"Redeeming" Credit

[jeffreydavid]

Something interesting happened recently. For all of 2011 I redeemed lawful money for all transactions, but I used a credit card in TRUE NAME LAST to cover renewal of two websites in the fall of 2011. When the invoices/coupons came I paid the bill using PMO but made sure I stamped on the invoice/coupon "Deposited for Credit on Account or Redeemed in Lawful Money Per Title 12 U.S.C. 411." I believe I did that two or three times last fall for relatively small amounts (maybe $13-$20 per transaction).

Now understand I only paid the amount on the invoice/coupon - nothing more, nothing less. I received a new "invoice" yesterday which shows a zero balance paid or due from the previous pay period but now shows a "5.00-" balance due. I will have to dig out the old statements from last year to verify the invoices and payments again, but it seems strange to me that the card is being credited for $5.00 when no overpayment has occurred in the past.

Once I confirm that the statements in fact were as I believe I will comment again. I just thought it was interesting that a credit now shows and I wonder if it has to do with the endorsement stamped on their invoice/coupon.

[David Merrill]

That is very interesting!

Thanks for keeping a close look at what is going on. Here is some Crosstalk:

I had a lengthy discussion with a suitor, who is qualified as in tax preparation and we went into some of the fundamentals of credit. He might have been coming from a different perspective but as I got it, we were discussing after one has published Notice and Demand in the county clerk, USDC and served that same N&D on the nearest Fed Bank, on might continue using a Credit Card without endorsing private credit. Of course my take is that we should discard the Credit Cards and use Debit Cards. We covered this extensively so I will just bring out some points that stuck with me.



His notion was that since N&D is properly given it is incumbent upon the bankers to watch their P?s and Q?s about lending fractionally on any funds in your account, since you have clearly not bonded any increase in the money supply (you have not endorsed a credit to the national debt). If they bond without authorization from you, the creditor, then that is counterfeiting money. So without anybody to monitor that, they will probably get away with it but I am not ready to send suitors into banking oversight.



This leads me to take the perspective of any black-robed attorney supposing this issue gets into court. By having the preponderance of credit ? Credit Card ? one accepts private credit. The attorney in the black robe will suppose that one day you will need to replace your transmission and so by private emergency you will need to take your credit card company up on their offer that you can take another 30 days or more to pay up the CC bill? By asking for credit in other words, you provided your Personal Information as debtor. Information indicts! You have already submitted your Name as granting Power of Attorney to the CC Company.

[I have amended my thought on that. As soon as you use a credit card you are getting credit. If you do not pay it off in the grace period, you get penalized.]

This really got fascinating from there though! We described the distinction between FRNs and USNs and decided that a loan is always granting credit. So one needs to provide Information if one wants a loan ? consistently ? whether elastic currency or not. So with the N&D in place properly served, is there any difference in the taxability of credit? Since you are specifying non-elastic currency with the N&D are transactions by the Credit Card considered taxable income?



We brought up the Atlanta Fed suit last year. I tried to convince BEACH that he needed to describe his injury, a class action for us all that the US notes are tied in value to the Fed notes that depreciates them both! He gave me no credit if you like the pun. Get a look though. If a suitor with understanding tried suing the Fed, then maybe a proper description of the Injury could be lodged.

[jeffreydavid]

Another suitor and I talked about the use of credit cards at length just before I began complete redemption of lawful money and stopped using the credit cards. What we never determined was the following - at the time we spoke he believed you could use up to $6,000 since he was under the assumption that is the minimum amount of credit you needed to use to be "forced" to "file a return." I don't believe the amount is correct as I believe the current minimum amount of "credit" one needs to use is about $13,000 (give or take) to have to file a return. But his thought, which makes total sense, was why give them any reason at all to come through the gate? Just don't use them.

But as a follow up on that thought, since my car accident two weeks ago I am in need of renting a car. But the rental agencies only use credit or debit, no cash. Yes, one can use a debit card and they will pull an extra $200 or so off the top "just in case" but what a pain. Then you have to hope no one takes that number and drains any cash from the account (side note: I keep a minimum balance in that account just in case something like that happens).

But anyway, it would be nice to be able to use up to a predetermined amount on a credit card each year without issue. But thus far I am not sure how one can. Thanks for the Xtalk above. I find it very interesting but without knowing more of the situation they speak of I am not completely confident I comprehend exactly the point they are making.

[Sabo]

There's something I don't understand with this, though.

