Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 158

Thread: 1st Return Redeeming Lawful Money

  1. #51
    Member froze25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The Land that some call New York
    Posts
    71
    I have still not received the letter from the IRS as they indicated on their website. Has anyone else gotten this from the IRS, if so how did you respond?

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by EZrhythm View Post
    Why are you waiting for next year? Why not demand lawful money "nunc pro tunc" this year and years past and collect those refunds!
    I am not sure of this mechanism. I have not set up a repository/court. I have also read posts that this was done successfully in the past but the IRS is no longer obliging this type of return.

    Any recent success stories regarding "nunc pro tunc" on a return that has no precedent of actual demand for that tax year?

  3. #53
    Member froze25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The Land that some call New York
    Posts
    71
    Ok, I got the letter from the IRS, Here it is suggested replies?
    Name:  IRS-LetterPg1.jpg
Views: 1799
Size:  39.1 KB
    Temporarily Deleted
    Name:  IRS-LetterPg3.jpg
Views: 1434
Size:  32.8 KB
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by froze25; 03-29-14 at 05:42 PM. Reason: Added more pictures

  4. #54
    One part of the letter says, "your position has no basis in law, IRC bla bla bla" which of course is not true law.

    So I wonder if it's a matter of passing the "hot potato" back to them with a rebuttal letter?

    And the word "may" as in "may file a bla bla bla against you" seems to imply a possibility, but no real commitment, like the obnoxious yapping neighborhood dog that barks at every little thing but never attacks, never catches the squirrel, etc..

  5. #55
    Suitors with an evidence repository have had success by adding to the Clerk Instruction (Refusal for Cause):



    I have examined the citations you have included in your letter and there is no connection with the process of redeeming lawful money that I am doing.

    But that is with a Libel of Review for an evidence repository and properly refusing for cause the FrivPen warning letter.

    May I suggest:

    Your letter postdated April 5, 2014 stating that I have filed a frivolous Tax Return confuses me. I have been making demand for redeemed lawful money most of the tax year 2013 and therefore should be getting nearly a full refund of all withholdings. Additionally I have examined the citations you have included in your letter and there is no connection with the process of redeeming lawful money that I am doing. Please explain exactly where on the Memorandum of 40 Frivolous Arguments you find the Remedy I am using and respond immediately BEFORE charging me a $5,000 Frivolous Penalty.
    Last edited by David Merrill; 03-30-14 at 03:35 AM.

  6. #56
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by froze25 View Post
    Ok, I got the letter from the IRS, Here it is suggested replies?
    Name:  IRS-LetterPg1.jpg
Views: 1799
Size:  39.1 KB
    Temporarily Deleted
    Name:  IRS-LetterPg3.jpg
Views: 1434
Size:  32.8 KB
    froze do not listen to those who would tell you to NOT respond to this as it is just gobbygook. The IRS has convened a common law court in Admiralty and the matter is being heard RIGHT NOW. If you do not respond within 30 days, THEN you will be considered to be in default. And judgement is a matter of Res Judicata. You bring judgment in your silence. Therefore do not remain silent.

    I have no idea what you sent them however you are now at a cross roads. If it was me I would write the agent to find out WHY the filing was frivolous - BECAUSE according to your records you deem it to be fine. They made a Claim - and if you remain silent their claim stands. So you write back - Counter Claim. In fact you are the accommodation party in this contract IF you have been endorsing the Federal Reserve System. So as such, it appears that you have an obligation. so what is it?

    Are you or are you not? If you have kept your records, then maybe you send the agent a copy of front/back of check from beginning, middle and end of year cycle. Shows sustained performance. But read carefully - if you remain silent then you bring judgment on your own head.

    Don't get wrapped around the axle - they beleive you to have an obligation - which you may or may not have. In trust law the trustee is PRESUMED guilty and must show his innocence. So are you righteous or not? If so you had best write back and prove it from within your Court of Record!


    THANK YOU FOR YOUR RECENT CORRESPONDENCE - I HAVE EXAMINED IT VERY CAREFULLY AND FOR THE LIFE OF ME I CANNOT FIND WHERE MAKING A DEMAND FOR LAWFUL MONEY PER 12USC411 IS A FRIVOLOUS POSITION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LETTER, I HAVE ATTACHED A SAMPLE OF DEMANDS FOR YOUR CONTEMPLATION - IF I CAN BE OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE - PLEASE ADVISE.

    shalom,
    MJ

    P.S. I just saw David Merrill's post and I am in agreement.
    Last edited by Michael Joseph; 03-29-14 at 11:53 PM.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

  7. #57
    Member froze25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The Land that some call New York
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Joseph View Post
    froze do not listen to those who would tell you to NOT respond to this as it is just gobbygook. The IRS has convened a common law court in Admiralty and the matter is being heard RIGHT NOW. If you do not respond within 30 days, THEN you will be considered to be in default. And judgement is a matter of Res Judicata. You bring judgment in your silence. Therefore do not remain silent.

