Welcome freedomfighter. As I understand, the company banked some of its income as lawful money by stamping the backside of deposited checks like this: http://jesse2012.com/boaCHECK.jpg Also called a 'restricted endorsement.' The similar stamped receipt shown probably functions as a reminder or indicator of that lawful money deposit. The amount appears to be over $116,000.
Last edited by JohnnyCash; 03-18-13 at 05:49 PM.
It seems they don't want to play anymore.Originally Posted by David Lyn
Blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over me.
So they are leaving you alone? How long now?
You do know that these posts are dated, right? And that the Philistines read them? Apparently word got back Goliath that I was approaching the battlefield with my sling and stone. They did not show up. He who attacks must vanquish, he who defends must merely survive.
Blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over me.
Yeah, realized that after I posted.. Stupid question
Don't sweat the small stuff.
Blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over me.
I am just curious if the IRS has come back to anyone who has applied the demanding lawful money process and disallowed the process? I have been doing the process for three years now and have success in two of those three years and have not gotten the refund check yet for 2012. I am just wondering what others in the group may have experienced in applying this process that have done it for more years.
Sometimes the IRS comes back after several years and disallows a process. Has anyone in the forum that has been doing the process had such contact from the IRS? I am not doubting the process, I am just wondering what others may have experienced? I am not very computer savy and I hope I am doing this right to get on the forum. Let me know if I am doing anything wrong. Thanks all, John Henry
I do not spend much time sanitizing documentation. So you have likely seen all the examples I have around here.
Your post shows up fine!
I am glad you are having success. Lots of folks are. There is a lot to be said for taking this risk without all the confidence building.
I do not go into the statistics of suitors in detail for reasons that I do not disclose. Only one suitor has been billed the $5K FrivPen but he began to espouse Ed RIVERA's dichotomized government doctrine on his Clerk Instruction. Big mistake! I feel it was borderline entrapment considering that he now has that bill as a bill of indictment against the IRS agent.
I think that's a legitimate concern about the IRS.
The best way to experiment would be on returns which would get a refund no matter how you file them.
If the IRS threatens frivolous filing penalties a few years down the road, then replace the LM return with a "conventionally" filed return and since it will still show a refund is due, there should be no interest charges.
I've also noticed that the IRS seems to expand its confiscatory grasp ever more, where it could not reach before.
This may be due to court decisions in their favor, or secret international treaties due to the nature of the IMF, or some processes which I don't know anything about.
They seem to be able to stick their greedy covetous hands ever deeper into the bank account holders' pockets.
For example, some non-conventional ways of filing such as Pete HENDRICKSON's, worked for many years and then quit working for people.
Treefarmer
There is power in the blood of Jesus
No Greg. Here's an example of a one-time penalty abatement:
page 2 here: http://jesse2012.com/168C_2.jpg
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote