IRS recognizes Redeeming Lawful Money - Yes!!!

[JohnnyCash]

I don't know.

[Darkmagus]

While I have serious doubts about the "IRS recogniz[ing] Redeeming Lawful Money", I know what the IRS does NOT recognize:
The IRS does not recognize as "taxpayers" some people I've known who have never filed any paperwork with the IRS in their entire lives, who work only for lawful money, and who have bank accounts, credit cards, DLs, BCs, insurance policies, and SSNs, and one even has a mortgage.

I'm surprised that no one has asked..."and how is that possible?"

[walter]

I'm surprised that no one has asked..."and how is that possible?"

I am one of those people.

Didn't file ever and never get contacted even when I created a subdivision that I had to rezone by going to government meeting etc.
My two friends that were involved with we did what an accountant told them to do and they both are getting screwed. One still owes 20K and the other the CRA has been holding 50K of his for years and has to go to court to get it.
The CRA has tried to milk info about me from them because the CRA thinks I am imaginary.
Even when they have my full legal NAME they still don't contact me.
And I never redeemed lawful money because I never filled.
Its simple...NO CONTRACT

[David Merrill]

I have heard if you finally get to look at your IRS file, all that is in it is what you put there.

So it may be realistic, the perception that you actually testify against yourself as your own collection agent.

[walter]

I have heard if you finally get to look at your IRS file, all that is in it is what you put there.

So it may be realistic, the perception that you actually testify against yourself as your own collection agent.

What else can there be?

[EZrhythm]

The power of rescission has no bounds!

[allodial]

I have heard if you finally get to look at your IRS file, all that is in it is what you put there.

So it may be realistic, the perception that you actually testify against yourself as your own collection agent.

Per the principles of "evidence law", attorneys are not allowed to generate, create or fabricate evidence, they are 'evidence police' (perhaps that is why the use of crack addict informants came to be more prominent--attorneys can't generate evidence but they can pay someone to lie). BTW, it is possible to put in a document: "Authority to use any information contained in this document against me is not granted." Even being read 'Miranda rights' constitutes attempt at formation of contract to allow them to use evidence against you. I'm all for lawfulness and civility but the truth is, the legal professions and law enforcement professions have gotten dirty in the past decade.

Since attorneys are not allowed to fabricate evidence, they must use investigators to do that. Peace officers can double up as investigators. Remember: peaces officer and notaries can administer oaths.

Re: the IRS
The folks at the IRS tend to be rather reasonable. They do their jobs and work with what you give them. I wouldn't count them as enemies. But I wouldn't suggest handing anyone rope to hang you with.

So it may be realistic, the perception that you actually testify against yourself as your own collection agent.

For the perplexed, there is a song...

...it doesn't have to be that way, does it? Its ok to make honest returns. But "my own enemy" mindset is when you hate the IRS and not realize you might be the IRS.

[walter]

not realize you might be the IRS.

the first acronym after all is "INTERNAL" , lol
right in your face.

[Freeman]

I keep going further down the rabbit hole

I have amended some of this Crosstalk so as to keep this suitor's identity concealed. FIRST MIDDLE LAST is most commonly the trust company in most people's minds when they become aware that their parents named them First Middle. - Like with this Massachusetts Trust.




This testimony is very revealing. Early on, so early that we were using the non-negotiable verbiage a suitor deposited a rubber paycheck. The bank called him when the funds would not go through the boss's bank. He went to the bank and they gave him back the instrument but the non-endorsement had been torn off the end of it. He described it over the phone so you see this example is a simulation for demonstration, not the actual torn check:

Together this suitor testimony reveals the nature of fractional lending and how it creates currency in circulation. This extra currency must be bonded, it has to be worth something for people to place any value in the (extra) currency, and since the extra currency looks just like the US (Treasurer and Secretary signatures) bonded currency that means we have inflation anyway...

In the Crosstalk testimony above, the bank was treating the non-endorsed demanded lawful money like it was endorsed and had to clean house rather than be sanctioned by the Reserve Board or OCC, maybe even prosecuted for counterfeiting. The funds that are non-endorsed need to be treated as special deposits or the accounts, after fractional lending will simply not balance out.

This is why many suitors have noticed after non-endorsing funds on a long-held account it will be revised to non-interest bearing without mention or notice. If the bank can have no benefit of fractional lending on the funds then there is no cause for the bank to be paying for that benefit as a State bank.

At the first glance it is a bad thing for people to have their bank accounts closed out. True. But you should sit back a bit and look what is really happening. The bank, ignoring putting the funds into special deposits had cost jobs and risked criminal prosecution. Therefore closing the bank accounts fit under their Quit for No Reason clause on the signature cards.



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. Treefarmer;


I am sure that the vast majority of readers here wish they had never filed a W-4 or 1040 Form. However how many people regret being employed?

Hey all, I have messaged some of you in private, but wanted to say, I've been on this chat forum for LITERALLY days, and it's like opening pandora a box. I love every second of it, thanks for the knowledge hope to speak to some of you soon.

[marcel]

Biden Wants to Fix a $7 Trillion Tax Evasion Problem With the Brain Trust

https://mishtalk.com/economics/biden-wants-to-fix-a-7-trillion-tax-evasion-problem-with-a-brain-trust