W-4 form and the intent for Lawful Money, first step to getting a mistake corrected.

This woman is a newbie to our local study group but very brilliant, has not been with us a month yet and already doing well making some bold moves. This normally takes about 30 days to get processed for withholding to be changed, but somehow they did it her next paycheck.
Next we will work on state withholding and then see what we can do about the Fica and Medicare.
First image is how she learned how to do the W-4, second image may be a little blurry but if you look in the first line of withholding you will see there is no major federal withholding taken out any more and she just gave herself a raise, was so excited she even had thoughts of early retirement. would that be great or what?
Attachment 383Attachment 384

You put nothing in the credit and deductions area, suggest just to X that out.

Is everyone with me on on this? If measures are taken not to have withholding at all then there is no reason for suitors to go file a return at the end of the year to get back the lawful money that is needed.

It does not seem it is most suitors interest the way we understand it otherwise in our study group locally the context of keeping it all in treasury to redeem coupons and eventually not even have to do do that to get utilities started in the home an such, that way eventually no money should be needed as stated in various documents.
[ See Page 2]
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...thkey=CMfv6uQO

That is some great exploration Motla68! Thank you for sharing that.

There is one blaring problem that seems to have been overcome. The scenario is that an employer, payroll or personnel calls up the 800 # for inquiring about such things and gets a low level IRS agent who says give them Zero Exemptions just to be safe. The employee will get everthing back they deserve after paying their fair share.

So the employer complies and the employee is on a marked up Tax Protester category and likely to get the Axe next time layoffs roll around.

My presumption is that the IRS is being careful enough to keep trained people answering who are informed about Title 12 U.S.C. §411, or at least this woman lucked out or has an informed employer. My policy before seeing this example has been to keep the employer out of the redemption process. Since a suitor would not be keeping an interest bearing account with a Redeemed Lawful Money Signature Card anyway it all comes back. Now it would be good to have your cash flow on time so in my video I suggest after you get a full refund, then you might approach your employer about the Withholdings.

Thank you for showing us how that could be done without much risk of losing one's job.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

That is some great exploration Motla68! Thank you for sharing that.

There is one blaring problem that seems to have been overcome. The scenario is that an employer, payroll or personnel calls up the 800 # for inquiring about such things and gets a low level IRS agent who says give them Zero Exemptions just to be safe. The employee will get everthing back they deserve after paying their fair share.

So the employer complies and the employee is on a marked up Tax Protester category and likely to get the Axe next time layoffs roll around.

My presumption is that the IRS is being careful enough to keep trained people answering who are informed about Title 12 U.S.C. §411, or at least this woman lucked out or has an informed employer. My policy before seeing this example has been to keep the employer out of the redemption process. Since a suitor would not be keeping an interest bearing account with a Redeemed Lawful Money Signature Card anyway it all comes back. Now it would be good to have your cash flow on time so in my video I suggest after you get a full refund, then you might approach your employer about the Withholdings.

Thank you for showing us how that could be done without much risk of losing one's job.



Regards,

David Merrill.

---

Hi David,

I am looking for the starting point for this idea. I realize it may not be so cut and dried, but where should I go to begin to understand this process? Having a link or two in this thread would be a great help.

Thank you,
earthshake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earthshake

Hi David,

I am looking for the starting point for this idea. I realize it may not be so cut and dried, but where should I go to begin to understand this process? Having a link or two in this thread would be a great help.

Thank you,
earthshake

---

I produced two videos. The first one has a great article in it but I applied a computer voice read-along that I often regret.

http://os.cloudme.com/v1/documents/2...e%20Credit.wmv

http://os.cloudme.com/v1/documents/2...-%20Remedy.wmv


Let me know if you can get these off the Cloud please?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I produced two videos. The first one has a great article in it but I applied a computer voice read-along that I often regret.

http://os.cloudme.com/v1/documents/2...e%20Credit.wmv

http://os.cloudme.com/v1/documents/2...-%20Remedy.wmv

Let me know if you can get these off the Cloud please?

---

I'm prompted to enter a username and password whenever I follow the links you provided.

Perhaps you can upload those videos to the Downloads section of this site.

Yes, I will give that a try. Here they are on Google Docs:

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1E...1MGEy&hl=en_US

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1E...3NWE5&hl=en_US

Hi David,
I have watched both videos. Here's what I understand up to this point, and please correct me if I am wrong. Setting aside the whys and wherefores for now:

We essentially have 2 forms of government: The US Government and the Federal Government.

Federal Reserve Notes (FRN's) are lawful elastic money, aka called private credit because the Federal Reserve Banks is privately owned.

U.S. Notes (now called U.S. Currency Notes) are lawful in-elastic money - aka public money because they are issued by the U.S. Government.

Fractional reserve banking practices can be applied to elastic money but not to in-elastic money.

When I endorse a check with just my signature, that creates a presumption by the Fed/IRS that I understand I am agreeing to use their private credit, and am therefore required to pay income tax on those funds, over and above $1000 per year.

So instead of agreeing further, I may endorse checks: "Redeemed in Lawful Money Pursuant to Title 12 U.S.C. Sec. 411, My Name, My Legal Name on Paycheck". This process eliminates income tax liability (but save copies of checks to prove it to the irs at the end of the year) and reduces the national debt.

Is that the gist of this?

If so, these questions arise:

What is done to refuse private credit if one receives electronic deposits from companies that are not local to them, or receives a check in the mail and cannot go to the bank upon which it is drawn?

Will the bank only give me cash, or does the money in my account now represent in-elastic money by some accounting process?

Thank you,
earthshake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earthshake

Hi David,
I have watched both videos. Here's what I understand up to this point, and please correct me if I am wrong. Setting aside the whys and wherefores for now:

We essentially have 2 forms of government: The US Government and the Federal Government.

More like two forms of currency in circulation - US notes (US currency notes) are in limited circulation between the 12 Fed Banks only so that they do not wear out by handling. They are not to be used for a reserve currency so they are inelastic.

Federal Reserve Notes (FRN's) are lawful elastic money, aka called private credit because the Federal Reserve Banks is privately owned.

It is being elastic that prevents FRN's from being fully lawful money and the law stipulates they may be redeemed in lawful money - US notes.

U.S. Notes (now called U.S. Currency Notes) are lawful in-elastic money - aka public money because they are issued by the U.S. Government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by US v Rickman; 638 F.2d 182

In the exercise of that power Congress has declared that Federal Reserve Notes are legal tender and are redeemable in lawful money.

---

and

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by US v Ware; 608 F.2d 400

United States notes shall be lawful money, and a legal tender in payment of all debts, public and private, within the United States, except for duties on imports and interest on the public debt.

---

Congress has the authority to define money - the courts describe money accurately. However the January 1, 2011 Memorandum to IRS agents mis-applies Rickman so citing this with your Return is no longer wise - as it may not be brought to the attention of an IRS attorney these days.

Fractional reserve banking practices can be applied to elastic money but not to in-elastic money.

Yes. For a better explanation Click Here.

When I endorse a check with just my signature, that creates a presumption by the Fed/IRS that I understand I am agreeing to use their private credit, and am therefore required to pay income tax on those funds, over and above $1000 per year.

Actually that is $6K I believe, before you are required to file at all. The $1K is an exemption that may still be applied, I don't know, on coinage as lawful money. Understand that the 1984 Author was not aware apparently that the same Demand in Title 12 U.S.C. §411 could be applied to all cash - US notes in the form of FRN's.

So instead of agreeing further, I may endorse checks: "Redeemed in Lawful Money Pursuant to Title 12 U.S.C. Sec. 411, My Name, My Legal Name on Paycheck". This process eliminates income tax liability (but save copies of checks to prove it to the irs at the end of the year) and reduces the national debt.

Is that the gist of this?

Yes. Thank you for sharing first impressions. It helps teach me what people glean from the videos.


Thank you,
earthshake

---

If so, these questions arise:

What is done to refuse private credit if one receives electronic deposits from companies that are not local to them, or receives a check in the mail and cannot go to the bank upon which it is drawn?

This may be done on the Signature Card or through Payroll where you work. Just go correct your Authorizing Signature to make Demand for Lawful Money on all transactions. Be aware though, you have to be confident and polite - not demanding with your employer. Don't get yourself fired because you are obstinant.

They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

Any way you can get your demand on the record will suffice. So let's say Payroll tells you that you cannot change or specially sign your Signature Card for Direct Deposit. Ask for paychecks? If they do not want to do that, request that they make note that you requested it? Any way to make the record show your intent - after that you are redeeming lawful money.



Will the bank only give me cash, or does the money in my account now represent in-elastic money by some accounting process?


This is only when you are getting cash in hand.

Ever notice how Office Max or PetSmart will have you sign for cash? They want you to endorse that it is private credit. I enjoy messing with them about it. Used to anyway. Now I just sign, Lawful Money and move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Actually that is $6K I believe, before you are required to file at all. The $1K is an exemption that may still be applied, I don't know, on coinage as lawful money. Understand that the 1984 Author was not aware apparently that the same Demand in Title 12 U.S.C. §411 could be applied to all cash - US notes in the form of FRN's.

---

Correct . The amount is currently $6,000 according to I.R.S. Publication 3453 (11-1999) . I have used this little info a lot over the years . The trap comes in the withholding racket .This Publication has not been updated apparently for a long time . I look for an update most every year , just to be sure .

Copy on line : Thank You for Not Filing