What exactly makes Lawful Money untaxable ?

[motla68]

I have seen it mentioned in here a letter from IRS David put up showing that when someone demands Lawful Money is telling them the person is not in the FR system.
Another thing I have not found yet is the connection through on this statutorily, lets take a look:

Title 18 Section 8 defines a FRN as an "obligation of the United States."
Section 8. Obligation or other security of the United States defined
The term "obligation or other security of the United States" includes all bonds certificates
of indebtedness, national bank currency, Federal Reserve notes, Federal Reserve bank
notes, coupons, United States notes, Treasury notes, gold certificates, silver certificates,
fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or
upon authorized officers of the United States, stamps and other representatives of value,
of whatever denomination, issued."
Title 31 Section 3124 states that "obligations of the United States are EXEMPT FROM
TAXATION BY A STATE."
"Section 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.


I am sure others will have something to add here, it would make for good edification with new people in the movement on this forum.

[David Merrill]

The Fed is an instumentality (case attached) of the United States government because it is allowed to have stock (notes) that devalues intentionally.

The priests are commonly misperceived to have no inheritance from God; but that is untrue - the priests inherited METRO; the cities and the suburbs. [Do you get it - in your face - Federal Reserve Board v. METROCenter! It gets no plainer than that. Incestual infighting brought it out - fiduciary responsibility. If the Fed were not an instrumentality of the US government it would be illegal to devalue its own stock!]

Of course I thought to take my GPS phone to the Center of the Spiral.



The Heart of the City - Facilities Operations!

So instead of trying to justify the distortions you bring with your misdirection, by trying to convince readers here that I have proven nothing better, you might just be straighforward and admit you have no evidence of Coresource Solutions yourself Motla68.

This is exactly what I am saying:

I have seen it mentioned in here a letter from IRS David put up showing that when someone demands Lawful Money is telling them the person is not in the FR system.

That is untrue!

Yes. Thank you David.


I was pushing my friend to discuss our redemption of lawful money with his sister that works in a legal department at IRS.


She was very resistant and she would not discuss it even privately. I think they have a policy there at IRS.


It has been 4 weeks since IRS has received my 1040 and my continuous insistence and questioning whether there are any new developments at the IRS regarding demanding lawful money per Title 12 USC 411; this Monday she finally said that typically IRS has 6 weeks to respond (sort of legal zone) and when someone is demanding lawful money he is considered out of the FR System. The IRS is creating a special file and that person's activities are being scrutinized by them.

That is not a letter from the IRS.

You insist on challenging my patience with the simple obfuscation of the contents of the robin egg-blue wrapper Motla68. The thing that is never going to happen though, is that you detract from the enjoyment I get out of this Website. I think what you are failing to comprehend is that most of the members here know too, like you, that this is only one side of the brain trust you should be interested in, rather than interested in disrupting with implications of Coresource Solutions - rather than showing us blatantly what that is. You try to be a guru here but you have nothing in your bag of tricks so it is time to reveal that.

The only reason I get to come off such a narcissist around here is that I show people what I am basing my assertions in. There is plenty of room for more narcissists though; it is just when you have an empty bag of source materials for which to convince us you are so very smart, we are smart enough to become annoyed with your wasting our reading time!

They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

It is constitutional for the Congress to define money in the US. And with the Emergency since 1861 that is fiat. The fiat is based in a good faith premise that the signatures on the bill, of the Secretary and US Treasurer are good IN GOD WE TRUST. However in 1913 we entered into another trust outside the scope of God; elastic currency.

Pro 11:1 A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.

The Fed banks were given the choice to redeem the notes - it has been so since 1913. That is and codified into - the Banker's Code. In 1933 we the people were given the opportunity to become Fed banks too - to enter into that trust with the Fed. [Link is from The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt; 1933 - The Year of Crisis.]

I can keep enjoying explaining the simple truth. That is why I am here (both places).

Yours is an old attorney trick though. You want to keep me explaining it differently so that you can pick up on the deviations in the renditions and distort them like you did here with this new thread. - By saying I presented a letter from the IRS that says if you demand lawful money you are out of the Fed system.

It is obvious by Title 12 it is true, but you want me to feed your distortion with more misdirection for a Quatloser-style attack on my credibility. I unabashedly tease the Quatlosers because I enjoy it Motla68. So grow a pair and show us what is in the robin egg-blue wrapper already so that we may find your 200 Posts might be worth the time we spent reading after all!



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Jaro]

That's easy. Lawful means REAL, like in common law real. That means they actually PAY debts, not just discharge them like FRN's do. Lawful money buys you ownership and all the rights of ownership that come with it, while FRN's only buy you possession, because they're not real, i.e. they have no real value, b/c they're not redeemable in anything of value.

FRN's are private 'money' of Federal Reserve, use of which is a PRIVILEGE, and privileges are taxable. Lawful money is real national money, not a private privilege, therefore it's not taxable. The corporate State just has no authority to tax what's TRULY YOURS, like lawful money. They only can tax private script like the FRN's, b/c using those is a State-provided privilege.

[David Merrill]

I suggest that it is the bond behind the money that should be considered.

If you endorse private credit from the Fed your signature represents that you are part of the bonding process. Since the value of the note is already bonded by the Secretary and the US Treasurer's signatures, that would leave the extra money created by the fractional lending of the elastic nature of the Fed notes.

[shikamaru]

That's easy. Lawful means REAL, like in common law real. That means they actually PAY debts, not just discharge them like FRN's do. Lawful money buys you ownership and all the rights of ownership that come with it, while FRN's only buy you possession, because they're not real, i.e. they have no real value, b/c they're not redeemable in anything of value.

Could you please present any documents, case law, evidence, or treatise to support your claim that lawful means REAL?
Also, what is common law REAL?

FRN's are private 'money' of Federal Reserve, use of which is a PRIVILEGE, and privileges are taxable. Lawful money is real national money, not a private privilege, therefore it's not taxable. The corporate State just has no authority to tax what's TRULY YOURS, like lawful money. They only can tax private script like the FRN's, b/c using those is a State-provided privilege.

You do realize there was taxation of income in English Common Law history?

[John Booth]

"Jaro is the demon lorde that fights the Illuminati." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaro

Is there a coincidence with the nick and the diversionary aroma around the post?

I don't know, it doesnt matter, the fruits will bear or they wont.

Bienvenue, Jaro

[David Merrill]

Cool Internet Name!!

Fighting the Illuminati? I suppose I prefer to be a peaceful inhabitant with full access to their libraries and museums.

[Neo1]

Puzzle Complete - Irrecusable Obligation

Use federal reserve notes and incur an Irrecusable obligation. The puzzle is complete!!!
Convincing Congress to Abolish the Fed http://www.silverbearcafe.com/
Irrecusable obligation, which according to 'Bouvier's Law Dictionary' (1914 ed.), is "a term used to indicate a certain class of contractual obligations recognized by the law which are imposed upon a person without his consent and without regard to any act of his own." This is distinguished from a recusable obligation, which according to Bouvier, arises from a voluntary act by which one incurs the obligation imposed by the operation of law. The Income Tax succinctly described is an irrecusable obligation.
The obligation to make a return of income for using private credit is recognized in law as an irrecusable obligation. The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent, which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law, which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.

[Keith Alan]

Use federal reserve notes and incur an Irrecusable obligation. The puzzle is complete!!!
Convincing Congress to Abolish the Fed http://www.silverbearcafe.com/
Irrecusable obligation, which according to 'Bouvier's Law Dictionary' (1914 ed.), is "a term used to indicate a certain class of contractual obligations recognized by the law which are imposed upon a person without his consent and without regard to any act of his own." This is distinguished from a recusable obligation, which according to Bouvier, arises from a voluntary act by which one incurs the obligation imposed by the operation of law. The Income Tax succinctly described is an irrecusable obligation.
The obligation to make a return of income for using private credit is recognized in law as an irrecusable obligation. The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent, which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law, which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.

Thank you for getting to the meat. My question is: What purpose, then, does the source of income serve in determining tax liability? If all one need do is demand lawful money to avoid taxation, what relevance is the source of the income? Or is it simply if you're receiving public money, you're not receiving income? And how would receiving public money from interest earned be interpreted?

[David Merrill]

Thank you for getting to the meat. My question is: What purpose, then, does the source of income serve in determining tax liability? If all one need do is demand lawful money to avoid taxation, what relevance is the source of the income? Or is it simply if you're receiving public money, you're not receiving income? And how would receiving public money from interest earned be interpreted?

Interesting perspective. The diversity of citizenship would seem to create a distinction between profit and gain (income) and compensation - an honest day's wages. Whereas if you endorse private credit from the Fed, you are paying for the use of that credit.

You prompt a new perspective overlaid on the old paradigm so I hope it makes sense; what I just said.

[Keith Alan]

Interesting perspective. The diversity of citizenship would seem to create a distinction between profit and gain (income) and compensation - an honest day's wages. Whereas if you endorse private credit from the Fed, you are paying for the use of that credit.

You prompt a new perspective overlaid on the old paradigm so I hope it makes sense; what I just said.

I wonder if the diversity of citizenship is caused by a person's choice of sources for money - receiving income from private credit, or being paid with public money.

[David Merrill]

I wonder if the diversity of citizenship is caused by a person's choice of sources for money - receiving income from private credit, or being paid with public money.

Exactly.

Your signature bond on the backside of a paycheck effectively adds your signature to the front of the bills as being obliged to perform - a first lien on all the property rights discharged through that bill. In other words bill and billing Information should always be construed in terms of indictment.


They always say Bill of Indictment. Or True Bill.

[Keith Alan]

Exactly.

Your signature bond on the backside of a paycheck effectively adds your signature to the front of the bills as being obliged to perform - a first lien on all the property rights discharged through that bill. In other words bill and billing Information should always be construed in terms of indictment.


They always say Bill of Indictment. Or True Bill.

So the 16th amendment's claim on incomes, from whatever source derived, applies only to income from private credit. And money received in the form of lawful money isn't income, but rather one is simply being paid. Two different kinds of persons; the first receiving income and engaged in the business of factoring for his principal's profit, while the other is merely being paid for goods and/or services rendered.

It's the diversity in citizenship that appeals most to me. My entire journey to learning about lawful money began in earnest after the Affordable Care Act was passed. Common sense told me it applied only to certain kind of persons. I have a profound moral objection to becoming unequally yoked in a pool of citizens who do not trust the Creator to provide for their needs.

Thank you, David. I can't tell you how much I appreciate your willingness to teach this subject. I do count it as a blesssing.

Keith

[Chex]

By the beginning of the 20th century, greater cooperation began to grow between the State and federal governments. Soon, the federal government began to accumulate more power. It was early in this period that a federal income tax was implemented, first during the Civil War and then permanently with the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913.

Before this, the states played a larger role in government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States%...d_World_War_IIhttp://www.delawareintercorp.com/t-d...px#Domoverview

Definitions
When determining the country for which we are obligated to report and collect information on your behalf, the following definitions will apply.

US person or entity is:regardless of residenceregardless of residence

http://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/?f=tax

All US citizens, Green Card holders and other legal residents are considered US persons by the IRS and are required to complete Form W-9, Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, when they apply to open an account. Entities formed or operating in the United States are also treated as US persons. If you are an individual, include your social security number (SSN). If you are an entity, your employer identification number (EIN) is required.

US resident aliens will also be required to complete Form W-9 and provide a social security number (SSN). A resident alien is considered a US resident if one of the following criteria has been met: you are a lawful permanent resident issued a resident alien registration card ("Green Card"), or you are an individual with a valid nonimmigrant visa who resides in the US for a required period of time and you have established a substantial presence. Refer to IRS Publication 519, US Tax Guide for Aliens, for further information.

Generally, there is no US tax withholding is required from the account of US persons or entities. However, the IRS may direct us to withhold on the accounts of US persons or entities on dividends, interest, and proceeds.

IRS Circular 230 Notice: These statements are provided for information purposes only, are not intended to constitute tax advice which may be relied upon to avoid penalties under any federal, state, local or other tax statutes or regulations, and do not resolve any tax issues in your favor.

And here you go http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf?portlet=3

Under penalties of perjury, I certify that:

1. The number shown on this form is my correct taxpayer identification number (or I am waiting for a number to be issued to me), and

2. I am not subject to backup withholding because:
(a) I am exempt from backup withholding, or
(b) I have not been notified by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that I am subject to backup withholding as a result of a failure to report all interest or dividends, or
(c) the IRS has notified me that I am no longer subject to backup withholding, and

3. I am a U.S. citizen or other U.S. person (defined below).

Certification instructions. You must cross out item 2 above if you have been notified by the IRS that you are currently subject to backup withholding because you have failed to report all interest and dividends on your tax return.

For real estate transactions, item 2 does not apply. For mortgage interest paid, acquisition or abandonment of secured property, cancellation of debt, contributions to an individual retirement arrangement (IRA), and generally, payments other than interest and dividends, you are not required to sign the certification, but you must provide your correct TIN.

See the instructions on page 4.

Uncle Ben: All non-US persons and entities are required to complete IRS Form W-8 to certify your country of tax residence and to establish whether you qualify for a reduced rate of withholding when opening an account. Forms W-8 are not provided to the IRS.

Valid Form W-8
Forms W-8 must be resubmitted every three years unless you have or apply for a US Taxpayer ID (ITIN or EIN) and provide the number on your Form W-8, in which case there is no need to resubmit.

Generally, tax is withheld at a rate of 30% on payments of US source stock dividends and substitute payments in lieu. The rate of withholding may be reduced if there is a tax treaty between your country of tax residence and the US.

[mikecz]

I read this book, it does offer some insights... Especially on the 16th ammendment..

So the 16th amendment's claim on incomes, from whatever source derived, applies only to income from private credit. And money received in the form of lawful money isn't income, but rather one is simply being paid. Two different kinds of persons; the first receiving income and engaged in the business of factoring for his principal's profit, while the other is merely being paid for goods and/or services rendered.

It's the diversity in citizenship that appeals most to me. My entire journey to learning about lawful money began in earnest after the Affordable Care Act was passed. Common sense told me it applied only to certain kind of persons. I have a profound moral objection to becoming unequally yoked in a pool of citizens who do not trust the Creator to provide for their needs.

Thank you, David. I can't tell you how much I appreciate your willingness to teach this subject. I do count it as a blesssing.

Keith

http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Contents.html

"Income" is legally defined as a corporate gain of profit in the Internal Revenue Code. Nowhere is there any different definition.
Anytime the Internal Revenue Code mentions the word "income" it is talking about corporate income.

I think the book, link above, misses the whole lawful money point entirely, but the read is incredibly insightful. It states the IRS is nonconstitutional because it is not taxing the individual (whose rights are protected within the constitution), it can tax the "person" or corporate entity by means of an indirect excise tax, basically a tax on not directly the companies profits, but a tax on the activity or privilege of operating within that business which the amount of activity is measured by the corporate entities profits.

"Take the alcohol tax for example. The tax is not on the alcohol itself (property), but on the manufacture or sale (activities) of the alcohol. (a government granted privilege requiring a license) Or a corporation tax. The tax is not on the corporation itself (property), or its income (also property), but on the privilege of doing business as a corporation, which privilege (not a right) is also granted by the government."

Well, from this book, and this website, I'm finding two reasons the IRS can tax us. 1.Using or contracting with the federal reserve and willfully partaking in the bonding process. 2.As this book states, operating as a business, in this case a "person" and not acting as an individual. All or our transactions are assumed to operate in the corporate arena, therefore are corporate in nature.


I'm thinking both points do have a correlation, and maybe the second is the truth, just not getting there in the correct manner. Indeed, since the constitution protects our INDIVIDUAL right, especially of private property, both points 1.willfully engaging in a private contract with the fed, which could be construed as in the corporate arena 2. Being assumed to be a "person"-as defined by the IRS as a corporate entity (freeman theory), it is nonconstitutional, because corporations operate with privileges and benefits, not with rights. I guess either way you look at it, demanding lawful money takes you out of the private contract (corporate arena), and forces that lawful money to be deemed private property, which is protected by the constitution. The only way the gov't can tax private property is with a 1 time direct tax, with apportionment. ("INDIRECT TAX. Indirect taxes are able to be passed on to someone else INDIRECTLY (excise tax, ie; alcohol tax or corporation tax). An indirect tax can be thought of a simply an activity or privilege tax. It is on something you do. Exercising a privilege.")

http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap3.html

Ok, well, there you go...