Do you receive an income?

[osbogosley]

A man tells me he wants his house remodeled. I agree to do the remodel. I use my energy(currency) to perform the changes. He, in exchange, gives me a check.

What he gives me is used to refill my energy bank. I view this as reimbursement for something I had used from my stores of current(energy).

I used something I already possesed in exchange for value of a different form. I loaned it until such time as he paid back what was determined to be equal value.

The current went 2 directions, out and back in. From my energy bank and then back in.

There was no wage, no pay, and no income. It was simply an exchange of currency whereby balance is achieved.

My records are balanced. There is no profit. There is no excess.

Agreeing to a tax on the check is insanity.

I explained this to the bank woman while I was setting up a new account and her eyes grew big. She said she would have never thought of it that way. I wonder what a revenue agent would say.

[Michael Joseph]

A man tells me he wants his house remodeled. I agree to do the remodel. I use my energy(currency) to perform the changes. He, in exchange, gives me a check.

What he gives me is used to refill my energy bank. I view this as reimbursement for something I had used from my stores of current(energy).

I used something I already possesed in exchange for value of a different form. I loaned it until such time as he paid back what was determined to be equal value.

The current went 2 directions, out and back in. From my energy bank and then back in.

There was no wage, no pay, and no income. It was simply an exchange of currency whereby balance is achieved.

My records are balanced. There is no profit. There is no excess.

Agreeing to a tax on the check is insanity.

I explained this to the bank woman while I was setting up a new account and her eyes grew big. She said she would have never thought of it that way. I wonder what a revenue agent would say.

Beard v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777-79 (1984)

On the face of your argument, I think yoiu are correct, but you deny the trust.

[Casper]

[Michael Joseph]

I had an IRS agent use that case in his argument to me concerning a zero filing that was previously issued. I explained Beard's argument and explained my position and the matter was easily resolved. I think that a computer must be scanning the returns. If Zero return, it is kicked out as a possible frivolous return under RIFEN v. US and BEARD v. COMMISSIONER.

I appreciate your argument Casper. In Rickman v. US, Rickman made a similar mistake. So too in MILAM. If I argue, I keep my words few and I stay on point.

Further, Beard argued he had no INCOME. That is absurd. Even if I redeem the notes, I still received notes [income]. What matters is my demand. Said another way, if I was 62 and eligible for social security, IF I do not apply, it ain't coming.

Shalom,
MJ

[Casper]

Your comments are always appreciated Michael Joseph. I learned quite a bit from you and David on this board and the talkshoe call you did. Good stuff. I am now a "redeemer" of lawful money. However I will have to admit I am an "idiot" (outsider) when it comes to the law society and their legalese. So my intent is to stay out (keep being an idiot). When one realizes the statutes and codes are there for commercial interstate commerce purposes, and for those that volunteer to enter that "beast" in a certain capacity, one realizes he has always had the option to come out of her. And I thank my "Kinsman-Redeemer" for the price He paid for redeeming me.

[Casper]

Being an "idiot" (outsider) of the federal tax code, take this for what its worth. But if I was one who held that office with that income subject to that code, as the orginal poster's comment suggests, one could look at the Title 26 Section 83 and ask a few questions. How does Section 83 operate in your conclusion that I owe tax on my labor? Where is your authority to exclude from any money or property the value of my labor? Then show a few court cases that demonstrate someone may be misinterpreting the term "any property". Those may be some difficult questions to answer by any agent of Trust #62 out of Puerto RICO, since Trust #62 never applies it. If you ever do get a response, please post it for our amusement.

This guy explains Section 83 argument:

http://youtu.be/c1u8KjfLX1o?t=7m

[EZrhythm]

"Income" as defined by the IRS? No. FRN's are debt notes. Notes of debt are not income. http://freedom-school.com/money/nod.htm

[Michael Joseph]

Beard v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777-79 (1984)

On the face of your argument, I think yoiu are correct, but you deny the trust.

Beard also claimed PROPERTY rights. That is a tort. He has no access his claim is faulty. Those who fail to stake a claim are by necessity subject to the claims of others. Therefore one lacking a claim lacks property rights and is therefore subject to an ESTATE. Now the question remains does said one have an interest in the Estate? And if so to what degree?

The claims have been perfected - the wife [states] have submitted themselves to the Husband [U.S.]. The leadership of the states [husband] are one with their citizens [wife]. The TWO become ONE. Therefore the state then as wife submits to the U.S. and again the two become one in Trust.

Ye have been bought. Just as Levi tithed to Melchizedok in the loins of Abraham, so too I was in the loins of my grandfather when he was purchased. See Genesis 47 and Amos 8.

Amo 8:6 That we may buy impoverished ones for silver, and a needy one for a pair of shoes; yea, and sell [as good wheat] the refuse of the wheat?

There is nothing new under the Sun.

Now the question remains where in to place my trust? Shall I place it in the princes of this age? I think not. Egypt has nothing to allure me. Who then allowed me to be bought and sold? The same one that created me! There remains only ONE remedy. To return to the Trust of my Elohim.

Deu 32:6 Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish People and unwise? Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee? Hath He not made thee, and established thee?

Deu 32:17 They sacrificed unto demons, not to God; To gods whom they knew not, To recent gods that came recently up, Whom your fathers feared not.

Deu 32:18 Of the Rock That begat thee thou art unmindful, And hast forgotten God That formed thee.

Deu 32:27 Were it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy, Lest their adversaries should mistake it, And lest they should say,Our hand is high, And the LORD hath not done all this.

Deu 32:28 For they are a nation void of deliberation, Neither is there any understanding in them.

Deu 32:29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, That they would consider their latter end!

====

Rev 15:2 And I saw as it were a glassy sea mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, standing on the sea of glass, having ... harps of God.

Rev 15:3 And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are Thy works, O Lord God The Almighty; just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of nations.

====

Their law is copy protected - it is private to their claim. You may dock to the great ship if you like - a dingy has been prepared for you - according to the uses established, whereupon said uses are governed by an Administration.

So now go to and consider yourself in the mirror:

Did you establish the flesh tabernacle that you reside within? It was provided FOR YOU and said flesh is subject to certain uses and restrictions established. Will you rebel yet again in its uses? The Holy Spirit of El Elyon has the Administration subject to the Word of Father El Elyon. For, with Wisdom [Holy Spirit/El Shaddai] El Elyon brought forth the Word [Yehoshuah]. Therefore, He and She are TREES OF LIFE. I see a TRUSTOR, CREATOR, SETTLOR, DIRECTOR, TRUSTEE and BENEFICIARY. A three-party contract. And I may become co-heir [beneficiary] only if I subject myself to the bylaws [trust agreement].


Therefore how can one say I HAVE NO TRUST IN YOU, and yet we find commercial evidence to the contrary? Which is it? Why don't the words match the actions?

One undertaking within an Estate established by another is subject to the TERMS OF USE governing the Estate.

The subjects of the King were set at LIBERTY. However, NEVER did the King release his interests in the Estates properly formed by claim. Please produce the evidence of your claim so that you can be recognized. If you lack a claim, then most likely you are undertaking within Estates formed by another. Your Husband or Lord!

Consider the way of the wife, citizen, congregation, it is submission. Have you never considered the vows? "Do you PROMISE to honor and obey till parted by death?"

OBEY, huh?

Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves servants for obedience, ye are servants to him whom ye obey....

Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve. You say, I will stake my claim and rule. Think again. You will become the SERVANT - KING. And your life will not be your own. Husbands love your wives.

Therefore SUBMIT to each other - in Public Trust, according to the Common Law of the realm within the established Law Boundaries of the kingdom. As such, where have you pledged your trust? Is it to a banker?

My claim is in El Elyon by Yehoshuah. Therefore my life is pledged in trust to Jesus Christ. My estate shall not be probated. I am therefore subject to the Common Law of the Kingdom. I, therefore, am subject to the Will of Father, El Elyon.

Col 3:3 For ye died, and your life has been laid up in store with Christ in God.

I have an Estate in God, held in Trust, by Jesus Christ! Today if you can hear His voice - each man according to the "calling" of Father. Therefore it is not given to man to judge. For their is only one ELOHIM - Dan-i-El.

Repugnant is the creature who fails to lift an eye to Heaven, conscious of his fleeting time here......

Shalom,
MJ

[Casper]

I live on one of the 50 states of the Union, which happens to be inhabited by numerous illegal aliens. I have learned a thing or two from them. They live here as foreign nationals (Mexican nationals) and carry ID cards as such. Most deal in cash only, but many open bank accounts without SS# (use W-8BEN). They get cell phone service without SS#. Their kids go to our local schools. Some are even enrolled on food benefits without a SS#. They all work and get paid in FRNs, and yet pay no FIT, just local sales and excise tax on alcohol, tobacco, gas, etc. (like in the constitution). Plenty of them have no driver license or insurance, and the cops never hassle them because they have no jurisdiction. Some do have car insurance even without a driver license. As long as they do not harm anyone, the cops just leave them alone. Some pull in $50k to $80k income tax free.

