No Income Tax paid - 3 years and counting.

[fishnet]

JohnnyCash,

Be careful with how you interpret tax code and be aware of how the courts interpret. Idaho State Tax Commision published this decision. Idaho Code relies on Internal Revenue Code.

"The taxpayer argued the amounts reported on the Forms 1099-MISC were incorrectly
shown as nonemployee compensation because this alleges he was in a trade or business, and a
trade or business is defined by IRC section 7701(a)(26) as the performance of the functions of a
public office. The taxpayer stated neither he nor the payers identified on the Forms 1099 were
involved in the performance of the functions of a public office.

In his interpretation of IRC section 7701(a)(26), the taxpayer misses a key component of
that section’s definition of the term “trade or business.” Subpart (26) states, “The term ‘trade or
business’ includes the performance of the functions of a public office.” This subpart does not
state that a trade or business is exclusively the performance of the functions of a public office. It
states it includes the performance of the functions of a public office. In fact, IRC section 7701(c)
defines the terms “includes” and “including” when used in a definition contained in the IRC. It
states that the terms includes and including shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise
within the meaning of the term defined. Therefore, the term trade or business also includes those
things generally attributable to the words trade and business.

Regardless of whether the taxpayer believes the services provided to the payers listed on
the Forms 1099-MISC constitutes or comes up to the level of a trade or business, the taxpayer
received compensation or remuneration for his services. According to IRC section 61, that
DECISION - 4
[Redacted] compensation is part of the taxpayer’s gross income."

http://tax.idaho.gov/decisions/0720157.pdf

[motla68]

31 USC 3124 - Sec. 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, except - (1) a nondiscriminatory franchise tax or another nonproperty tax instead of a franchise tax, imposed on a corporation; and (2) an estate or inheritance tax. (b) The tax status of interest on obligations and dividends, earnings, or other income from evidences of ownership issued by the Government or an agency and the tax treatment of gain and loss from the disposition of those obligations and evidences of ownership is decided under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1 et seq.). An obligation that the Federal Housing Administration had agreed, under a contract made before March 1, 1941, to issue at a future date, has the tax exemption privileges provided by the authorizing law at the time of the contract.

This subsection does not apply to obligations and evidences of ownership issued by the District of Columbia, a territory or possession of the United States, or a department, agency, instrumentality, or political subdivision of the District, territory, or possession.
************************************************** ********************************************

26 CFR 1.83-3 - Meaning and use of certain terms.

Code of Federal Regulations - Title 26: Internal Revenue

(4)(g)
Amount paid. For purposes of section 83 and the regulations thereunder, the term amount paid refers to the value of any money or property paid for the transfer of property to which section 83 applies, and does not refer to any amount paid for the right to use such property or to receive the income therefrom. Such value does not include any stated or unstated interest payments. For rules regarding the calculation of the amount of unstated interest payments, see 1.4831(c).

When section 83 applies to the transfer of property pursuant to the exercise of an option, the term amount paid refers to any amount paid for the grant of the option plus any amount paid as the exercise price of the option. For rules regarding the forgiveness of indebtedness treated as an amount paid, see 1.834(c).
************************************************** ***************************************

The first statute shows the exemption for obligations of the United States, i.e. Lawful Money
The second statute is pretty much a checkmate because even that last statute mentioning the other sections, they relate to performance for services rendered which is also exempt.
Income is corporate profits, plain and simple because the value offered and amount paid are the same. Even bonus checks and such if marked with the demand for lawful money are exempt from taxation, because that shows you have no interest in profiting from the interest at banks.
This is also why it is best to try and find a bank account that is non-interest baring therefor no reporting to IRS need be done.
Claim ownership of nothing, exercise control of everything for the benefit of thy neighbor.

[Treefarmer]

JohnnyCash,

Be careful with how you interpret tax code and be aware of how the courts interpret. Idaho State Tax Commision published this decision. Idaho Code relies on Internal Revenue Code.

"The taxpayer argued the amounts reported on the Forms 1099-MISC were incorrectly
shown as nonemployee compensation because this alleges he was in a trade or business, and a
trade or business is defined by IRC section 7701(a)(26) as the performance of the functions of a
public office. The taxpayer stated neither he nor the payers identified on the Forms 1099 were
involved in the performance of the functions of a public office.