    I have no idea what you sent them however you are now at a cross roads. If it was me I would write the agent to find out WHY the filing was frivolous - BECAUSE according to your records you deem it to be fine. They made a Claim - and if you remain silent their claim stands. So you write back - Counter Claim. In fact you are the accommodation party in this contract IF you have been endorsing the Federal Reserve System. So as such, it appears that you have an obligation. so what is it?

    Are you or are you not? If you have kept your records, then maybe you send the agent a copy of front/back of check from beginning, middle and end of year cycle. Shows sustained performance. But read carefully - if you remain silent then you bring judgment on your own head.

    Don't get wrapped around the axle - they beleive you to have an obligation - which you may or may not have. In trust law the trustee is PRESUMED guilty and must show his innocence. So are you righteous or not? If so you had best write back and prove it from within your Court of Record!


    THANK YOU FOR YOUR RECENT CORRESPONDENCE - I HAVE EXAMINED IT VERY CAREFULLY AND FOR THE LIFE OF ME I CANNOT FIND WHERE MAKING A DEMAND FOR LAWFUL MONEY PER 12USC411 IS A FRIVOLOUS POSITION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LETTER, I HAVE ATTACHED A SAMPLE OF DEMANDS FOR YOUR CONTEMPLATION - IF I CAN BE OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE - PLEASE ADVISE.

    shalom,
    MJ

    P.S. I just saw David Merrill's post and I am in agreement.
    Michael if you look at the earlier posts I made in this thread you can see exactly what I sent them. I have posted everything in my process here. Check page 1 and 2 of this thread. Thank you for your response I do agree with you to rebut the presumption.

  8. #58
    Member froze25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The Land that some call New York
    Posts
    71
    OK so this is what I am thinking of using as my response letter. Let me know your thoughts.

    Dear Sir or Madam;


    The letter postdated April 7, 2014 (copy included with this letter) stating that I have filed a frivolous Tax Return confuses me. I have been making demand for redeemed lawful money most of the tax year 2013 and therefore should be getting nearly a full refund or a full refund of all withholdings. Additionally I have examined the citations you have included in your letter and there is no connection with the process of redeeming lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 that I have been and still are doing as evidenced by the copies of the checks that were included with my refund. I have included 3 of them with this letter as examples. To save money on postage I have not resent all of them. If the agents acting for the IRS need me to resend all of them I can and will upon request.

    Please explain exactly where on the Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4 (included with this letter) you find the Remedy I am using or something similar that applies to my filing and respond BEFORE charging me a $5,000 Frivolous Penalty because I cannot find any connection with the process of redeeming Lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 or demand for lawful money reduction on Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4.

    On the letter that was sent to me it states "review the enclosed Publication 2105 (Why do I have to pay taxes)". Publication 2105 was not included in the letter but I went on irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p2105.pdf and found what I believe to be the one that was supposed to be sent to me and included it with this letter. Is the included publication 2105 the one the letter I received from the IRS Post dated April 7th 2014 the Publication 2105 it was referring to? If it was the correct publication I was unable to find any reference to the process of redeeming lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 or demand for lawful money reduction.

    If I am mistaken please tell me what section(s) apply to my return in your response so that I may understand for this as well as future fillings. If after further review the 1040 I filed is found by the IRS to be correct as I have determined it to be, please respond in kind and I will await the check in the mail. If not please answer my questions and we can work to a speedy resolution.

    Warm Regards,
    John Q. Doe

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by David Neil View Post
    I am not sure of this mechanism. I have not set up a repository/court. I have also read posts that this was done successfully in the past but the IRS is no longer obliging this type of return.

    Any recent success stories regarding "nunc pro tunc" on a return that has no precedent of actual demand for that tax year?
    Based on the travails of froze25 and the documents he cited I found this:
    Frivolous tax returns; “nunc pro tunc.”
    This ruling emphasizes to taxpayers, promoters, and return preparers that inserting the
    phrase “nunc pro tunc” on a return or other document submitted to the Service has no legal effect and does not validate an invalid return, make a delinquent return timely, invalidate a signature, create a claim for refund of taxes previously paid, or reduce one’s federal tax liability


    I will therefore not use this for my current tax year. I will make a valid lawful money deduction based on my evidence repository.

    Froze25:
    Did you include your affidavit "In Support of Lawful Money". If so I wonder if they are using that document to qualify for "other document submitted to the Service" That affidavit uses the term "nunc pro tunc"?

  10. #60
    Member froze25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The Land that some call New York
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by David Neil View Post
    Based on the travails of froze25 and the documents he cited I found this:
    Frivolous tax returns; “nunc pro tunc.”
    This ruling emphasizes to taxpayers, promoters, and return preparers that inserting the
    phrase “nunc pro tunc” on a return or other document submitted to the Service has no legal effect and does not validate an invalid return, make a delinquent return timely, invalidate a signature, create a claim for refund of taxes previously paid, or reduce one’s federal tax liability


    I will therefore not use this for my current tax year. I will make a valid lawful money deduction based on my evidence repository.

    Froze25:
    Did you include your affidavit "In Support of Lawful Money". If so I wonder if they are using that document to qualify for "other document submitted to the Service" That affidavit uses the term "nunc pro tunc"?
    David Neil, I did not sent that in with my return so they do not have a document with "nunc pro tunc"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •