Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Patriots win again - 2013 lawful money tax filing

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by doug555 View Post
    Correct. If this demand "lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)" had been on record since Jan 1, 2013, then this filer could have gotten all $7100 FITW refunded. So, evidently, "co-mingling" of funds is not an issue. The $2100 was legitimately paid as a "usage fee" for the FRNs that were used.

    And I now think that JohnnyCash's position that the IRS will probably not dispute 1040's with lawful money demands is correct.

    It would stir up a more formal judicial recognition of this remedy, and thereby increase its publicity and use.

    So, I am very grateful for what JohnnyCash has done and posted here for all of us to see that lawful money demands are being honored by the IRS, despite any "mistakes" being made by the filers.
    Doug555 and JohnnyCash...

    Doug555: This 'co-mingling' of redeeming funds was your concern over at 'Treasury Letter' (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...tter-from-1984), where you suggested refraining from this. I'm wondering if you consider Johnny's method to be a DEDUCTION rather than a 'all transactions' REDUCTION, where BOTH are respectively correct. Perhaps we should craft an addendum to the 'Treasury Letter' topic/thread regarding this fact?

    JohnnyCash: I did not doubt your method was working (for what, 8 years now?). I saw the logic in your method, but also saw the logic behind Doug555's method. Just trying to look at all angles and decide what works for me. Apparently I can now amend 2013 and proceed with 2014 both in a 'co-mingled' fashion as a DEDUCTION. Then start taking the REDUCTION going forward from TY 2015 with the 'all transactions' demand.

    If either of you disagree with my interpretations or presumptions above, please state your thoughts to educate us all.

    Thank you both for your knowledge and insight.

    imm
    Last edited by itsmymoney; 01-19-15 at 07:56 PM.

  2. #12
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    You're welcome guys. Yes, there was 32xx. in FITW- Fed income tax withheld (box 2), 32xx. in SS tax withheld (box 4), and 7xx. in Medicare tax withheld (box 6). Subtracting the $5xxx refund equals about $2100 paid to US Treasury. Yes the refund could have been higher with more lawful money redeemed but total LM redeemed for TY13 was $14k for Primary filer (I'm Secondary filer with no FR currency earnings), that's what we have record of. Can't go back in time and redeem more LM now. But perhaps this victory will give Primary filer the confidence to redeem more LM going forward.

    Srsly $2100? Doesn't even cover my Dad's SS payout for the month! How can the govt continue all their entitlement payouts on $2100 from the average family, let alone pay the banks their cut? If half the families in America pay only $2100/yr in taxes ... how will your Banking Cabal survive? The simple answer is, it can't. The bank & tax scam cannot continue on so little money. This is the end game. The run on the Fed. Lawful money users are a real threat to their scam.

    No "mistake" was made in this filing, no deception or trickery involved in this win. We got the refund requested, a legal win. It's another glaring example of LAWFUL MONEY success. The Silver Bullet. LM works for both W2/W4 workers and 1099 workers.

    There's no shame in admitting you've been out-coached and outplayed.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCash View Post
    You're welcome guys. Yes, there was 32xx. in FITW- Fed income tax withheld (box 2), 32xx. in SS tax withheld (box 4), and 7xx. in Medicare tax withheld (box 6). Subtracting the $5xxx refund equals about $2100 paid to US Treasury. Yes the refund could have been higher with more lawful money redeemed but total LM redeemed for TY13 was $14k for Primary filer (I'm Secondary filer with no FR currency earnings), that's what we have record of. Can't go back in time and redeem more LM now. But perhaps this victory will give Primary filer the confidence to redeem more LM going forward.

    Srsly $2100? Doesn't even cover my Dad's SS payout for the month! How can the govt continue all their entitlement payouts on $2100 from the average family, let alone pay the banks their cut? If half the families in America pay only $2100/yr in taxes ... how will your Banking Cabal survive? The simple answer is, it can't. The bank & tax scam cannot continue on so little money. This is the end game. The run on the Fed. Lawful money users are a real threat to their scam.