In his interpretation of IRC section 7701(a)(26), the taxpayer misses a key component of
that section’s definition of the term “trade or business.” Subpart (26) states, “The term ‘trade or
business’ includes the performance of the functions of a public office.” This subpart does not
state that a trade or business is exclusively the performance of the functions of a public office. It
states it includes the performance of the functions of a public office. In fact, IRC section 7701(c)
defines the terms “includes” and “including” when used in a definition contained in the IRC. It
states that the terms includes and including shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise
within the meaning of the term defined. Therefore, the term trade or business also includes those
things generally attributable to the words trade and business.

Regardless of whether the taxpayer believes the services provided to the payers listed on
the Forms 1099-MISC constitutes or comes up to the level of a trade or business, the taxpayer
received compensation or remuneration for his services. According to IRC section 61, that
DECISION - 4
[Redacted] compensation is part of the taxpayer’s gross income."

http://tax.idaho.gov/decisions/0720157.pdf

The IRC is a trap IMHO, designed to distract attention away from the real object of the income tax, which is the endorsement of Federal Reserve credit. The IRC twists statutory construction to the utmost in order to look like something that it is not.
Normally the term (not word) "includes" has a limiting function in statutory construction.
I've lost some bookmarks to lightening so I can't conveniently pull up an example right now, but if you look at statutes from sections other than 26USC you will find that the term "includes" excludes all other items which are not listed in the text of the statute.
In order to be able to have it both ways, i.e. for the code to look good and "constitutional" to the masses, but to be interpreted according to the secret hidden contract of the Fed banks, the code provides the courts with the preposterous definition of the term "includes" and "including".

It took them roughly 1.5 million words to obscure the truth and the remedy, and they have been extremely successful at beguiling the people with it.

I had an interesting article on the terms include, including, includes, etc saved up and will try to find it on my old computer.

[Treefarmer]

Can't find that article anymore, so I will link to the Informer because he explains it so much better than I.

[Treefarmer]

JohnnyCash,

Be careful with how you interpret tax code and be aware of how the courts interpret....
...........
states that the terms includes and including shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise
within the meaning of the term defined. Therefore, the term trade or business also includes those
things generally attributable to the words trade and business.

Found what I was looking for after all.
I believe that this little treatise on key terms used in the IRC supports my assertion that the IRC was written especially to obfuscate remedy and to hide the truth about Federal Reserve Credit as opposed to Lawful Money from the people.

[Darkmagus]

JohnnyCash,

Be careful with how you interpret tax code and be aware of how the courts interpret. Idaho State Tax Commision published this decision. Idaho Code relies on Internal Revenue Code.

"The taxpayer argued the amounts reported on the Forms 1099-MISC were incorrectly
shown as nonemployee compensation because this alleges he was in a trade or business, and a
trade or business is defined by IRC section 7701(a)(26) as the performance of the functions of a
public office. The taxpayer stated neither he nor the payers identified on the Forms 1099 were
involved in the performance of the functions of a public office.

In his interpretation of IRC section 7701(a)(26), the taxpayer misses a key component of
that section’s definition of the term “trade or business.” Subpart (26) states, “The term ‘trade or
business’ includes the performance of the functions of a public office.” This subpart does not
state that a trade or business is exclusively the performance of the functions of a public office. It
states it includes the performance of the functions of a public office. In fact, IRC section 7701(c)
defines the terms “includes” and “including” when used in a definition contained in the IRC. It
states that the terms includes and including shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise
within the meaning of the term defined. Therefore, the term trade or business also includes those
things generally attributable to the words trade and business.

Regardless of whether the taxpayer believes the services provided to the payers listed on
the Forms 1099-MISC constitutes or comes up to the level of a trade or business, the taxpayer
received compensation or remuneration for his services. According to IRC section 61, that
DECISION - 4
[Redacted] compensation is part of the taxpayer’s gross income."

http://tax.idaho.gov/decisions/0720157.pdf

Fish, this is hogwash! Those of us who have studied the use of the terms "includes/including" can see through the obfuscation attempt of the IRS. According to the definition section, from earlier revenue acts, and Blacks law dictionary, YES "includes" is a term of expansion as they submit, but the expansion only occurs within the items of the same class as those enumerated.

Eg. "For the purposes of this chapter the term "automobile" includes cars, trucks, motorcycles" Even though NOT enumerated the term can reasonably be expanded to include scooters, but would you honestly say it could reasonably include "kites"? Of course not, because "kites" are NO WAY in the same class as the aforementioned.