Your private credit is with an issuing lender - which not all are Fed banks, correct? It certainly must be possible to have private credit with a private entity without involving fractional lending (on what?) or other federal 'privilege'. I enter a contract with you, and you tell me you'll pay for up to $10,000 of anything I want, as long as I simply pay you back, including any interest if I haven't squared up with you by the end of each month.

But in any event, it's not like you have "money", even on paper, with a credit card. You're in the hole if you use it. It's not 'income' (IRS definition or otherwise), and you don't ever report it on a return (assuming you're subject to a return, that is).
I'm just having trouble following the logic on how every instance of a 'private credit' would subject you to any sort of income tax. You pay for my things, and I pay you back in lawful money.

[jeffreydavid]

As far as I comprehend it every time you endorse private credit it is use. And the "tax" is nothing more than tribute. Therefore, there should be no difference between someone who doesn't work at all (think of a non-working spouse) who uses credit cards compared to their spouse who endorses private credit. Now what if the spouse who works converts to lawful money but the other continues to buy on credit cards, let's say, $40,000 per year. My bet is the IRS will be knocking down their door to collect on use of that private credit. Others can clarify this much better than I, but using credit is the taxable event, and every credit card is backed by the system so therefore it is endorsing private credit when one is used.

[jeffreydavid]

Update - "Redeeming Credit" confirmed. On December 18, 2011 a charge was placed for $22.16. I didn't notice this before but there was already a $0.10 credit balance from my prior payment that also had my demand stamped on it. The resulting balance due was $22.06 which was paid via PMO on or after January 5, 2012 for the same amount. On the coupon I stamped "DEPOSITED FOR CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OR REDEEMED IN LAWFUL MONEY PER TITLE 12 U.S.C. 411" in red letters.

On the new statement I recently received the Previous balance shows "$0.00" but shows Other Credits as "5.00." Under New Balance it shows "$5.00-"

Go figure. Definitely something interesting there.

[Sabo]

Update - "Redeeming Credit" confirmed. On December 18, 2011 a charge was placed for $22.16. I didn't notice this before but there was already a $0.10 credit balance from my prior payment that also had my demand stamped on it. The resulting balance due was $22.06 which was paid via PMO on or after January 5, 2012 for the same amount. On the coupon I stamped "DEPOSITED FOR CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OR REDEEMED IN LAWFUL MONEY PER TITLE 12 U.S.C. 411" in red letters.

On the new statement I recently received the Previous balance shows "$0.00" but shows Other Credits as "5.00." Under New Balance it shows "$5.00-"

Go figure. Definitely something interesting there.

You should call and ask first. I have a lot of trouble believing a webhost would have some sort of federal ties that would adjust your balance just for redeeming lawful money.. or even know what that means.

[David Merrill]

Update - "Redeeming Credit" confirmed. On December 18, 2011 a charge was placed for $22.16. I didn't notice this before but there was already a $0.10 credit balance from my prior payment that also had my demand stamped on it. The resulting balance due was $22.06 which was paid via PMO on or after January 5, 2012 for the same amount. On the coupon I stamped "DEPOSITED FOR CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OR REDEEMED IN LAWFUL MONEY PER TITLE 12 U.S.C. 411" in red letters.

On the new statement I recently received the Previous balance shows "$0.00" but shows Other Credits as "5.00." Under New Balance it shows "$5.00-"

Go figure. Definitely something interesting there.

Indeed, that is interesting. This is classical coupon redemption and it appears there is an account to draw from when there is not. It is a mechanism of credit I am sure of it. I have used POMC's long ago and observed this too. The real mechanism is that if you offer legal tender and the creditor refuses it, then the debt is waived. The coupon is legal tender.

About the Credit Card confusion.

It is difficult to ponder about. I spent over an hour discussing this with a very informed suitor the other day and a couple hours later it became clear. The moment you pay for something with a credit card you have accepted private credit. The confusion - in my mind at least during the conversation was that the credit started in 30 days! That is when the penalties begin, not the credit.



I hope that helps.

David Merrill.

[freedave]

Today I sent to my brokerage firm the check I have been holding onto.

On the back it has
Deposit for credit on account
to be redeemed in lawful money
USCA12 section 411
above my signature.

[Lawful]

When it comes to credit card use, I have never received any paperwork (1099's) for my credit cards. I have one with the bank I currently use and they send me a 1099 for the interest I made on my interest bearing account (all of 2 dollars) nothing to do with the ccard. Just my experience.