    No "mistake" was made in this filing, no deception or trickery involved in this win. We got the refund requested, a legal win. It's another glaring example of LAWFUL MONEY success. The Silver Bullet. LM works for both W2/W4 workers and 1099 workers.

    There's no shame in admitting you've been out-coached and outplayed.
    Johnny,

    Thanks again. However, no one was 'out-coached and outplayed'. In fact, I (and probably others) will 'win' with BOTH methods (yours and Doug555's) depending on if/when we executed an 'all transactions' demand going forward. 'Win Win' is an appropriate term here!

    If you were a humble person you would thank Doug555 because the 'all transactions' method will return more Lawful Money than 'your' method. Just saying.

    Thanks again to both of you!

  4. #14
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    No. Both methods result in the same $3588 refund. Doug even says so: "NOTICE, however, you are only asking for and getting a refund of the FITW,,, namely, 3588."
    Using the "John DOH" filer grossing $800/week, $41600/year:

    DOUG555 EXAMPLE:
    41,600 + 3588 + 1747.20 + 603.20 = 47538.40
    Line 21 has (47538.40)
    Line 22 has (5938.40)
    Refund of 3588.

    NET PAY EXAMPLE:
    Line 21 has (35662.)
    Line 22 has 5938.
    Refund of 3588.
    http://jesse2012.com/JTD1040.pdf

    Heavy is the head that wears a crown.

  5. #15
    You're right Johnny...same refund both ways....and for that matter, same refund if you manipulate the numbers for a GROSS PAY EXAMPLE.

    And that gross pay ties back into Doug555's "ALL TRANSACTIONS" reasoning....to include the FITW & FICA amounts for the "W-2" employees....and your mention on another post "You cannot exclude or deduct more than your foreign earned income for the year."

    I understand the logic behind the "All Transactions", but had such a hard time wrapping my head around the actual numbers in doug's example....especially when the refund comes out the same when using Gross Pay....and in my mind Gross Pay includes the transactions of FITW & FICA....but I definitely see the logic of not using Net Pay for the reason that FRN's & Lawful Money become co-mingled.

  6. #16
    Noah
    Guest
    Do you and Doug carry around 2 wallets to avoid co-mingling?

    Johnny, while as filers on a joint return paying $2100 in fed taxes, I feel it should be pointed out, that by virtue of primary filer being an "employee" in "employment," the employer paid in an equal (at least once was equal) amount of SocialSecurity and Medicare taxes, box 4 and box 6, into the system. So the total contribution to federal coffers would be 2100+3200+700 = $6000.
    I'm surprised crazy-math Doug did not catch this as he's always looking for moar.

  7. #17
    W2 vs 1099 For most of us the actual difference between 1099 Independent Contractors and W-2 Employees is clear cut for several reasons.

    But there are many of us out there that have never encountered it or never even thought to discover and understand their differences.

    Use the links on this page for additional information.

    When a person is paid on the form W-2, the employer will automatically withhold and pay all of the necessary employee income taxes which are required by the IRS.
    The applicable taxes include:
    Federal Income Tax,
    State Income Tax, and
    FICA (Social Security and Medicare).

    In addition, the employer will pay all of the necessary employer taxes.
    These taxes shall include:
    FICA (Social Security and Medicare),
    FUTA (Federal Unemployment Tax), and
    SUI (State Unemployment Tax).

    Working on a 1099 basis actually means that you are working as a true Independent Contractor under the IRS rules.

    You work on a 1099 basis when you are self employed such as a sole proprietor or as a corporation.

    Your clients will report the monies they pay you to the IRS on a 1099 form.

    Your clients will typically contract with you to work on a specific project.

    You should have a written contract with each client that will outline the work you will perform, the fees and or cost the client will pay, and how the client will pay you.

    You will forward invoices to the client according to the contract terms.

    Actual independent contractors are responsible for maintaining all business expenses and income and for making quarterly federal and state income tax payments.

