walking the walk

Short history
I found this forum about 6 months ago and understood basics of lawful money redemption. Since then my spouse and I (W2 employees) canceled direct deposits and started to redeem lawful money by stamping back of the check with “A regular deposit of lawful money pursuant to 12 USC 411”. Actually, in addition to that I have every copy of the check notarized (may be an overkill but I thought to make first time as bulletproof as possible).

Purpose of the thread
Time of filing is approaching and it is time to establish evidence repository and do the actual work. While this forum contains huge amount of useful information and examples I am still having problems with understanding technique of the paperwork preparation and filing. Also, me not being born in US nor having very fluent speaking and writing abilities I can hardly imagine myself to be able to write legalese without help of honorable people of this forum. Thus I thought that doing the process and documenting all its steps with examples of paperwork, questions and answers will setup a good learning resource for newbies like myself.

What I am planning to achieve during the “walk”

1. While still in 2012 open new bank account and record a notice and demand, so that starting new year I can switch back to direct deposit
2. File return with reduction of income that equals to total amount of lawful checks.
3. R4C IRS correspondence if necessary
4. Get a refund
5. Learn (probably should be the first in the list :))
6. Help other to learn (should it be second or first? :))

Plan
Here is a plan of actions that I am thinking to perform to achieve my objective. Based on comments and recommendations I hope to get it finalized by the end of the “walk”.

1. Establish Libel of Review (or should it be miscellaneous evidence file?)
2. Open bank account
3. Record Notice and demand
4. Send copy of the recorded Notice to bank
5. File return with copy of all checks into established libel of review
6. File return to IRS
7. … depends on IRS response.

Dilemmas and thoughts

1. I am planning to have joined bank account for future direct deposits as well as to file return as joined. Therefore it seems that when establishing Libel of Review it should have two petitioners, is it possible?

P.S. I expect this thread to touch on many different topics and I am in doubt of proper place for the thread. Dear Admins please fill free to find a better “home” for this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realname

Short history
I found this forum about 6 months ago and understood basics of lawful money redemption. Since then my spouse and I (W2 employees) canceled direct deposits and started to redeem lawful money by stamping back of the check with “A regular deposit of lawful money pursuant to 12 USC 411”. Actually, in addition to that I have every copy of the check notarized (may be an overkill but I thought to make first time as bulletproof as possible).

Purpose of the thread
Time of filing is approaching and it is time to establish evidence repository and do the actual work. While this forum contains huge amount of useful information and examples I am still having problems with understanding technique of the paperwork preparation and filing. Also, me not being born in US nor having very fluent speaking and writing abilities I can hardly imagine myself to be able to write legalese without help of honorable people of this forum. Thus I thought that doing the process and documenting all its steps with examples of paperwork, questions and answers will setup a good learning resource for newbies like myself.

What I am planning to achieve during the “walk”

1. While still in 2012 open new bank account and record a notice and demand, so that starting new year I can switch back to direct deposit
2. File return with reduction of income that equals to total amount of lawful checks.
3. R4C IRS correspondence if necessary
4. Get a refund
5. Learn (probably should be the first in the list :))
6. Help other to learn (should it be second or first? :))

Plan
Here is a plan of actions that I am thinking to perform to achieve my objective. Based on comments and recommendations I hope to get it finalized by the end of the “walk”.

1. Establish Libel of Review (or should it be miscellaneous evidence file?)
2. Open bank account
3. Record Notice and demand
4. Send copy of the recorded Notice to bank
5. File return with copy of all checks into established libel of review
6. File return to IRS
7. … depends on IRS response.

Dilemmas and thoughts

1. I am planning to have joined bank account for future direct deposits as well as to file return as joined. Therefore it seems that when establishing Libel of Review it should have two petitioners, is it possible?

P.S. I expect this thread to touch on many different topics and I am in doubt of proper place for the thread. Dear Admins please fill free to find a better “home” for this thread.

---

That is a beautiful post!

I took a look around with some tools and see you have been parsing out the various posts and threads of the Lesson Plan with an engineering-meticulousness. I like that! You comprehend the process and want to proceed with your initial filing after redeeming lawful money carefully, implementing the Notice and Demand procedure too.

One thing I may have neglected to display on this forum is how a suitor has been getting his refund in full, however the IRS has been crediting his past liability. That is to say, he has been owing the IRS for past years and the IRS agent recognizes he has a full refund coming, but deducts that amount from his past taxes due.

That is an interesting admission.

The thread is placed perfectly too. It is great to have you posting finally, after a few months of careful study here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realname

Short history
I found this forum about 6 months ago and understood basics of lawful money redemption. Since then my spouse and I (W2 employees) canceled direct deposits and started to redeem lawful money by stamping back of the check with “A regular deposit of lawful money pursuant to 12 USC 411”. Actually, in addition to that I have every copy of the check notarized (may be an overkill but I thought to make first time as bulletproof as possible).

Purpose of the thread
Time of filing is approaching and it is time to establish evidence repository and do the actual work. While this forum contains huge amount of useful information and examples I am still having problems with understanding technique of the paperwork preparation and filing. Also, me not being born in US nor having very fluent speaking and writing abilities I can hardly imagine myself to be able to write legalese without help of honorable people of this forum. Thus I thought that doing the process and documenting all its steps with examples of paperwork, questions and answers will setup a good learning resource for newbies like myself.

What I am planning to achieve during the “walk”

1. While still in 2012 open new bank account and record a notice and demand, so that starting new year I can switch back to direct deposit
2. File return with reduction of income that equals to total amount of lawful checks.
3. R4C IRS correspondence if necessary
4. Get a refund
5. Learn (probably should be the first in the list :))
6. Help other to learn (should it be second or first? :))

Plan
Here is a plan of actions that I am thinking to perform to achieve my objective. Based on comments and recommendations I hope to get it finalized by the end of the “walk”.

1. Establish Libel of Review (or should it be miscellaneous evidence file?)
2. Open bank account
3. Record Notice and demand
4. Send copy of the recorded Notice to bank
5. File return with copy of all checks into established libel of review
6. File return to IRS
7. … depends on IRS response.

Dilemmas and thoughts

1. I am planning to have joined bank account for future direct deposits as well as to file return as joined. Therefore it seems that when establishing Libel of Review it should have two petitioners, is it possible?

P.S. I expect this thread to touch on many different topics and I am in doubt of proper place for the thread. Dear Admins please fill free to find a better “home” for this thread.

---

Hello realname
Welcome to the forum.
I highly recommend you read this somewhat lengthy treatise, while you pay your income taxes on your W-2 "income" conventionally, to save yourself much agony and expenses in the future.

Even though you can redeem your paychecks for lawful money AFTER you receive the "taxable income", you still owe the income taxes because you signed W-4s, which result in W-2s, which means that you are receiving "taxable income" as far as the IRS is concerned.

So-called lawful money returns are still new to the IRS right now. Give them about 2 years and watch what happens.
They have 7 years to mess around with a return you file for any given tax year.
Just because they issue refunds for a while doesn't mean that "it worked".
The IRS will demand those refunds back later, plus penalties and interest, and with frivolous filing fees piled on top.

I don't mean to put a damper on your enthusiasm, but after experiencing the HENDRICKSON disaster, I would hate to see more people fall into this trap.
Lawful money is real, it exists, but unless you are being paid in cash or coin, you are not getting lawful money.
If you signed W-4s you volunteered to be a taxpayer-slave via the trade or business scam.

Please be careful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

Hello realname
Welcome to the forum.
I highly recommend you read this somewhat lengthy treatise, while you pay your income taxes on your W-2 "income" conventionally, to save yourself much agony and expenses in the future.

Even though you can redeem your paychecks for lawful money AFTER you receive the "taxable income", you still owe the income taxes because you signed W-4s, which result in W-2s, which means that you are receiving "taxable income" as far as the IRS is concerned.

So-called lawful money returns are still new to the IRS right now. Give them about 2 years and watch what happens.
They have 7 years to mess around with a return you file for any given tax year.
Just because they issue refunds for a while doesn't mean that "it worked".
The IRS will demand those refunds back later, plus penalties and interest, and with frivolous filing fees piled on top.

I don't mean to put a damper on your enthusiasm, but after experiencing the HENDRICKSON disaster, I would hate to see more people fall into this trap.
Lawful money is real, it exists, but unless you are being paid in cash or coin, you are not getting lawful money.
If you signed W-4s you volunteered to be a taxpayer-slave via the trade or business scam.

Please be careful.

---

Thank you Treefarmer,
And for resource you have given. I was capable to read through 0.0001% of it by now. I will continue to study it. Your advice to be careful is well taken. This is exactly what I was looking for when joining this forum. There is a difference between reading and doing, now every word said has more weight (I like it). People like you, David and many others helped me to establish my understanding of the issue and DO IT…. I consider this to be a journey. I may end up nowhere or find a treasure. And most important thing, from my perspective, is to get new knowledge (without getting something new life become boring, this is why people stay in line for IPhone X. I prefer something different).

Following the plan, seems like one of the first things that I need to do is to take care of a bank account. I see different options:

1. Use existing (interest bearing) account and do Notice and Demand against it. As a consequence I will be gladly paying taxes on all accrued interests.
2. Somehow make the bank to convert existing one from Interest bearing to non-bearing account. Does anyone has experience or at least procedural understanding on how to do this?
3. Open new account, without signing W-??. When asked why I am not signing W-??, what would be my explanation to the clerk?

What would be the best option from your experience? If there are legal implications associated with either choice, I would highly appreciate simplified explanation (plain English)(if possible), so that people (me including) who just starting will have easier comprehension.

