1040 help

[American_National]

Their U.C.C. operating procedures may be helpful in this regard as well (I'm thinking in written form here) . . .

U.C.C. Section 3-114: If there are contradictory terms on a check, typewritten terms prevail over printed terms, handwritten terms prevail over both, and words prevail over numbers.

So how do we use their own operational parameter rules to our favor in making our demand for the payment of our check/draft medium of exchange in lawful money of value ONLY?


Try this: (my poor attempt at trying to recreate the face of a personal check/draft)


Pay to the order of: ABC Company _________________. $[See Below]

One hundred and no/hundredths U.S. issued lawful money of value in units of DollarsFor: described in UCC 3-103(a)(3). . . . . . . . . . . . . .By demand: your autograph, maker (UCC 3-103(a)(7))


Analysis:

1. Per the 4 corners [ ] rule, you have eliminated them establishing an exchange ratio for purposes of this transaction between their $[### ] "FRN's" and the long-form written value expressed in "Dollars" below their $BOX.

2. You have ordered the payment of this check/draft to be made in U.S. situs based lawful money of value in units of "Dollars", and not foreign/private FRN bills of credit evidencing a debt.

3. You have described the purpose of this check/draft as being the actual payment (not discharge) of a consumer transaction in value.

4. You have made your compliance with 12 USC 411 "By demand:" known as the maker of this check/draft. (transacting absent accommodation is authorized per U.C.C. 4-205)

5. No fractional reserve fabrication of additional debt is allowed resultant to your "non-accommodation" of their private-credit FRN instruments.


What are your comments/questions in relation to the above approach in building your administrative record for such lawful money offsets on your annual tax return(s)?

[doug555]

Their U.C.C. operating procedures may be helpful in this regard as well (I'm thinking in written form here) . . .

U.C.C. Section 3-114: If there are contradictory terms on a check, typewritten terms prevail over printed terms, handwritten terms prevail over both, and words prevail over numbers.

So how do we use their own operational parameter rules to our favor in making our demand for the payment of our check/draft medium of exchange in lawful money of value ONLY?


Try this: (my poor attempt at trying to recreate the face of a personal check/draft)


Pay to the order of: ABC Company _________________. $[See Below]

One hundred and no/hundredths U.S. issued lawful money of value in units of DollarsFor: described in UCC 3-103(a)(3). . . . . . . . . . . . . .By demand: your autograph, maker (UCC 3-103(a)(7))


Analysis:

1. Per the 4 corners [ ] rule, you have eliminated them establishing an exchange ratio for purposes of this transaction between their $[### ] "FRN's" and the long-form written value expressed in "Dollars" below their $BOX.

2. You have ordered the payment of this check/draft to be made in U.S. situs based lawful money of value in units of "Dollars", and not foreign/private FRN bills of credit evidencing a debt.

3. You have described the purpose of this check/draft as being the actual payment (not discharge) of a consumer transaction in value.

4. You have made your compliance with 12 USC 411 "By demand:" known as the maker of this check/draft. (transacting absent accommodation is authorized per U.C.C. 4-205)

5. No fractional reserve fabrication of additional debt is allowed resultant to your "non-accommodation" of their private-credit FRN instruments.


What are your comments/questions in relation to the above approach in building your administrative record for such lawful money offsets on your annual tax return(s)?

IMO, the DEMAND in 12 USC 411 has to do with the REDEMPTION, and not ISSUANCE, of lawful money.

The presumed and legitimate default currency in USA is FRN Fiat Notes.

Redemption of same can only occur in the after-the-fact usage of same.

Therefore, I believe we cannot demand payment in lawful money, per se.

However. we can state that "lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)" so that we can redeem these same amounts on a subsequent 1040 Form on line 21.

Make sense?

[Michael Joseph]

doug,

That makes perfect sense. A demand for lawful money is a lawful claim upon a Trustee. In other words, one is requesting relief and the trustee must consult the bylaws to see if relief can be granted. The claimant makes a demand and this demand is not the act of redemption - rather it is a request FOR redemption.

To go Scriptural - we confess sins before the Mercy Seat of Christ but we cannot forgive our trespass upon the Divine. Free will is upheld in Choice. So when I have a choice, I choose life. But I must give another the same choice I had and have.

Best regards,
MJ

[American_National]

IMO, the DEMAND in 12 USC 411 has to do with the REDEMPTION, and not ISSUANCE, of lawful money.

The presumed and legitimate default currency in USA is FRN Fiat Notes.

Redemption of same can only occur in the after-the-fact usage of same.

Therefore, I believe we cannot demand payment in lawful money, per se.

However. we can state that "lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)" so that we can redeem these same amounts on a subsequent 1040 Form on line 21.

Make sense?

Thank you for your thoughts and feedback . . . Great thought process and good verbiage above.

I can see a version of the above working to fully discharge/remove accommodation party status for the holder/payee in transacting the check/draft "medium of exchange" to keep it payable on the U.S. Treasury side of the house, but where would you, as the maker of any check/draft - place such payment restrictions on the face of the above working example of our check when it is labeled as - "Pay to the Order of: _ABC Company___ Maybe the maker of the check/draft could place their demand in the For or Memo: ______________ field on the front of the check???

Maker requires payment to be made in lawful money of the
United States ONLY

[American_National]

That makes perfect sense. A demand for lawful money is a lawful claim upon a Trustee. In other words, one is requesting relief and the trustee must consult the bylaws to see if relief can be granted. The claimant makes a demand and this demand is not the act of redemption - rather it is a request FOR redemption.

To go Scriptural - we confess sins before the Mercy Seat of Christ but we cannot forgive our trespass upon the Divine. Free will is upheld in Choice. So when I have a choice, I choose life. But I must give another the same choice I had and have.

Best regards,
MJ

Thanks MJ . . .

You had said: A demand for lawful money is a lawful claim upon a Trustee.

Agreed. . . Fiscal/Depository agents of the Federal Reserve system act in "trustee" capacity on behalf of the U.S. Dept. of the Treasury. . .

The Federal Reserve system and their affiliated member banks serves as a fiscal and depository agent for the United States Government. In this role, the Reserve Banks perform a variety of services for the U.S. Department of the Treasury, other Federal Agencies and government-sponsored enterprises.

You had said: In other words, one is requesting relief and the trustee must consult the bylaws to see if relief can be granted.

Agreed . . . Their operating-agreement bylaws and duties/obligations are detailed within ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275, The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, as lawfully amended. Their bylaws and authority to provide such relief upon demand by any maker, holder or payee are currently found within (Dec. 23, 1913, ch. 6, Sec. 16 (par.), 38 Stat. 265; Jan. 30, 1934, ch. 6, Sec. 2(b)(1), 48 Stat. 337; Aug. 23, 1935, ch. 614, title II, Sec. 203(a), 49 Stat. 704.)


You had said: The claimant makes a demand and this demand is not the act of redemption - rather it is a request FOR redemption.

Agreed . . . Holder/Payee fulfills the "on demand" conditional requirement for giving notice of their right to avoid contracting themselves into accommodation/surety of debt instruments "servitude" and exercise their right to use "lawful money" of the United States in their transactions as specified within Section 16(par.) of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, et. seq.

You had said: To go Scriptural - we confess sins before the Mercy Seat of Christ but we cannot forgive our trespass upon the Divine.

Thomas 7:8 Jesus said: Whoever blasphemes against the Father, it shall be forgiven him, and whoever blasphemes against the Son, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either on earth or in heaven.

Exactly! Forgiveness of trespass/sin is a two part process: First, there must be a positive act of regret/repentance on the part of the transgressor/sinner - and then an act of forgiveness can occur for such transgressions/sins.

repent (v.) c. 1300, "to feel such regret for sins or crimes as produces amendment of life," from Old French repentir (11c.), from re-, here probably an intensive prefix (see re-), + Vulgar Latin *penitire "to regret," from Latin poenitire "make sorry," from poena (see penal). The distinction between regret (q.v.) and repent is made in many modern languages, but the differentiation is not present in older periods. Also from c. 1300 in Middle English and after in an impersonal reflexive sense, especially as (it) repenteth (me, him, etc.).

