Lawful Money Stops IRS Proposal

[Michael Joseph]

Michael,

You obviously know your way around such things. I have not been so lucky...

I am currently faced with a CP15 'pay us 5k' letter for a 'frivolous' return. I have about 8 days to respond. I filed a 2013 sheeple return and was paid. I then filed a 1040x amended return with a LM deduction. I believe I should have started a LM deduction with the 2014 return of which the LM deduction was honored; however I'm sure I will see a CP2000 at some point for 'unpaid taxes'.

Their initial 3176C letter ('we have identified your return as frivolous') I responded to 3 months ago with a denial of any liability and simultaneously rescinded that amended return (the 3176C language states I may rescind and send a 'corrected' return). However, the 'corrected' return is actually the original return already refunded. They recently assessed the 5k penalty anyway, I presume because I was ALREADY paid a refund from the original 2013 return. They will do anything to steal your money.

There is not much recourse but I thought someone might have suggestions as to my response. I was rushed into the 3176C response due to a family illness and I may have lost my 'right of inquiry' window to stall them. The CP15 is an actual 'invoice' from their MFT 55 'penalty' module in the IMF system. Insidious, but there it is. However, I believe there is a 'mistake' statute that may come into play here. Doug555 mentioned it somewhere in this forum and I need to find it to see if it might apply - D555 if you have that statute handy please forward if possible.

Any other thoughts are welcome.

Thanks.

Just stick to the facts and be unwilling to swerve from the truth. Simply put refuse to leave the battlefield of words. As such, there is no need to be alarmed at the clerks on the other end of the phone. In the end you will eventually come to see that "it is NOT your money".

Money is for the USE subject to the Statute. There exists trustees to understand the issue of money - but those who endorse fractional reserve banking accommodate that system. I have lost much in my struggle for truth but then too, I have gained much. The answer is simple - I demand lawful money and I refuse to understand any new private credit as surety or accommodation. The trust account held by United States whereof I have an Estate interest is not subject to the accommodation of "new credit" because I refuse to ORDER up new credit. My grant is to the United States and not the Federal Reserve Bank. Nevertheless it is my freewill choice.

Consider McDonalds. When you walk in what does the clerk ask you? "May I take your Order?" And for the consideration of your order you are billed for the service or thing delivered. Actually at McDonalds it is both. There is nothing new under the sun.

Have you called the clerks? Have you written the clerks explaining the causes upon which you must refuse their offer to charge the Estate? The government is truly upon your shoulders - will you undertake for the benefit of all? Should you remain silent then the Estate may be Latched - LACHES DOCTRINE.

Use of Money is Usufruct. For you, "itsmymoney", make a use of property that belongs to another.

In my opinion that is all that needs to be known regarding this matter. But only you alone can walk down into the Valley and face the Giant [Goliath].


Best Regards,
MJ

[itsmymoney]

I like that. The notes in circulation have trustees in place to understand. Any new credit created by fractional reserve banking practices requires an accommodation party. Thusly the signature on the back of the private financial instrument commonly called a cheque.

The experience shared by lorne has been my experience. Can you imagine what would happen if agents for IRS came back with a "yes you are exactly right, you got us. We give up". A response like that would spread almost instantaneously around the globe. No it is better for the business plan to just fall silent.

When they tried to levy a 10k friv. filing penalty - two letters and two phone calls and all I get is crickets....

I suppose it is the nature of curiosity that we have a need to feel vindicated at the end of the day as if we are not yet sure unless someone else tells us we are right. But at once that is an immediate trap. For if I come seeking judgment from you, then I have placed my trust in you and by my submission to you for judgment, I am now subject to your rulings. Silence is wonderful.

Smile and waive boys - just smile and waive. When told recently by a local attorney that I should be very afraid, I responded "you're not very smart are you." He actually brought up their poster boy "Wesley Snipes". I asked did you study his case? He responded no. I said "he tried to tap the stock of a bankrupt company." Like I say, when fear is gone there is no control mechanism left - save a gun.

Thusly is the importance of education. For the greatest in the Kingdom is the servant.

Make it a great day!
MJ


P.S. It looks like Maureen thinks he/she/it can give you an offer. Can he/she/it? I mean you don't have to do a thing, just sit back and relax while we determine your fate. Is that right? Is that what you will do? Is there not a cause whereof one should refuse such offer? Is your claim/demand valid or not? Only you can tell. Many may show, but only you can know. For it is your claim and your's alone. And therefore, only you know if the claim/demand is valid.

TAKE - implies abandonment.

Michael,

You obviously know your way around such things. I have not been so lucky...

I am currently faced with a CP15 'pay us 5k' letter for a 'frivolous' return. I have about 8 days to respond. I filed a 2013 sheeple return and was paid. I then filed a 1040x amended return with a LM deduction. I believe I should have started a LM deduction with the 2014 return of which the LM deduction was honored; however I'm sure I will see a CP2000 at some point for 'unpaid taxes'.

Their initial 3176C letter ('we have identified your return as frivolous') I responded to 3 months ago with a denial of any liability and simultaneously rescinded that amended return (the 3176C language states I may rescind and send a 'corrected' return). However, the 'corrected' return is actually the original return already refunded. They recently assessed the 5k penalty anyway, I presume because I was ALREADY paid a refund from the original 2013 return. They will do anything to steal your money.

There is not much recourse but I thought someone might have suggestions as to my response. I was rushed into the 3176C response due to a family illness and I may have lost my 'right of inquiry' window to stall them. The CP15 is an actual 'invoice' from their MFT 55 'penalty' module in the IMF system. Insidious, but there it is. However, I believe there is a 'mistake' statute that may come into play here. Doug555 mentioned it somewhere in this forum and I need to find it to see if it might apply - D555 if you have that statute handy please forward if possible.

Any other thoughts are welcome.

Thanks.

[lorne]

The experience shared by lorne has been my experience. Can you imagine what would happen if agents for IRS came back with a "yes you are exactly right, you got us. We give up". A response like that would spread almost instantaneously around the globe. No it is better for the business plan to just fall silent.

Exactly. The secret is out. Tell all your friends.

[xparte]

fly on the wall all I get is crickets...if the Tax question is repeated refer to first decision from Internal affairs classafied silent service silence is golden

[Michael Joseph]

I would like to share my experience with the Saving To Suitors Club. The IRS said they'd get back to me about my lawful money tax return within 60 days, but they have not even allowing time for mailing. No response.

Made about $40k at job (W2) and about $28k at side business (1099) for the year. I put a minus $15k on Line 21 of the 1040 return (paychecks redeemed in Lawful Money). None of the side business income was entered on the return as it was all redeemed lawful money.
Tax return filed: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/1040manny1.jpg

http://www.ctcwarrior.com/1040manny2.jpg

It is likely the IRS computer finally detected the reported 1099 business income was NOT included on my 1040 return, and they sent this CP2000 proposal of $10k due: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/CP2000_1.jpg

http://www.ctcwarrior.com/CP2000_2.jpg

My letter back to them essentially said, no I don't agree with your proposal, the reported 1099 amounts were all redeemed lawful money and here attached are copies of the LM checks, front and back.

IRS response: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/LTR4.jpg

Since then: [crickets]

To be sure, I also requested and just received this Account Transcript showing a zero balance due on the account: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/Transcript724.jpg

This confirms David Merrill is correct. Lawful money is not neccesarily taxable income. Thank you.

I like that. The notes in circulation have trustees in place to understand. Any new credit created by fractional reserve banking practices requires an accommodation party. Thusly the signature on the back of the private financial instrument commonly called a cheque.

The experience shared by lorne has been my experience. Can you imagine what would happen if agents for IRS came back with a "yes you are exactly right, you got us. We give up". A response like that would spread almost instantaneously around the globe. No it is better for the business plan to just fall silent.

When they tried to levy a 10k friv. filing penalty - two letters and two phone calls and all I get is crickets....

I suppose it is the nature of curiosity that we have a need to feel vindicated at the end of the day as if we are not yet sure unless someone else tells us we are right. But at once that is an immediate trap. For if I come seeking judgment from you, then I have placed my trust in you and by my submission to you for judgment, I am now subject to your rulings. Silence is wonderful.

Smile and waive boys - just smile and waive. When told recently by a local attorney that I should be very afraid, I responded "you're not very smart are you." He actually brought up their poster boy "Wesley Snipes". I asked did you study his case? He responded no. I said "he tried to tap the stock of a bankrupt company." Like I say, when fear is gone there is no control mechanism left - save a gun.

Thusly is the importance of education. For the greatest in the Kingdom is the servant.

Make it a great day!
MJ


P.S. It looks like Maureen thinks he/she/it can give you an offer. Can he/she/it? I mean you don't have to do a thing, just sit back and relax while we determine your fate. Is that right? Is that what you will do? Is there not a cause whereof one should refuse such offer? Is your claim/demand valid or not? Only you can tell. Many may show, but only you can know. For it is your claim and your's alone. And therefore, only you know if the claim/demand is valid.

TAKE - implies abandonment.

[allodial]

Thanks for sharing. Principal is not taxed. Interest is.

[lorne]

I would like to share my experience with the Saving To Suitors Club. The IRS said they'd get back to me about my lawful money tax return within 60 days, but they have not even allowing time for mailing. No response.

Made about $40k at job (W2) and about $28k at side business (1099) for the year. I put a minus $15k on Line 21 of the 1040 return (paychecks redeemed in Lawful Money). None of the side business income was entered on the return as it was all redeemed lawful money.
Tax return filed: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/1040manny1.jpg

http://www.ctcwarrior.com/1040manny2.jpg

It is likely the IRS computer finally detected the reported 1099 business income was NOT included on my 1040 return, and they sent this CP2000 proposal of $10k due: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/CP2000_1.jpg

http://www.ctcwarrior.com/CP2000_2.jpg

My letter back to them essentially said, no I don't agree with your proposal, the reported 1099 amounts were all redeemed lawful money and here attached are copies of the LM checks, front and back.

IRS response: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/LTR4.jpg

Since then: [crickets]

To be sure, I also requested and just received this Account Transcript showing a zero balance due on the account: http://www.ctcwarrior.com/Transcript724.jpg

This confirms David Merrill is correct. Lawful money is not neccesarily taxable income. Thank you.

You are quite welcome. Now 2018 and an important lesson is that the Withholdings amount should match the Claim. That is to say do not try to get a refund back that is any different that what is on account as withholdings. The 1040 Form is complicated even if you use it for reporting use of private credit like it is designed.

The only amount due for you to claim is the withholdings. So exemptions might be shown on the Form, but they are irrelevant for calculating the amount of the refund. The claim for a refund should match exactly the amount of the total withholdings on all the W-2's. Which should be considered like an account.