After reading some of the materials referred by Treefarmer, it makes absolute sense that as W-2 employee I am involved in “trade or business”. However, analysis made by Peter Eric Hendrickson in his “Cracking the Code” in regard to W-4 seems to be answering the concern:

Quote:

---

…Needless to say, and despite 3402(p)(3)(B), the fact that a business calls payments “wages” paid to an “employee”—and even report them as such—does not transform them into “income”, if they are actually paid to a private-sector worker. Chapter 24 imposes no tax at all (nor does subtitle F)—it simply provides for withholding. The amount withheld under its provisions are credited against any liability for “income” tax which might be found to exists under the provisions of subtitle A….

---

While I am aware of Peter’s failure, it doesn’t not automatically invalidates his whole research. Next step is to look into subtitle A and see how it fits with lawful money redemption process.
Regardless of future finding, it seems to be desirable to find a way to dispute/abate (cannot find better word) W-4/W-2, so that it makes very simple and clear to all parties involved (IRS, court, myself) without arousing potential/actual employer.

i have been depositing with the non endorsement also. i make copies front and back of every check and write the check number on the back so the back and front correspond. i have never really known how to utilize this and i have read lots since the 1st article in 2006...
in january i go to the bank and have them print all deposits and a cover latter stating these are the deposits for year 20?? in account #123345 and have the name of a contact person and have it noterized at the bank. now, i have a 3rd party witness.
i believe in the 3 year rule also.... this is new and how the agency will respond is still unknown.
i have learned to never file joint... only married file separate. that way my bride is protected.
keep in mind taking deductions is a benefit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realname

Following the plan, seems like one of the first things that I need to do is to take care of a bank account. I see different options:

1. Use existing (interest bearing) account and do Notice and Demand against it. As a consequence I will be gladly paying taxes on all accrued interests.
2. Somehow make the bank to convert existing one from Interest bearing to non-bearing account. Does anyone has experience or at least procedural understanding on how to do this?
3. Open new account, without signing W-??. When asked why I am not signing W-??, what would be my explanation to the clerk?

What would be the best option from your experience? If there are legal implications associated with either choice, I would highly appreciate simplified explanation (plain English)(if possible), so that people (me including) who just starting will have easier comprehension.

---

I believe that is a decision for the bank to make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realname

After reading some of the materials referred by Treefarmer, it makes absolute sense that as W-2 employee I am involved in “trade or business”. However, analysis made by Peter Eric Hendrickson in his “Cracking the Code” in regard to W-4 seems to be answering the concern:



While I am aware of Peter’s failure, it doesn’t not automatically invalidates his whole research. Next step is to look into subtitle A and see how it fits with lawful money redemption process.
Regardless of future finding, it seems to be desirable to find a way to dispute/abate (cannot find better word) W-4/W-2, so that it makes very simple and clear to all parties involved (IRS, court, myself) without arousing potential/actual employer.

---

This and any other Pete HENDRICKSON argument I have ever come across has been shot down so much since the early '90's that any attorney bringing them into tax court will be sanctioned, and any pro se defendant will be warned only once. These are like navigating with the UCC. There are great theoretical and hypothetical scenarios but expecting the court to follow a script is really the first hard lesson anybody can expect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdsea10

i have been depositing with the non endorsement also. i make copies front and back of every check and write the check number on the back so the back and front correspond. i have never really known how to utilize this and i have read lots since the 1st article in 2006...
in january i go to the bank and have them print all deposits and a cover latter stating these are the deposits for year 20?? in account #123345 and have the name of a contact person and have it noterized at the bank. now, i have a 3rd party witness.
i believe in the 3 year rule also.... this is new and how the agency will respond is still unknown.
i have learned to never file joint... only married file separate. that way my bride is protected.
keep in mind taking deductions is a benefit.

---

Suitors in the brain trust are exploring the 843 Form and variations of Notice and Demand. A very interesting development is a new suitor who has had $30K in redeemed lawful money Refund applied in its entirety to a pre-redemption tax liability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdsea10

i have been depositing with the non endorsement also. i make copies front and back of every check and write the check number on the back so the back and front correspond

---

.

Trying to resolve the problem with association of the check's front a back made me to notarize each check copy where front and back printed on the same page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdsea10

i have learned to never file joint... only married file separate. that way my bride is protected.
keep in mind taking deductions is a benefit.

---

Thank you for excellent points.

Just to keep "easy to follow" order of the thread I am re-posting some of the related to "bank account" post snippets that were made on different branches:

From Here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realname

Following the plan, seems like one of the first things that I need to do is to take care of a bank account. I see different options:….

---

I believe that is a decision for the bank to make.

---

And Here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Suitors in the brain trust are exploring the 843 Form and variations of Notice and Demand. A very interesting development is a new suitor who has had $30K in redeemed lawful money Refund applied in its entirety to a pre-redemption tax liability.

---

Here is a good example of a comprehensive Notice and Demand.

I was looking at the 843 Form and it is not for overpayment of Income Tax. While that does not include refund of withholdings it may be best to file with a 1040 Form and use the 843 Form if the IRS should ever charge the frivolous penalty.

Keep in mind that the term "lawful money" does not exist in the IRC.
The word lawful occurs about 3 times or so, but not in connection with money, and money is mentioned many times, but not in connection with lawful.

I suspect that the reason for this is similar to the reason why footballs are not described in the rules for tennis or golf: different ball game.

If the IRS is involved in any way, then lawful money isn't.
The IRS has nothing to do with lawful money and doesn't know what that is (not that it will admit to anyways).

My advice is to stay away from lost horizons; there's a reason why they are lost.

Finished watching David Merrill’s movie again (3^rd time I believe). It is fascinating how information in the movie gets more and more clear with each view (admitted I did quite a bit of reading in between). It is like a sponge, which takes water very slowly at the beginning then faster and faster with each passing second. Seems like I am a very “dry sponge” :) hopefully, will get wet enough at end – and there is not observable final degree of wetness. Assuming that I am swimming in the clean/pure water and not in a toxic swamp.

Getting back to the topic though. The fact that I am involved in “trade or business” and federal employee (signature on W-4) doesn’t prevent me from demanding lawful money, use them and pay NO fee/taxes on them. I might not be able to declare withheld money as lawful, but what was given to me (thanks IRS for not withholding 100%. IRS it is not a tip) and not bound by signature/converted to lawful money are mine to deduct (seems to be an incorrect word but cannot come up with a better one) from the “income”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

Hello realname Welcome to the forum.

I highly recommend you read this somewhat lengthy treatise, while you pay your income taxes on your W-2 "income" conventionally, to save yourself much agony and expenses in the future.

Even though you can redeem your paychecks for lawful money AFTER you receive the "taxable income", you still owe the income taxes because you signed W-4s, which result in W-2s, which means that you are receiving "taxable income" as far as the IRS is concerned.

So-called lawful money returns are still new to the IRS right now. Give them about 2 years and watch what happens.

They have 7 years to mess around with a return you file for any given tax year.

Just because they issue refunds for a while doesn't mean that "it worked".

The IRS will demand those refunds back later, plus penalties and interest, and with frivolous filing fees piled on top.

I don't mean to put a damper on your enthusiasm, but after experiencing the HENDRICKSON disaster, I would hate to see more people fall into this trap.

Lawful money is real, it exists, but unless you are being paid in cash or coin, you are not getting lawful money.

If you signed W-4s you volunteered to be a taxpayer-slave via the trade or business scam.

Please be careful.

---

The real rub here is that filling out the W-4 Form is a mandatory part of employment in America. If the employer fails to collect the W-4 Forms from all the employees there can be fines and other penalties for the employer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

Keep in mind that the term "lawful money" does not exist in the IRC.

The word lawful occurs about 3 times or so, but not in connection with money, and money is mentioned many times, but not in connection with lawful.

I suspect that the reason for this is similar to the reason why footballs are not described in the rules for tennis or golf: different ball game.

If the IRS is involved in any way, then lawful money isn't.

The IRS has nothing to do with lawful money and doesn't know what that is (not that it will admit to anyways).

My advice is to stay away from lost horizons; there's a reason why they are lost.

---

This reminds me of the LOST TV series. I watched the entire six seasons only to find that it was a post-death hallucination - all of it! It was a remake of Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge, and Jacob's Ladder in my opinion. Beware the linguistics of anything LOST!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by realname

Finished watching David Merrill’s movie again (3^rd time I believe). It is fascinating how information in the movie gets more and more clear with each view (admitted I did quite a bit of reading in between). It is like a sponge, which takes water very slowly at the beginning then faster and faster with each passing second. Seems like I am a very “dry sponge” :) hopefully, will get wet enough at end – and there is not observable final degree of wetness. Assuming that I am swimming in the clean/pure water and not in a toxic swamp.

Getting back to the topic though. The fact that I am involved in “trade or business” and federal employee (signature on W-4) doesn’t prevent me from demanding lawful money, use them and pay NO fee/taxes on them. I might not be able to declare withheld money as lawful, but what was given to me (thanks IRS for not withholding 100%. IRS it is not a tip) and not bound by signature/converted to lawful money are mine to deduct (seems to be an incorrect word but cannot come up with a better one) from the “income”.

---

Thank you for the video commentary. It has prompted me to Review of My Videos - new threads coming soon. I know there are things I have confirmed as well as am embarrased to have said. Like with HENDRICKSON that is a problem about publishing where you are at that time, when life is a learning process.

The evolved comment in your second paragraph Realname, is that we can be full-fledged State Banks and still make our demand for lawful money. That in fact is who (what) the remedy is intended for - state banks who have been issued Federal Reserve notes. There are suitors earning over $100K/year gainfully employed.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

The real rub here is that filling out the W-4 Form is a mandatory part of employment in America. If the employer fails to collect the W-4 Forms from all the employees there can be fines and other penalties for the employer.




This reminds me of the LOST TV series. I watched the entire six seasons only to find that it was a post-death hallucination - all of it! It was a remake of Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge, and Jacob's Ladder in my opinion. Beware the linguistics of anything LOST!




Thank you for the video commentary. It has prompted me to Review of My Videos - new threads coming soon. I know there are things I have confirmed as well as am embarrased to have said. Like with HENDRICKSON that is a problem about publishing where you are at that time, when life is a learning process.

The evolved comment in your second paragraph Realname, is that we can be full-fledged State Banks and still make our demand for lawful money. That in fact is who (what) the remedy is intended for - state banks who have been issued Federal Reserve notes. There are suitors earning over $100K/year gainfully employed.


Regards,

David Merrill.

---

Your last comment, David, is very interesting to me. I've been mulling over the very same idea, that the demand is available only to state banks. After all, isn't it true that anyone holding FRN's is then a state bank by default? At any rate, I've been trying to figure out what this implies. It seems that if someone is holding FRN's (or has deposits on account denominated in FRN's) , and is entitled to demand redemption in lawful money, he has been holding FRN's from the beginning. Since this must be the case, then isn't it also true he that his status as a state bank hasn't changed? And that any income he receives is first received in FRN's? And while his income in FRN's might be offset by the demand, wouldn't filing a return still be required?

I apologize for my muddled thinking, but I'm trying to understand the process completely. After much soul searching, I've come to realize that my most important concern is to completely withdraw from this system. However, it appears that one must be in the system in order to use it. That is appealing on one level, but it still goes against my grain.

It has occurred to me that the only way to completely withdraw is to never receive FRN's. That leaves barter or using alternative currency altogether as a means of trading with people. I guess my problem boils down to this: I don't see how redeeming lawful money changes the nature of a person's relationship to the government. I see how it can be advantageous and desirable to redeem lawful money, but it looks like a catch-22; that one must be in the system in order to use it.

I'm sorting my thoughts as I write, and it appears my goal of withdrawing completely may not be realistic. Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith Alan

I'm sorting my thoughts as I write, and it appears my goal of withdrawing completely may not be realistic. Or am I barking up the wrong tree?

---

I'll disagree with you. Your goal of withdraw is very feasible.

It will be tricky, but is doable when you have a grand strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

I'll disagree with you. Your goal of withdraw is very feasible.

It will be tricky, but is doable when you have a grand strategy.

---

That is what I've been thinking until lately. To withdraw would require finding enough people to trade with who could supply the things we all need. And while there are now numerous cooperatives and mutual aid societies in existence, I have found a great reluctance among most people to even consider trading in anything other than FRN's. Barter is okay, but it's very difficult to get most things when you need them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith Alan

That is what I've been thinking until lately. To withdraw would require finding enough people to trade with who could supply the things we all need.

---

Don't forget production. Produce your own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith Alan

And while there are now numerous cooperatives and mutual aid societies in existence, I have found a great reluctance among most people to even consider trading in anything other than FRN's. Barter is okay, but it's very difficult to get most things when you need them.

---

How about another idea?
How about using a corporation or trust as an interface and front for acquiring the things that you need or desire?

If there is some ownership interest involved, that interest can be deposited into a trust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

Don't forget production. Produce your own.



How about another idea?
How about using a corporation or trust as an interface and front for acquiring the things that you need or desire?


If there is some ownership interest involved, that interest can be deposited into a trust.

---

I haven't thought about that, honestly. I am a sole proprietor contractor in California, so the business should probably be incorporated anyway. I really don't know enough about though. Besides, business has been steadily going away for several years now. I'm sad to say my family is in dire financial straits. I couldn't afford to incorporate even if I wanted to. Not now, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith Alan

I haven't thought about that, honestly. I am a sole proprietor contractor in California, so the business should probably be incorporated anyway. I really don't know enough about though. Besides, business has been steadily going away for several years now. I'm sad to say my family is in dire financial straits. I couldn't afford to incorporate even if I wanted to. Not now, anyway.

---

Sole proprietor is the worst form of business to be.
The proprietor is personally and directly responsible and liable for the debts and obligations of the business.

I say separate the business from the individual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith Alan

I haven't thought about that, honestly. I am a sole proprietor contractor in California, so the business should probably be incorporated anyway. I really don't know enough about though. Besides, business has been steadily going away for several years now. I'm sad to say my family is in dire financial straits. I couldn't afford to incorporate even if I wanted to. Not now, anyway.

---

Incorporating is not all that it is cracked up to be.