    Resource http://www.residual-rewards.com/w2-vs-1099.html

    When your Foreign Corporation expects to transact business outside your state of formation, your company may be required to qualify as a "foreign corporation".

    There are many "company formation companies" that can file the necessary paperwork to qualify your business as a foreign corporation in any of the 50 states.

    A corporation is considered to be domestic only in the state where it was formed.

    In all other states, your company is regarded as a foreign corporation.

    To qualify your company to transact business in another state, you must register for a Certificate of Authority to transact business in that state.

    The consequences of not qualifying in a foreign state in which your company transacts business may include loss of access to that state's courts and potential fines.

    Additionally, corporations are subject to taxes and annual report fees in both the state of formation and any states where the corporation is qualified as a foreign corporation.

    Additionally, most states require corporations to have within each state where the company is qualified. This Registered Agent must be available to receive important communications from the state and others on behalf of the company. http://www.residual-rewards.com/fore...rporation.html

    The statement "withhold and pay all of the necessary employee income taxes which are required by the IRS."

    The question is required by whom?

    I feel the FRB relies on the IRS to find out where and who has their FRN's.
    "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

  8. #18
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    Noah, you're right it's about $6000 total paid-in between Employer & Employee. Still not too bad for $109k in income (5.5%). I checked doug555's math [41,600 + 3588 + 1747.20 + 603.20 = 47538.40] and it's correct; it's not "crazy math." Please have respect for the feelings of other innocent quatlosers.

    Now the fact he's choosing to add-in more than his lawful money income for the year certainly qualifies for driving the train past the station. I can appreciate that diverse viewpoint. and a CP (civil penalty). Perhaps we could characterize it as crazy train.

    ChexMix, you've just spouted what THEY want us to believe. You cut & pasted propaganda. THEY conveniently leave out that these guidelines & rules are conditional; only apply to those in contract. They leave out the contract, the nexus, that we all know is FEDERAL RESERVE CREDIT. If I pay my workers in LM, bitcoin, or marbles ... then this W2/1099 reporting doesn't apply. If I'm paid in LM, bitcoin, or marbles ... then this BS doesn't apply.
    This is just social conditioning. Which is easily overcome.
    Last edited by JohnnyCash; 01-22-15 at 04:39 PM.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCash View Post
    No. Both methods result in the same $3588 refund. Doug even says so: "NOTICE, however, you are only asking for and getting a refund of the FITW,,, namely, 3588."
    Using the "John DOH" filer grossing $800/week, $41600/year:

    DOUG555 EXAMPLE:
    41,600 + 3588 + 1747.20 + 603.20 = 47538.40
    Line 21 has (47538.40)
    Line 22 has (5938.40)
    Refund of 3588.

    NET PAY EXAMPLE:
    Line 21 has (35662.)
    Line 22 has 5938.
    Refund of 3588.
    http://jesse2012.com/JTD1040.pdf

    Heavy is the head that wears a crown.
    Johnny, I meant that in the one real-world example (Primary/Secondary filer) 'they' left $2100 on the table.

    In your your 'John DOH' example, both methods work because the Gross Pay is relatively low. So for the NET PAY method, plug in 75,000 Gross Pay at single-0 withholding: you do NOT receive all of your FITW. You end up 'forfeiting' less than $1000. So depending on your pay grade and withholding exemptions, you may not receive all of the FITW. Which brings me to this point...

    You can NEVER redeem all the Gross Pay (including deductions) in lawful money using the NET PAY method. As Doug555 pointed out, I don't believe there is a law that states that you are NOT allowed to redeem the Gross Pay. If there is, someone please provide it if they know of it.

    Here's another idea. If people are wary of Doug555's accounting method, i.e. 'adding all W-2 "income" transactions (including SS/Med) to be greater than Gross Pay' (I still need to verify that accounting method with an accountant), then the following might be an alternative to that. And, it actually combines the D555 and Johnny methods, with a twist I have added. The more I think about it, this seems to make lawful and legal sense. Here goes...