1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also The Law: for sin is the transgression of The Law.

1 John 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

1 John 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin [which is] not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

You had said: Free will is upheld in Choice. So when I have a choice, I choose life. But I must give another the same choice I had and have.

Joshua 24:14 Now therefore fear the "I AM", and serve Him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the "I AM".

24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the "I AM", choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that [were] on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the "I AM".

[doug555]

Thank you for your thoughts and feedback . . . Great thought process and good verbiage above.

I can see a version of the above working to fully discharge/remove accommodation party status for the holder/payee in transacting the check/draft "medium of exchange" to keep it payable on the U.S. Treasury side of the house, but where would you, as the maker of any check/draft - place such payment restrictions on the face of the above working example of our check when it is labeled as - "Pay to the Order of: _ABC Company___ Maybe the maker of the check/draft could place their demand in the For or Memo: ______________ field on the front of the check???

Maker requires payment to be made in lawful money of the
United States ONLY

http://1040relief.blogspot.com/p/getting-started.html?m=1

Above is exactly how I do it. And it works.

[David Merrill]

Thanks again Doug!

[PilgrimPublisher]

When you file would one still use Schedule A? And enter the standard exemption$?

This is for a partial RLM- haven't been doing it the entire year.

[Chex]

http://federalevidence.com/node/1981).

Expounding.

From http://govqa.com/ to http://federalevidence.com/print/1981 Public records (record forming) are defined in FOIA as "all records, reports, forms, writings, letters, memoranda, books, papers, maps, photographs, microfilms, cards, tapes, recordings, electronic data processing records, electronic communications, recorded information and all other documentary materials pertaining to the transaction of public business, regardless of physical form or characteristics, having been prepared by or for, or having been or being used by, received by, in the possession of, or under the control of any public body."

Makes you wonder if the national debt can be reduced even faster. 1040 other taxes paid "Any estimated taxes you paid to state or local governments during the year, and; Any prior "

[doug555]

When you file would one still use Schedule A? And enter the standard exemption$?

This is for a partial RLM- haven't been doing it the entire year.

See HERE for example Supporting Schedule for a RLM split-year

The 1040 has all schedules filed as you would normally file and did file before doing RLM.

[ag maniac]

Just for clarification Doug555.......

The hourly wage earner has SS & medicare withheld......but the employer must also put the other 50% of that tax into the kitty.

So on Line 7 goes the total wages for that employee....and on Line 21 goes the total of Line 7 PLUS the employer's part of SS & FICA ?????

[doug555]

Just for clarification Doug555.......

The hourly wage earner has SS & medicare withheld......but the employer must also put the other 50% of that tax into the kitty.

So on Line 7 goes the total wages for that employee....and on Line 21 goes the total of Line 7 PLUS the employer's part of SS & FICA ?????

IMO, since that transaction does NOT show up on your W-2, I would not include it. Because, that assumes that they actually paid that amount - and you actually have no non-hearsay evidence of that occurring.

Very good and insightful question! I am sure that others had the same concern.

[David Merrill]

Thank you for parsing that out, more precisely than my, Do not try getting insurance premiums back.

[ag maniac]

IMO, since that transaction does NOT show up on your W-2, I would not include it. Because, that assumes that they actually paid that amount - and you actually have no non-hearsay evidence of that occurring.

Very good and insightful question! I am sure that others had the same concern.

[/SIZE]

Thanx Doug555......I asked that particular question in regards to a post you made in July ....my presumption then that Line 7 matches Line 21, but your reply saying 21 was greater than 7 because of derivative transactions SS & medicare.

Would you please address this for my peace of mind ?

And yes DM, we know we ain't gettin' no premiums back ;-]

[doug555]

Lawful Money Demand Confirmed in 1933

Redemption DeclaredredeemedRedemption Confirmeddischarged upon payment, dollar for dollarredemptionpromiseIRS Form 1040 to facilitate the ledgering of this redemption accounting?

Could one use Line 21frivolous