Some years ago DH and I, with 30 years of construction and contracting experience and college degrees of Bachelor of Architecture and Bachelor of Science in Environmental Design between us, decided to seek out the aid of a professional CPA who came highly recommended, in order to put our sub-contracting business on a perfectly secure and lawful foundation, so we would never have to worry about any tax problems.
The CPA was expensive, but we figured it would be worth it.

He gave us reading material that he had put together to advertise his services to contractors, and told us we needed to form an LLC.
So we did. First we bought two NOLO press books on LLCs, then got the STATE incorporation papers drawn up by the only attorney in the nearby town, got the TIN, the business checking account, and started to save all receipts for everything.
We had minutes for our "business meetings", did everything as instructed.

This went OK for 2 years, the tax bills were payable out of the money we took in, and although we never were able to get health or accident insurance or save any money or go on vacation, or buy a newer truck, we scraped by. The utility bills and student loan monthly payments got paid, I paid tithes in church and we had decent food, we kept the old trucks running, bought used tools, and worked our butts off thinking it would get better with time.
Our grand goal was to have my student loan paid off, health/accident insurance and to be able to visit my family and friends in Germany some day.

In the third year the tax return that the CPA prepared knocked our socks off.
Thousands of dollars in taxes, and we only had a few hundred dollars in the bank, plus the next quarterly estimated tax payment for the next year was due.

I asked the CPA why the taxes were so high and he mumbled something about how he didn't know why we had an LLC, since it only costs money and serves no purpose, due to it being only a "pass-through entity".
I reminded him that he had told us that we needed an LLC. He stared at me funny, like he didn't remember who I was and then excused himself saying he needed to go somewhere and was already late.

We had to go on a payment plan with the IRS, and I called the Tennessee State Department revenue office to see if they also had a payment plan.
The lady there said they didn't, then she paused and I heard keyboard clicking, and she said "I'm looking at your tax return now, and there's something wrong with it. Your CPA must not have prepared it correctly, because I can tell that you didn't have much income at all. You need to check this over."
I told her I didn't know how to check and had already paid for the paperwork and could not afford to pay again, and she assured me it would not be very difficult and she sent me the instructions and tax forms and said I still had time to submit a new return.

I followed the instructions, worked out the amounts and found that the CPA had added an extra zero to the amount. BIG difference between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars.
I sent it to her, she said I did it correctly, and we were able to pay the STATE tax.

So we thought it would be worth double checking the federal tax return too, since it was so much higher than the previous years, even though we had the same amount of business at the same pay scale as the previous years.
But whereas the STATE tax forms had been simple and straight forward, the IRS forms were the exact opposite.

So I did internet research and found much conflicting info. I tried to contact our CPA again, but we had already paid him and he refused to speak with us. I tried to find a low-income tax clinic to help me, but there were none.
Meanwhile, we were drowning in tax debt and interest. It became obvious that it would quickly become impossible to pay the quarterly payments and the previous bill. The harder we worked, the more taxes, the more indebted we became.
Then work got scarce in 2008, and contractors' checks started bouncing, because they were all having the same problems too.
We realized we could not afford to work anymore and dissolved the LLC.

Then I discovered Pete HENDRICKSON's website and saw all the evidence of "success" and it all seemed to make sense.
I could not see where we had ever conducted a "trade or business" with the US, or how we might be corporate officers of the US. Of course I was not aware of the trade or business scam, and that having a bank account is the trade or business nexus with the US.

To be continued...

Way to leave me gripping my seat; I'm on the edge :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

The real rub here is that filling out the W-4 Form is a mandatory part of employment in America. If the employer fails to collect the W-4 Forms from all the employees there can be fines and other penalties for the employer.

---

Awesome fact #5683- "W" forms and "10XX" forms are called Information Returns and are REBUTTABLE!

Once properly rebutted they become VOID.

*They may be rebutted at the time of filing a return.
*They may be rebutted immediately after submitting one to an employer. The rebuttal may be issued to the employer and the tax agencies.

WIN-WIN-WIN situation!

What is your source? As my inquiry to the IRS has revealed: http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...-need-rebuttal
the IRS has no procedure in place for the payee (recipient) of a 1099-MISC to correct it. As a payee I refuse to accept the con, I refuse to believe the amounts reported are actually taxable income (I'm redeeming these check amounts into lawful money), and I guess that could be considered a form of rebuttal. My non-belief.

EXCELLENT JC!

For those who hold a strong position then no rebuttal is necessary but it is an option for those who desire to go that route. For instance one who has filled out a W-4 to meet the satisfaction of an employer as their requirement for being hired and then decides to rebut the information in order to not have a deduction from the paycheck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

The CPA was expensive, but we figured it would be worth it.
..

In the third year the tax return that the CPA prepared knocked our socks off.
Thousands of dollars in taxes, and we only had a few hundred dollars in the bank, plus the next quarterly estimated tax payment for the next year was due.

I asked the CPA why the taxes were so high and he mumbled something about how he didn't know why we had an LLC, since it only costs money and serves no purpose, due to it being only a "pass-through entity".
I reminded him that he had told us that we needed an LLC. He stared at me funny, like he didn't remember who I was and then excused himself saying he needed to go somewhere and was already late.

---

suma bitch!

...continuing:

Since we didn't know of any "trade or business" we were conducting with the US, we corrected the 1099-MISC information returns which we got from contractors for doing sub-contract work for them, claiming 0 income from a federally privileged trade or business. We also rebutted a few W-2s, claiming we had zero income from federally privileged activities.
We informed the Social Security Administration of the fact that we had no "income" (as we understood the term from reading its definition in the IRC) in those years, and their record has reflected zero income ever since then.

We promptly got refunds from the IRS and figured we must have done right, especially since to our knowledge we weren't engaging in any interstate commerce or contracting with any government agencies. We thought we were on the right track, even though most contractors around us were going bankrupt or leaving the state.

Two years later the IRS sent us notices of frivolous filing penalties, $10,000.00 per tax return, because of married filing jointly, for a total of $20,000.00.
The irony of it was that even in our best year, we never had that much net income.

We realized that contracting under a FIRST M LAST and a SSN, even when done through an LLC with a TIN, is financial suicide, and we would have been better off applying for food stamps, going fishing, and doing the other activities common to Appalachia.

It seems that the indigenous population of Appalachia learned this lesson during the New Deal in the 30s, and many people here never even try to work.
Living off welfare is considered an art-form, and I can appreciate why that is now.
I know some third generation welfare recipients whose only job skill is filling out government welfare applications. They have much better incomes and drive nicer cars than we do.

Since we had no way anymore of doing design and carpentry work without going deeper and deeper into tax debt, DH started to draw social security at the earliest opportunity and officially retired.
I started homesteading and bartering, and will try to live the rest of my life without a bank account. If I can find some way to replace my car with a horse, I will.

The contractors who still seem to be doing well around here are high Masons and they hire mostly Hispanic workers.
The few who aren't masonically connected are dirt poor, can't ever seem to get out of debt and are working themselves to death.

I have come to the conclusion that the "public policy" which the IRS is said to be enforcing includes putting small contractors and anyone who does freelance work (so-called "self-employed") out of business, in order to ruin the economy and herd people into working for big corporations in big cities, on W-4 contracts.
I believe this is for the purpose of making the one-world government easier to enforce on the masses, as it is being implemented by secret treaties with Rome (see UNIDROIT) and is almost complete now, judging by how there is nothing left of the old constitutional republic in the USA.

I didn't have to wear a tin foil hat to figure this all out, but contracting with a TIN for a few years sure helped.
Who feels it knows it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

I have come to the conclusion that the "public policy" which the IRS is said to be enforcing includes putting small contractors and anyone who does freelance work (so-called "self-employed") out of business, in order to ruin the economy and herd people into working for big corporations in big cities, on W-4 contracts.
I believe this is for the purpose of making the one-world government easier to enforce on the masses, as it is being implemented by secret treaties with Rome (see UNIDROIT) and is almost complete now, judging by how there is nothing left of the old constitutional republic in the USA.

---

This sounds like the policy the Babylonian and Egyptian kings implemented to centralize the people into the cities and draw them out of the hinterlands. I'm certain the Old Testament mentions this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

...continuing:

...I have come to the conclusion that the "public policy" which the IRS is said to be enforcing includes putting small contractors and anyone who does freelance work (so-called "self-employed") out of business, in order to ruin the economy and herd people into working for big corporations in big cities, on W-4 contracts.

I believe this is for the purpose of making the one-world government easier to enforce on the masses, as it is being implemented by secret treaties with Rome (see UNIDROIT) and is almost complete now, judging by how there is nothing left of the old constitutional republic in the USA.

I didn't have to wear a tin foil hat to figure this all out, but contracting with a TIN for a few years sure helped.
Who feels it knows it.

---

My take on the same scenario is neglected here lately on StSC - I called it A-China-Ca. I still collect the BBC World News reports about Delivering Iran to China. Of course the Patroons of Manhattan and the Grand Master Robert LIVINGSTON giving WASHINGTON his oath on the porch of the NY Grand Lodge is playing a big role in the overall plan of municipal unification.

Something that comes into play are the Ghost Cities of China. America is the main target for labor I am sure but I think it likely there will be cities dedicated to other languages. That is the model for world production already in place - for example there is a city in China dedicated to the manufacture of zippers. Even if your pants are made in the USA it is likely that your zipper was bought from this city in China.

So my take is that as the Information Highway and international commuting develops into the world akin to one big global village the adoption of international municipal policy has become inevitable. Interestingly that manifestation first became prominent in America when I was born:

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9...agerletter.jpg


http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/9...agerletter.jpg

I say that is interesting as the Patroons, my heritage and perpetual inheritance is prominently mentioned in this 1995 Americans' Bulletin article.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ROchapter1.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ROchapter2.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ROchapter3.pdf

This weekend I am awaiting delivery of a gift copy of Jo HINDMAN's Terrible 1313 Revisited. I once borrowed her The Metrocrats from a former state senator's library.

So your perceptions Treefarmer are quite agreeable. The time will come I believe when people are offered instead of a free government dole to jump on a plane to China on a two-year contract for $100K to work away making zippers, glasses frames or shoelaces.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Today DH reminded me of something he saw a few years ago, in a nearby town.
On his way to a construction job which lasted a few months, he always drove by a food bank which gave out boxes of food to needy low-income families on a twice-per-week schedule.
He said that long lines of cars regularly awaited the opening of the free food give-away, and he saw late model Cadillacs, SUVs, Toyota 4X4s, and even a Hummer in the waiting line of cars.

Church held an URGENT meeting yesterday about the financial outlook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Church held an URGENT meeting yesterday about the financial outlook.

---

Did anyone tell the truth that they made their own bed?

Your unit of currency is also the problem?

Why do people volunteer into voluntary servitude?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

Did anyone tell the truth that they made their own bed?

Your unit of currency is also the problem?

Why do people volunteer into voluntary servitude?

---

That is the understatement of the day!

Originally Posted by David Merrill

"The real rub here is that filling out the W-4 Form is a mandatory part of employment in America. If the employer fails to collect the W-4 Forms from all the employees there can be fines and other penalties for the employer."



The rub unfortunately appears to be more brainwashing and disinformation. (I don't mean from you David Merrill :)
Even when you show this to people online at the law website they do not believe it.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/31.3402(p)-1

§ 31.3402(p)-1
Voluntary withholding agreements.
(a) In general. An employee and his employer may enter into an agreement under section 3402(b) to provide for the withholding of income tax ...

(b) Form and duration of agreement. (1) Except as provided in subdivision (ii) of this subparagraph, an employee who desires to enter into an agreement under section 3402(p) shall furnish his employer with Form W-4 (withholding exemption certificate) executed in accordance with the provisions of section 3402(f) and the regulations thereunder. The furnishing of such Form W-4 shall constitute a request for withholding.


...(iii) No request for withholding under section 3402(p) shall be effective as an agreement between an employer and an employee until the employer accepts the request by commencing to withhold from the amounts with respect to which the request was made.


(2) An agreement under section 3402 (p) shall be effective for such period as the employer and employee mutually agree upon. However, either the employer or the employee may terminate the agreement prior to the end of such period by furnishing a signed written notice to the other. Unless the employer and employee agree to an earlier termination date, the notice shall be effective with respect to the first payment of an amount in respect of which the agreement is in effect which is made on or after the first “status determination date” (January 1, May 1, July 1, and October 1 of each year) that occurs at least 30 days after the date on which the notice is furnished. If the employee executes a new Form W-4, the request upon which an agreement under section 3402 (p) is based shall be attached to, and constitute a part of, such new Form W-4.


There is a little bit more there but these are pertinent parts I believe

Thank you for your time and consideration
Rick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NO1UNO

Originally Posted by David Merrill

"The real rub here is that filling out the W-4 Form is a mandatory part of employment in America. If the employer fails to collect the W-4 Forms from all the employees there can be fines and other penalties for the employer."



The rub unfortunately appears to be more brainwashing and disinformation. (I don't mean from you David Merrill :)
Even when you show this to people online at the law website they do not believe it.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/31.3402(p)-1

§ 31.3402(p)-1
Voluntary withholding agreements.
(a) In general. An employee and his employer may enter into an agreement under section 3402(b) to provide for the withholding of income tax ...

(b) Form and duration of agreement. (1) Except as provided in subdivision (ii) of this subparagraph, an employee who desires to enter into an agreement under section 3402(p) shall furnish his employer with Form W-4 (withholding exemption certificate) executed in accordance with the provisions of section 3402(f) and the regulations thereunder. The furnishing of such Form W-4 shall constitute a request for withholding.


...(iii) No request for withholding under section 3402(p) shall be effective as an agreement between an employer and an employee until the employer accepts the request by commencing to withhold from the amounts with respect to which the request was made.


(2) An agreement under section 3402 (p) shall be effective for such period as the employer and employee mutually agree upon. However, either the employer or the employee may terminate the agreement prior to the end of such period by furnishing a signed written notice to the other. Unless the employer and employee agree to an earlier termination date, the notice shall be effective with respect to the first payment of an amount in respect of which the agreement is in effect which is made on or after the first “status determination date” (January 1, May 1, July 1, and October 1 of each year) that occurs at least 30 days after the date on which the notice is furnished. If the employee executes a new Form W-4, the request upon which an agreement under section 3402 (p) is based shall be attached to, and constitute a part of, such new Form W-4.


There is a little bit more there but these are pertinent parts I believe

Thank you for your time and consideration
Rick

---

Thank you for that valuable information!