    1) Create and record at the County, the suggested Affidavit that demands lawful money for ALL transactions and the discharge of all obligations via the 95a(2) language. I believe that Affidavit is linked in the 'Treasury Letter' topic. I don't know the method of linking that here, so I apologize. So you are therefore demanding lawful money on the GROSS PAY and ALL other transactions (including NET, SS/MED, ATM withdrawals, etc), with that Affidavit recording.

    2) Now using the 'John DOH' example:
    Line 21 has (39250) This is NET pay of 35662 + FITW of 3588.
    Line 22 has (2350) This is SS of 1747 + MED of 603.

    The refund is still 3588. Even if you plugged in the 75,000 Gross Pay example I mentioned, you would still receive your full FITW refund.

    Here's the thought on this alternative (combining D555 with Johnny, and my removing FITW from Line 22 and adding to Line 21):

    1) There is no statute or regulation (if there is, PLEASE publish it) that determines HOW to provide for a lawful money DE-DUCTION or RE-DUCTION on the 1040.

    2) By including the FITW with NET PAY as "Other Income", you are demanding THAT portion (FITW + NET PAY) of the GROSS PAY in lawful money to be refunded, BECAUSE you were not able to redeem the FITW, UNTIL NOW - on the 1040.

    3) This is in fact an 'income tax' matter, is it not? Look at the PAYMENTS section of the 1040. For 2013, what does it tell you to put on Line 62? FEDERAL INCOME TAX WITHHELD (I'm not yelling, just emphasizing). Do you see SS/MED anywhere here (forget the 'excess SS/etc)? No, because it's out of scope for the 1040. The SS/MED amounts are the so-called privilege/contract/taxable-event that incurs an "income" tax...so..

    4) IMO the Doug555 example might want to remove the FITW from Line 22. I could say the same for the Johnny example IF he had the 'all transactions' demand Affidavit filed and the D555 'all transactions' language on the checks/slips, where he would then add the FITW to Line 21. If you are redeeming in lawful money in the D555 method, and the NET PAY you received is NOT "income", then how is the FITW considered "income" if you are receiving ALL of it back with the RE-DUCTION from GROSS PAY? If it's NOT SS/MED, then all the other amounts (NET PAY and FITW) are NOT "income" - IF you have demanded that ALL transactions be RILM ...

    We KNOW we can't ask for a SS/MED refund on this Form 1040, but we CAN ask for the FITW of which WOULD have been redeemed in lawful money if we were paid in GROSS PAY. Since we are not, then the Affidavit notifies the IRS/Treasury if necessary (not a bad idea to include it with the 1040) that yes, I also have demanded the FITW (and SS/MED) in lawful money. The checks/slips are an extension of the Affidavit (or vice versa, however you want to look at it). So if I have filed my affidavit (and novated the checks/slips with 'all transactions/95a(2)' language), then I know that I can rightfully demand the NON-SS/MED amounts because this is an "income" tax Form. And my "income" in this example is $2350. The remaining (NET + FITW) is not "income" in the statutory taxation sense. Therefore it is removed from the Line 22 "income".

    I recognize that BOTH methods have been working and that is great. However, I think the combined method may be viable (removing FITW from Line 22, adding it to Line 21). I'll have a year to think it over. For 2013 and 2014, it'll have to be the Johnny method for my situation.


    All thoughts welcome.
    Last edited by itsmymoney; 01-23-15 at 03:01 AM.

  10. #20
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    Thanks for mischaracterizing our win as ... left $2100. on the table. Very incongruous coming from a persona who sets their W4 exemptions to 0 yielding maximum benefit to the bank&tax scam; at a minimum giving the govt a free loan. I can say we were both elated to receive a $5k refund last March. More than the box 2 FITW withheld. We got exactly what we wanted & asked for, no more & no less. That's less than 2% tax paid on $109,00 reported income. The federal govt does provide some important services and it's possible the primary filer was willing to contribute ... a little.

    You might forgive me for glossing over the remainder of your post to save time. Just couldn't get past that .... certain agenda-driven aroma. Might wanna do something about that discharge.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •