estate in God, held in Trust, by Jesus Christ! Today if you can hear His voice - each man according to the "calling" of Father. Therefore it is not given to man to judge. For their is only one ELOHIM - Dan-i-El.

Repugnant is the creature who fails to lift an eye to Heaven, conscious of his fleeting time here......

Shalom,
MJ

I live on one of the 50 states of the Union, which happens to be inhabited by numerous illegal aliens. I have learned a thing or two from them. They live here as foreign nationals (Mexican nationals) and carry ID cards as such. Most deal in cash only, but many open bank accounts without SS# (use W-8BEN). They get cell phone service without SS#. Their kids go to our local schools. Some are even enrolled on food benefits without a SS#. They all work and get paid in FRNs, and yet pay no FIT, just local sales and excise tax on alcohol, tobacco, gas, etc. (like in the constitution). Plenty of them have no driver license or insurance, and the cops never hassle them because they have no jurisdiction. Some do have car insurance even without a driver license. As long as they do not harm anyone, the cops just leave them alone. Some pull in $50k to $80k income tax free.

When talking with them, most of them have no desire to be "signed up" as a citizen of the United States (District of Columbia). They understand why the fedgov wants to get them on the books as a registered vessel on the citizenSHIP, but they want their independence. In many ways, the way they live is closer to the way the founding fathers lived than most US citizens. Learn from them I have, indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Casper

I live on one of the 50 states of the Union, which happens to be inhabited by numerous illegal aliens. I have learned a thing or two from them. They live here as foreign nationals (Mexican nationals) and carry ID cards as such. Most deal in cash only, but many open bank accounts without SS# (use W-8BEN). They get cell phone service without SS#. Their kids go to our local schools. Some are even enrolled on food benefits without a SS#. They all work and get paid in FRNs, and yet pay no FIT, just local sales and excise tax on alcohol, tobacco, gas, etc. (like in the constitution). Plenty of them have no driver license or insurance, and the cops never hassle them because they have no jurisdiction. Some do have car insurance even without a driver license. As long as they do not harm anyone, the cops just leave them alone. Some pull in $50k to $80k income tax free.

When talking with them, most of them have no desire to be "signed up" as a citizen of the United States (District of Columbia). They understand why the fedgov wants to get them on the books as a registered vessel on the citizenSHIP, but they want their independence. In many ways, the way they live is closer to the way the founding fathers lived than most US citizens. Learn from them I have, indeed.

---

Illegal Alien. Interesting term. It goes to ones Estate. Where is it lodged and which treasury stands surety for its liability. Names are persons. My life is held in Trust, in God. Consider the Wisdom of that verse.

Legal Name is held in Trust, in State. Got it? State and U.S. become one in covenant. Ever read the constitution? The former is the wife the latter the husband.

Oh the depths and riches of the Scriptures. The Earth is in God. Claims established by man, setup Property Rights. Estates are carved our of the interests in Property. Mexico, Canada, etc are Estates vested in a Kingdom. Consider now what it means to ALIENATE and Estate or for that matter Property. It would be Illegal to Alienate an estate in Mexico to Canada, unless the ones holding Property Rights made a covenant [agreement] and there existed a Surety so that the Estate may Pass thru the Ports.

Shalom,
MJ

P.S. I like what Bob Dylan wrote years ago. "Although the rules of the road have been lodged, its only peoples games you have to dodge"....

Quote:

---

Legal Name is held in Trust, in State. Got it? State and U.S. become one in covenant. Ever read the constitution? The former is the wife the latter the husband.

---

You seem to discuss trusts quite a bit. That is not my strong suit. Can you expound on that some more?

Quote:

---

Illegal Alien. Interesting term. It goes to ones Estate. Where is it lodged and which treasury stands surety for its liability. Names are persons. My life is held in Trust, in God.

---

I like that description of citizenship, from which arises the diversity of citizenship undergirding the Libel of Review process.

Which treasury lies surety for this particular legal person?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Casper

You seem to discuss trusts quite a bit. That is not my strong suit. Can you expound on that some more?

---

Most everything around you is moving in trust. Consider the term Legal. It begs a trust. As does King/State/dominion/property/interest/usufruct/right....

Jay Vincent and I realized this fact about eight years back and once realized, we found remedy. Get your hands on any and all materials you can find on trusts....I recommend a Bible. It is the fountainhead of Wisdom.

Shalom,
MJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I like that description of citizenship, from which arises the diversity of citizenship undergirding the Libel of Review process.

Which treasury lies surety for this particular legal person?

---

Example of PASSPORT - whereupon the Person of Nehemiah would be underwritten in terms of liability of the treasuries of Artaxerxes the king. Nehemiah would be an ILLEGAL ALIEN in those foreign Kingdoms as he lacked an Estate and would therefore be taking against the Will of those who settled said foreign kingdom. Therefore his actions must be underwritten or backed by a Treasury, thus he was granted a letter [passport] that he might show a foreign governor concerning his commercial status.

Neh 2:7 Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah;

Shalom,
MJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Casper

This subject is not to be taken lightly. One must research the legal terms and be cognizant of the contracts and agency you have entered in to before that question could be answered. As well as your status as either within the United States, or without the United States.

I can only speak for myself, and my cognizance, but I do not have any “income” that is effectively connected to a “trade or business” (public office within the District of Columbia).

---

The question then is, what is the source of authority to deem one's earnings -- if one is one of the People without the District of Columbia -- as effectively connected to a “trade or business”? That authority can only come from one source: you. Via completing and signing a "W-9" or similar form, thereby certifying "U.S. person", "U.S. citizen", and "individual", it appears the "effectively connected to a 'trade or business'" nexus is formed.

But what happens if a payor deems one's payment "effectively connected to a 'trade or business'" without a W-9 or your consent? What if additionally you told the payor, "Do not send me '1099' Forms" and they ignore you and do it anyway? Would this not constitute fraud? Would you all agree that any and all liabilities created by the fraudulent issuance of 1099's would be 100% the payor's liability?

Jethro, I can only speak for myself since I know what my status is. My heritage traces back to the early 1600s in one of the original colonies, said ancestors became landholders in 1640. They predated our nations Organic Laws and were the original Constitutional Citizens, and especially they predated the 14th Amendment citizenship. As a natural-born of a state of the Union, at some point I voluntarily made the election to be treated as a US citizen for tax purposes (a privilege), around the age of 16. Which was when I also was told of my need for applying for a SS#, which I later discovered I was not even eligible for since the 50 states are not included in the 1935 Social Security Act [Section 1101(a)(1) and 1101(a)(2)] codified at 42 USC 1301(a)(1) and 1301(a)(2). I also discovered the SS Act was for a "person" defined in the Social Security Act at Section 1101(a)(3) and (a)(4). I have seen no evidence that I am such a said "person". It was never explained to me that I had other options.

I recently had to resign that trustee relationship due to my religious objections, and so unfortunately I was no longer eligible to hold a "public office". So I revoked the original election to be treated as a US citizen for tax purposes by an Affidavit to the appropriate parties. Sadly, I no longer have the privilege to file. However, as I stated earlier, there are plenty of other foreign nationals that live and work here and are doing just fine. The fedgov seems to roll out the red carpet for them, and respects their rights more than mere "residents". I have learned much from them. If someone asks me for a 1099 form to be filed, I just use the appropriate form for a foreign national (without the United States). A SS# is not required to live and work in the United States. The 1099 is a tax class 5 doc, and is not evidence of a tax liability, nor would it change my status. It is not even signed, much less a jurat. Showing the person who remunerates you for your labor copies of your revocation, the certain laws passed by Congress, and the correct forms, should suffice. A payor cannot deem you a US citizen/"public officer". FYI, read the passport application form DS-11 for the 2 passport options citizens/nationals and research which option is appropriate for you.

If you are a US citizen, employed within the United States, in that public office, I recommend you return for your privilege. Redeeming lawful money is an interesting option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osbogosley

A man tells me he wants his house remodeled. I agree to do the remodel. I use my energy(currency) to perform the changes. He, in exchange, gives me a check.

Check/negotiable instrument: Broadly defined, contract implies an enforceable promissary obligation, that is, a promise for the breach of which the law gives remedy. In this sense every article 3 (UCC) negotiable instrument is a contract. From "Instruments and check collection (the new law) In a nutshell series. 4th edition"

What he gives me is used to refill my energy bank. I view this as reimbursement for something I had used from my stores of current(energy).

I used something I already possesed in exchange for value of a different form. I loaned it until such time as he paid back what was determined to be equal value.

The current went 2 directions, out and back in. From my energy bank and then back in.

There was no wage, no pay, and no income. It was simply an exchange of currency whereby balance is achieved.

I like to call it compensation for my labor/time, but whatever it is called is irrelevant.

My records are balanced. There is no profit. There is no excess.

You are not being taxed on profit

Agreeing to a tax on the check is insanity.

I agree but they don't care

I explained this to the bank woman while I was setting up a new account and her eyes grew big. She said she would have never thought of it that way. I wonder what a revenue agent would say.

---

When you use the SOP of society and sign the check and deposit it into the bank. They are essentially negotiating the check on your behalf for bank credit or federal reserve credit/notes. At no time did they discharge the debt via the treasury. The whole progression of events was handled via the banking system. THIS is the taxable event...not your work or labor or service or employment. That would be slavery.

My time and labor is MY property (intangible), to be used as I wish. I sell my property to someone who needs my labor to produce their goods so they can sell them for a profit. I have to do this in order to obtain a tangible medium of exchange to sustain my life and my families. Now enter the fork in the road. My paycheck arrives. I demand lawful money of the United States, sign it and present it to the bank for payment. The (income) incoming transfer is then payed in money issued directly by the US Treasury either in the form of current coin or intangible USN's. Bank credit is transferred to the treasury and the treasury issues the bank lawful money of the United States. The debt is discharged. Your intangible property has been converted to a tangible medium of exchange issued directly by the treasury (NOT A TAXABLE event as this is a duty of the government). The Treasury can then use the bank credit it received to collapse some national debt or spend it out again.

The other method as I said is handled entirely within the banking system. Congress has the power to regulate (restrain/tax) the circulation AS MONEY of any NOTES not issued under its own authority. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...us/75/533.html

I define income as: incoming transfer

Using bank credit as your medium of exchange turns what would be a direct tax into an income duty on the contract (check) because you did not use the medium of exchange provided by congress.

FR credit/notes are issued under the authority of the federal reserve board. NOT congress, they just charted them by the authority given to them via McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316

FWIW in my view......

I always redeem lawful money and have been before I ever heard of Savings to suitors. Levi Philos wrote something I Read about 6 or 7 years ago.
The owner of the property I am restoring recently sent the IRS a 1099 without a ss # as I don't have one. I'm waiting to see if anything shows up in the box addressed to the name they want me to call myself. I haven't heard from them in 10 years or so. I quit filing 20 years ago. If anything ever comes addressed to the registered name it will be marked Deceased, return to sender".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osbogosley

I always redeem lawful money and have been before I ever heard of Savings to suitors. Levi Philos wrote something I Read about 6 or 7 years ago.
The owner of the property I am restoring recently sent the IRS a 1099 without a ss # as I don't have one. I'm waiting to see if anything shows up in the box addressed to the name they want me to call myself. I haven't heard from them in 10 years or so. I quit filing 20 years ago. If anything ever comes addressed to the registered name it will be marked Deceased, return to sender".

---

12 years ago in my zeal to be right, I remember demanding a SSN from a lady who provided some nanny services for my family. She would not give me one. I actually called the IRS to see if I could get her SSN from them. Looking back I think to myself HOW ABSURD I was in those days. Nevertheless, the IRS agent informed me that if I could not get a SSN I was still required to report the transaction and I could still use that transaction as a deduction on the return.

Isaiah 50:1
Thus says the Lord: “Where is the certificate of your mother’s divorce, Whom I have put away? Or which of My creditors is it to whom I have sold you? For your iniquities you have sold yourselves, And for your transgressions your mother has been put away."

This lets all know point blank that the Kingdom has been let out to murderers and thieves, the terrible ones, as a result of forsaking the Law of God, who then in his Great wisdom, uses the wicked for the testing of faith through their wicked actions as well as inactions. I most certainly do agree that the only Remedy for this, the only Resolution for this, the only Relief for this is to resolve to return to the Father through the Redeemer, the only provision provided and indeed that provision is more than enough, “For my grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”

Isa_25:4 For thou hast been a strength to the poor, a strength to the needy in his distress, a refuge from the storm, a shadow from the heat, when the blast of the terrible ones is as a storm against the wall.

Isa_25:5 Thou shalt bring down the noise of strangers, as the heat in a dry place; even the heat with the shadow of a cloud: the branch of the terrible ones shall be brought low.

Isa_29:5 Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust, and the multitude of the terrible ones shall be as chaff that passeth away: yea, it shall be at an instant suddenly.

Shalom,
Michael Joseph

I find my truth in observations of nature. A raindrop in free fall knows that it is water. A man in his separation suspects he is something else.

Quote:

---

When you use the SOP of society and sign the check and deposit it into the bank. They are essentially negotiating the check on your behalf for bank credit or federal reserve credit/notes. At no time did they discharge the debt via the treasury. The whole progression of events was handled via the banking system. THIS is the taxable event...not your work or labor or service or employment. That would be slavery.

---

This applies when you are a "resident" and "U.S. person" on your bank application and evidenced by your interstate commerce "operator license" for use within "this state" (federal zone) you voluntarily provided. You also agreed to abide by Title 26 on your bank contract.

Plenty of nationals around here have checking accounts as non-resident, non U.S. persons, with no such taxable event even without any redeeming. So what really is the "taxable event"? Is it the fact the income is effectively connected to a trade or business (holding a public office) within the United States (District) as federal personnel (SS#) while using FRN's as an agent?

A Guatamalan national has worked here for my father for 32 years, since she first came over as a refugee illegal alien. She has never made an election to be treated as a citizen of the United States to hold that public office (file a 1040), and has never been hassled. She lives better than most "residents". She pays all lawful taxes for her status, sales tax, alcohol, tobacco, gas, etc. Really smart lady. There are whole communities set up here that cater to her status as a non-resident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

12 years ago in my zeal to be right, I remember demanding a SSN from a lady who provided some nanny services for my family. She would not give me one. I actually called the IRS to see if I could get her SSN from them. Looking back I think to myself HOW ABSURD I was in those days. Nevertheless, the IRS agent informed me that if I could not get a SSN I was still required to report the transaction and I could still use that transaction as a deduction on the return.

---

Very interesting admission they provided you, MJ! So when the payee refuses or cannot provide a SSN to a payor, the payor (taxpayer) must still report, although the "benefit" of reporting is for the payor, but with presumably no liability to the payee.

Did you ever "backup withhold" on a payee who did not provide a SSN?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Casper

Jethro, I can only speak for myself since I know what my status is. My heritage traces back to the early 1600s in one of the original colonies, said ancestors became landholders in 1640. They predated our nations Organic Laws and were the original Constitutional Citizens, and especially they predated the 14th Amendment citizenship. As a natural-born of a state of the Union, at some point I voluntarily made the election to be treated as a US citizen for tax purposes (a privilege), around the age of 16. Which was when I also was told of my need for applying for a SS#, which I later discovered I was not even eligible for since the 50 states are not included in the 1935 Social Security Act [Section 1101(a)(1) and 1101(a)(2)] codified at 42 USC 1301(a)(1) and 1301(a)(2). I also discovered the SS Act was for a "person" defined in the Social Security Act at Section 1101(a)(3) and (a)(4). I have seen no evidence that I am such a said "person". It was never explained to me that I had other options.

I recently had to resign that trustee relationship due to my religious objections, and so unfortunately I was no longer eligible to hold a "public office". So I revoked the original election to be treated as a US citizen for tax purposes by an Affidavit to the appropriate parties. Sadly, I no longer have the privilege to file. However, as I stated earlier, there are plenty of other foreign nationals that live and work here and are doing just fine. The fedgov seems to roll out the red carpet for them, and respects their rights more than mere "residents". I have learned much from them. If someone asks me for a 1099 form to be filed, I just use the appropriate form for a foreign national (without the United States). A SS# is not required to live and work in the United States. The 1099 is a tax class 5 doc, and is not evidence of a tax liability, nor would it change my status. It is not even signed, much less a jurat. Showing the person who remunerates you for your labor copies of your revocation, the certain laws passed by Congress, and the correct forms, should suffice. A payor cannot deem you a US citizen/"public officer". FYI, read the passport application form DS-11 for the 2 passport options citizens/nationals and research which option is appropriate for you.

If you are a US citizen, employed within the United States, in that public office, I recommend you return for your privilege. Redeeming lawful money is an interesting option.

---

Thanks for the reply, Casper, though my question is -- what to do when, given one has done everything you have done, a payor ignores or disregards it and issues you 1099's anyway? (And then IRS uses those 1099's to create liabilities for you). I'm interested in hearing about theories as to what remedies are available to us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jethro

Did you ever "backup withhold" on a payee who did not provide a SSN?

---

No I never have.

Jethro, the law is that "income not effectively connected to a trade or business [public office] within the United States Government is not subject to any tax under Subtitle A of the tax code." That quote comes directly from a letter from Trust #62 on their own letterhead, dated December 1995 in the Philadelphia office, from a Disclosure Officer. I downloaded that from SEDM.org. I have dozens of those types of letters. Even if the payor files a 1099 in error, it could not "create" a liability if you do not meet those requirements. The paperwork you provide will prevent this issue. You revoking that initial election IS the remedy that Congress gave you. If you go this path, don't ever fill out a W-4 or file a 1040 or else you will be treated that way again. Use the forms for a foreign national. Private sector companies hire foreign nationals all the time and are familiar with that paperwork.

The letter also stated "the tax code is not positive law, it is "special law". It applies to "persons" in the United States [federal zone] who choose to make themselves subject to the requirements of the special laws in the Internal Revenue Code by entering in to an employment agreement within the U.S. government." ["Internal" being municipal laws of the government in DC., and employment agreement being a "W-4" Application]

Lots of resources here including Michael L. White letter: http://www.weissparis.com/resource.html
Also here: http://www.weissparis.com/july4.html
The implementing regulation for Title 26 was never published in the Federal Register, so it is not for without the United States [50 states united]. A law does not have to be positive law or published in the Federal Register for within the United States [DC and territories]. For example the NDAA, Patriot Act, Obamacare were never published in the Federal Register for the people out in the 50 states. Unless by your agreements, you voluntarily opted in and consented to be governed by it. Federal means by agreement. That can be between fed and state, or fed and you. I choose not to contract with them.

Thanks for the response, Casper, and I fully understand and agree with your position. But I still go back to my original question -- what if ALL of that (i.e. revocation of election, etc.) is ignored? What if one is treated as a "person" with "income effectively connected to a trade or business" when in fact, one is not? What if one's property is taken? What remedies are available to us? (I have some thoughts, but I'm interested in hearing yours and others' ideas).

Well, DC has already implemented all 10 planks of communism, we are now in a police state, so there are no guarantees Trust #62 in Puerto RICO will abide by law. That is all you can do, is correct your status, abide by law and save your evidence. If they break their own laws and are lawless, then we truly are in trouble. Redeeming is always a good option no matter what path you choose. This guy uses a 6203 demand: http://www.pauljjhansen.com/?cat=108

Do not argue merits as that may imply jurisdiction in their eyes. Get them to prove everything. They can not.

Really nice information Casper and refresher. Check this out.

Karen Hudes explains the real reason why both JFK and Abraham Lincoln were assassinated. She tells us how a nuclear war was averted in Syria and how two recently-dismissed commanders, in charge of the US Navy's nuclear arsenal recently prevented a false flag nuking of Charleston, South Carolina, detonating the bomb 600 miles off the Carolina coast.

WHISTLE BLOWER

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=F-2Rfuq8NBU

Karen Hudes .net

Paul John Hansen really has things going on.

Property tax: This is the second case where people walked away from the case, per instruction by their attorney, and I paid no property tax. Currently doing 6 others with the same process. http://freeinhabitant.info/pay-no-pr...operty-tax.htm

PROPERTY TAX.ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20ORCO%2020121212581

Paychecks. Your employer is only acting upon a suggestion from an IRS employee, he is acting without Law, without a Court Order, Judgment, or Warrant, your employer is involved in conveyance of your property without authority and is 100% liable. http://www.pauljjhansen.com/?p=391#comment-172412

EIB COREY

Automobiles. Mercedes license plates.http://freeinhabitant.info/wp-conten...mpt-plates.jpg

Mercedes Registration http://freeinhabitant.info/wp-conten...ation+Card.pdf

Blogspot. http://www.coreyeib.blogspot.com/

EIB COREY YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/user/coreyeib

Paul John Hansen Free Inhabitant One A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HtpPMynE5o

I found Paul's site a couple months ago and read all his stuff. Emailed him a couple times. Good guy who is a doer. He has some good mp3 recorded radio interviews (2 hrs each) you may enjoy about the way he lives his life. I have learned a thing or two from him. He has a great grasp of jurisdiction and seems to be knowledgable in Ed Rivera and Paul Andrew Mitchell's work. I think I recall him recently saying he owns 28 properties and hasn't paid property tax in years, he had them moved to the other side of the ledger.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-39904/TS-879305.mp3
http://godspropertyradio.podomatic.c...09_20_31-07_00

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jethro

Thanks for the response, Casper, and I fully understand and agree with your position. But I still go back to my original question -- what if ALL of that (i.e. revocation of election, etc.) is ignored? What if one is treated as a "person" with "income effectively connected to a trade or business" when in fact, one is not? What if one's property is taken? What remedies are available to us? (I have some thoughts, but I'm interested in hearing yours and others' ideas).

---

The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

This article shall be known and may be cited as the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.

- See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/G....rSMu6Jhu.dpuf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Casper

Well, DC has already implemented all 10 planks of communism, we are now in a police state, so there are no guarantees Trust #62 in Puerto RICO will abide by law. That is all you can do, is correct your status, abide by law and save your evidence. If they break their own laws and are lawless, then we truly are in trouble.

---

Yeah, that's the rub. If we are without remedy when they break the law, then there is no incentive for them to follow the law because they are assured nothing will happen to to them if they don't.

But we know that's not the case because every injury done must have an available remedy. (Of course, getting judges to obey the law can be just as challenging!) It's ok if you don't know what remedies are available; I'm just asking.