When talking with them, most of them have no desire to be "signed up" as a citizen of the United States (District of Columbia). They understand why the fedgov wants to get them on the books as a registered vessel on the citizenSHIP, but they want their independence. In many ways, the way they live is closer to the way the founding fathers lived than most US citizens. Learn from them I have, indeed.

[Michael Joseph]

I live on one of the 50 states of the Union, which happens to be inhabited by numerous illegal aliens. I have learned a thing or two from them. They live here as foreign nationals (Mexican nationals) and carry ID cards as such. Most deal in cash only, but many open bank accounts without SS# (use W-8BEN). They get cell phone service without SS#. Their kids go to our local schools. Some are even enrolled on food benefits without a SS#. They all work and get paid in FRNs, and yet pay no FIT, just local sales and excise tax on alcohol, tobacco, gas, etc. (like in the constitution). Plenty of them have no driver license or insurance, and the cops never hassle them because they have no jurisdiction. Some do have car insurance even without a driver license. As long as they do not harm anyone, the cops just leave them alone. Some pull in $50k to $80k income tax free.

When talking with them, most of them have no desire to be "signed up" as a citizen of the United States (District of Columbia). They understand why the fedgov wants to get them on the books as a registered vessel on the citizenSHIP, but they want their independence. In many ways, the way they live is closer to the way the founding fathers lived than most US citizens. Learn from them I have, indeed.

Illegal Alien. Interesting term. It goes to ones Estate. Where is it lodged and which treasury stands surety for its liability. Names are persons. My life is held in Trust, in God. Consider the Wisdom of that verse.

Legal Name is held in Trust, in State. Got it? State and U.S. become one in covenant. Ever read the constitution? The former is the wife the latter the husband.

Oh the depths and riches of the Scriptures. The Earth is in God. Claims established by man, setup Property Rights. Estates are carved our of the interests in Property. Mexico, Canada, etc are Estates vested in a Kingdom. Consider now what it means to ALIENATE and Estate or for that matter Property. It would be Illegal to Alienate an estate in Mexico to Canada, unless the ones holding Property Rights made a covenant [agreement] and there existed a Surety so that the Estate may Pass thru the Ports.

Shalom,
MJ

P.S. I like what Bob Dylan wrote years ago. "Although the rules of the road have been lodged, its only peoples games you have to dodge"....

[Casper]

Legal Name is held in Trust, in State. Got it? State and U.S. become one in covenant. Ever read the constitution? The former is the wife the latter the husband.

You seem to discuss trusts quite a bit. That is not my strong suit. Can you expound on that some more?

[David Merrill]

Illegal Alien. Interesting term. It goes to ones Estate. Where is it lodged and which treasury stands surety for its liability. Names are persons. My life is held in Trust, in God.

I like that description of citizenship, from which arises the diversity of citizenship undergirding the Libel of Review process.

Which treasury lies surety for this particular legal person?

[Michael Joseph]

You seem to discuss trusts quite a bit. That is not my strong suit. Can you expound on that some more?

Most everything around you is moving in trust. Consider the term Legal. It begs a trust. As does King/State/dominion/property/interest/usufruct/right....

Jay Vincent and I realized this fact about eight years back and once realized, we found remedy. Get your hands on any and all materials you can find on trusts....I recommend a Bible. It is the fountainhead of Wisdom.

Shalom,
MJ

[Michael Joseph]

I like that description of citizenship, from which arises the diversity of citizenship undergirding the Libel of Review process.

Which treasury lies surety for this particular legal person?

Example of PASSPORT - whereupon the Person of Nehemiah would be underwritten in terms of liability of the treasuries of Artaxerxes the king. Nehemiah would be an ILLEGAL ALIEN in those foreign Kingdoms as he lacked an Estate and would therefore be taking against the Will of those who settled said foreign kingdom. Therefore his actions must be underwritten or backed by a Treasury, thus he was granted a letter [passport] that he might show a foreign governor concerning his commercial status.

Neh 2:7 Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah;

Shalom,
MJ

[Jethro]

without a W-9 or your consent? What if additionally you told the payor, "Do not send me '1099' Forms" and they ignore you and do it anyway? Would this not constitute fraud? Would you all agree that any and all liabilities created by the fraudulent issuance of 1099's would be 100% the payor's liability?