What exactly makes Lawful Money untaxable ?
I have seen it mentioned in here a letter from IRS David put up showing that when someone demands Lawful Money is telling them the person is not in the FR system.
Another thing I have not found yet is the connection through on this statutorily, lets take a look:
Title 18 Section 8 defines a FRN as an "obligation of the United States."
Section 8. Obligation or other security of the United States defined
The term "obligation or other security of the United States" includes all bonds certificates
of indebtedness, national bank currency, Federal Reserve notes, Federal Reserve bank
notes, coupons, United States notes, Treasury notes, gold certificates, silver certificates,
fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or
upon authorized officers of the United States, stamps and other representatives of value,
of whatever denomination, issued."
Title 31 Section 3124 states that "obligations of the United States are EXEMPT FROM
TAXATION BY A STATE."
"Section 3124. Exemption from taxation
(a) Stocks and obligations of the United States Government are exempt from taxation by
a State or political subdivision of a State. The exemption applies to each form of taxation
that would require the obligation, the interest on the obligation, or both, to be considered
in computing a tax.
I am sure others will have something to add here, it would make for good edification with new people in the movement on this forum.
Puzzle Complete - Irrecusable Obligation
Use federal reserve notes and incur an Irrecusable obligation. The puzzle is complete!!!
Convincing Congress to Abolish the Fed http://www.silverbearcafe.com/
Irrecusable obligation, which according to 'Bouvier's Law Dictionary' (1914 ed.), is "a term used to indicate a certain class of contractual obligations recognized by the law which are imposed upon a person without his consent and without regard to any act of his own." This is distinguished from a recusable obligation, which according to Bouvier, arises from a voluntary act by which one incurs the obligation imposed by the operation of law. The Income Tax succinctly described is an irrecusable obligation.
The obligation to make a return of income for using private credit is recognized in law as an irrecusable obligation. The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent, which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law, which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.
I read this book, it does offer some insights... Especially on the 16th ammendment..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Keith Alan
So the 16th amendment's claim on incomes, from whatever source derived, applies only to income from private credit. And money received in the form of lawful money isn't income, but rather one is simply being paid. Two different kinds of persons; the first receiving income and engaged in the business of factoring for his principal's profit, while the other is merely being paid for goods and/or services rendered.
It's the diversity in citizenship that appeals most to me. My entire journey to learning about lawful money began in earnest after the Affordable Care Act was passed. Common sense told me it applied only to certain kind of persons. I have a profound moral objection to becoming unequally yoked in a pool of citizens who do not trust the Creator to provide for their needs.
Thank you, David. I can't tell you how much I appreciate your willingness to teach this subject. I do count it as a blesssing.
Keith
http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/.../Contents.html
"Income" is legally defined as a corporate gain of profit in the Internal Revenue Code. Nowhere is there any different definition.
Anytime the Internal Revenue Code mentions the word "income" it is talking about corporate income.
I think the book, link above, misses the whole lawful money point entirely, but the read is incredibly insightful. It states the IRS is nonconstitutional because it is not taxing the individual (whose rights are protected within the constitution), it can tax the "person" or corporate entity by means of an indirect excise tax, basically a tax on not directly the companies profits, but a tax on the activity or privilege of operating within that business which the amount of activity is measured by the corporate entities profits.
"Take the alcohol tax for example. The tax is not on the alcohol itself (property), but on the manufacture or sale (activities) of the alcohol. (a government granted privilege requiring a license) Or a corporation tax. The tax is not on the corporation itself (property), or its income (also property), but on the privilege of doing business as a corporation, which privilege (not a right) is also granted by the government."
Well, from this book, and this website, I'm finding two reasons the IRS can tax us. 1.Using or contracting with the federal reserve and willfully partaking in the bonding process. 2.As this book states, operating as a business, in this case a "person" and not acting as an individual. All or our transactions are assumed to operate in the corporate arena, therefore are corporate in nature.
I'm thinking both points do have a correlation, and maybe the second is the truth, just not getting there in the correct manner. Indeed, since the constitution protects our INDIVIDUAL right, especially of private property, both points 1.willfully engaging in a private contract with the fed, which could be construed as in the corporate arena 2. Being assumed to be a "person"-as defined by the IRS as a corporate entity (freeman theory), it is nonconstitutional, because corporations operate with privileges and benefits, not with rights. I guess either way you look at it, demanding lawful money takes you out of the private contract (corporate arena), and forces that lawful money to be deemed private property, which is protected by the constitution. The only way the gov't can tax private property is with a 1 time direct tax, with apportionment. ("INDIRECT TAX. Indirect taxes are able to be passed on to someone else INDIRECTLY (excise tax, ie; alcohol tax or corporation tax). An indirect tax can be thought of a simply an activity or privilege tax. It is on something you do. Exercising a privilege.")
http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/...ory/Chap3.html
Ok, well, there you go...
Social Security Taxes - Untaxable as well?
I understand that IF lawful money has been claimed properly, it becomes untaxable for income taxes purposes with a reduction shown on line 21 on the form 1040. Does this also hold true for SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES on employee wages [W-2 wages] and Schedule C [indpendent contractor]? If this is the case [non-taxable], how would one go about showing the credit on the 1040? Thanks Tony
