Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 55

Thread: IRS recognizes Redeeming Lawful Money - Yes!!!

  1. #31
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    I redeem lawful money. The IRS has never attacked me. You are fearful MOTL, you project fear. Perhaps that is why Wes nicknamed you Pamsfear.

  2. #32
    ManOntheLand
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    Ok, I get that. The problem with lawful money of the U.S. is it is fire! They may find ways to intimidate and coerce as always but this remedy is correct in my view. I don't think they will want to discuss this topic in court. Oh and as far as attacking folks attempting remedy, it is bound to happen as most agents only know what the IRM says. Your material probably has to be pitched to someone (a lawyer) who has a clue. Most people are just flat ignorant of this distinction between different types of "money".
    I think the LMR remedy is correct as well, Brian. Some people on this forum seem to have gotten me all wrong on that point. The extent of how rigged and corrupt the system is should not be underestimated, however. I have seen it up close. I think I see a way to handle IRS that might make everybody happy.

    Granted if IRS seems to be okay with what you are doing, you would seem to be in good shape. But we know the possibility for unlawful harassment will always be there. So get them to tell you if they are going to have a problem with your LMR remedy BEFORE you file anything.

    Let's assume for the sake of argument that LMR is ALL you need to do to exempt yourself from income tax and that disputing information returns sent to IRS a la CTC is therefore unnecessary. I would love it if this turns out to be the case, BTW! I am just not convinced yet.

    There is a good way to find out if IRS will honor your LMR remedy WITHOUT filing a return and risking frivolous return penalties or "false document" felony charges:

    Let IRS know in a statement (not a tax return) that you redeemed all deposits for LM, include your copies etc. and that it is your understanding that this exempts you from income tax. Invite them to rebut this position if they disagree. Then ASK for a determination of whether you are required to file!! Tell them if they do not respond within 30 days or whatever, you will assume they agree you are exempt from all tax and are NOT required to file. Perhaps they will even send you a letter stating you are not required to file!!! A refund of withholding should then be issued automatically!! If not, you can make a claim for refund and attach their letter stating you are not required to file. You may separately request a refund of FICA withholding on Form 843 if you believe you are entitled to that.

    If they do not reply within 30 days to your inquiry about exemption/filing requirement, you can default them and make an informal claim for a refund of all withholding, attaching a copy of your previous correspondence to show you are relying on their tacit agreement with your position.

    Even better, you can now safely claim exempt on W-4, and you won't have to wait for a refund next year (except FICA).

    Why is this way better than just filing a 1040 and taking a LMR deduction? Because you are not submitting anything that "purports to be a return" under IRC 6702 frivolous penalty provisions. If they still end up trying to hang a frivolous penalty on you later (or if you insist on filing a return to claim your refund and they claim it is frivolous) you will have a reasonable cause for abatement of the penalty on Form 843, since all you did was rely on their agreement/tacit agreement that this was okay for you to do!!
    Last edited by ManOntheLand; 05-24-13 at 09:05 AM.

  3. #33
    Hi Johnny! It is always good to have you around!

    I made a point about revealing private details and since you brought up Quatloos - that is really where I learned all about that. For months I would look at their Tax Protester forum and find O Members and 1 Guest - Me! Wesley SERRA - WSERRA - shot that place down with his attack on Redeeming Lawful Money.

    ManOnTheLand;


    I hear where you are coming from and note that you are spending quite a bit of verbiage trying to convince me that the IRS is corrupt. If you are right then this is all of no use because the System has grown arbitrary, capricious and lawless. Why bother learning about law when you are better off to learn how to obey or how to destroy and rebel? I like to think that is what I would be teaching - that I am smart enough to teach that instead of how to waste energy by creating heat!

    This is why I am not reading your posts very carefully. And why I have asked you to state your premise at the very beginning so that I can gist at a quick glance. I will try to spend more time reading though.

    I did try to get the essence across to you in terms of the torroid/heart math. I emphasized the suitor's comment in red above. The IRS as well as every conscious being is law-abiding. This particular suitor by learning the Word (trust law) has perfected Jesus' (Yehoshuah) redemption model and undergirded that by amplifying the Word through his children. The fruit is a 35% pay raise as only the beginning...

  4. #34
    Goldi
    Guest
    This YouTube came out in 2009. Oregon Representative Hanna from the Oregon House Floor noting to all that the OR State CAFR showed "Billions" (4.9 total) available over what all were being told of 500 million. Watch the reaction from the other Representatives, an: Oh, crap moment, "He broke the silence is golden rule". Mr. Hanna holds in his hand a copy of the cover page of the OR State CAFR and not the whole report.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VakE...719BCD&index=4

  5. #35
    Goldi
    Guest
    "I either consented to give a SSN and sign a W-4 or I did not. What I am claiming the employer did to me is so obviously wrong legally as to be almost self-evident. Other than "did this really happen?" there is no debate!! Unless you want to argue that it is somehow okay that my employer coerced me!"

    Manontheland, I guarantee you that if you asked an IRS agent what Subtitle tax were you purportedly liable for, the answer would be a Subtitle A "income" tax. That makes your employer taking your money and handing it over a "withholding agent" which is defined at 26 USC 7701 (a)(16), which further describes who a withholding agent can withhold from as found in 26 CFR 1.1441, 1442, 1443 and 1461...all of which are foreign corps, foreign orgs and non resident alien/foreign persons.

    That means that there was misrepresentation of the facts, undue influence, deceit, trickery and a lack of full disclosure of the knowledge that under 26 CFR 31.3402(n), you could have filled out a W-4 certifying to not having a Subtitle A tax liability as you are not a foreign person. Now how can you possibly form an intent to avail yourself of a purported tax liability without all the cards on the table? You couldn't. That makes the signature on the W-4 form "unauthorized" and effectively a forgery.
    Last edited by Goldi; 05-25-13 at 10:28 PM.

  6. #36
    ManOntheLand
    Guest
    Agreed Goldi! If it will not jeopardize one's job, it is a good idea to recognize the right to terminate withholding under 26 CFR 3402 (who is this provision intended for if we are supposed to believe everybody is subject to this tax?) and submit a written notice to the employer that you relieve them of the requirement to withhold, and indemnify them against liability.

    Even if the employer refuses to stop withholding, and you do not want to push it, you have made your record and can use this as evidence if ever needed that all of this is against your will. It is a good extra layer of long term insurance against IRS harassment.

    Even if you were liable for a tax, IRS has zero right to receive your money in advance of a liability being determined. Tax withholding is effectively an interest free loan you are making to them until April 15 the next year! The purpose of withholding is not only to encourage taxpayer compliance (people getting a fat refund can't file a return fast enough) but to control inflation as well. Congress conducted hearings in the early 40's to investigate income tax withholding at the source as "an inflation control measure". It is also useful mind control for the money to already be gone when you get paid--so you never think of that portion of your check as being"your" money in the first place. As Chris Rock once said, "You get your paycheck, the money's already gone. That's not a tax, that's a JACK!"
    Last edited by ManOntheLand; 05-25-13 at 11:13 PM.

  7. #37
    If it will not jeopardize one's job...

    Speaking from experience, one can start with the employer 100% behind standing up to the IRS and then completely turn.

  8. #38
    Goldi
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Speaking from experience, one can start with the employer 100% behind standing up to the IRS and then completely turn.
    26 CFR 1.1461 creates a liability on the employer if he continues to withhold when you make the claim of exemption from a Subtitle A tax. The definition of withholding agent is one who is allowed to withhold from a 26 CFR 1.1441 foreign person, a 1.1442 foreign corp. or a 1.1443 foreign organization. If you are not one of those, then the authority to withhold is destroyed, making the employer vulnerable to be sued. It's really not a matter of "standing up" to the IRS. It's a matter of reading that code and being in compliance with it or get your butt handed to you in court.
    Last edited by Goldi; 08-08-13 at 07:14 PM.

  9. #39

  10. #40
    How's this for a W-4?

    W-4 Yo Mama.pdf
    Blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over me.

Posting Permissions

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