1040 help

[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]

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".

[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___ ?

The payee could place the following form of non-endorsement in writing on the back of the check/draft before transacting it to accomplish our goal:

**********************************************
Payee orders payment made in lawful money of the
United States and full discharge of accommodation
status is demanded for all related transactions.


transacting absent accommodation is authorized in U.C.C. 4-205
Auth: ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275; Title 12 U.S.C. §411, §95a(2).

**********************************************

Or alternatively - an autograph could be placed below the payee order like the example shown below:

**********************************************
Payee orders payment made in lawful money of the
United States and full discharge of accommodation
status is demanded for all related transactions.

By: _______________________________________, Payee
Auth: ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275; Title 12 U.S.C. §411, §95a(2).

**********************************************

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 and full discharge for accommodation
status of parties in all related transactions is demanded.
Auth: ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275; Title 12 U.S.C. §411, §95a(2).


Any better or more precise/concise thoughts on how the maker can remove any remaining ambiguity restrict the transacting and payment of their check/draft to "lawful money" of the United States and keep their business affairs on the U.S. Treasury side of the house?

[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___ ?

The payee could place the following form of non-endorsement in writing on the back of the check/draft before transacting it to accomplish our goal:

**********************************************
Payee orders payment made in lawful money of the
United States and full discharge of accommodation
status is demanded for all related transactions.


transacting absent accommodation is authorized in U.C.C. 4-205
Auth: ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275; Title 12 U.S.C. §411, §95a(2).

**********************************************

Or alternatively - an autograph could be placed below the payee order like the example shown below:

**********************************************
Payee orders payment made in lawful money of the
United States and full discharge of accommodation
status is demanded for all related transactions.

By: _______________________________________, Payee
Auth: ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275; Title 12 U.S.C. §411, §95a(2).

**********************************************

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 and full discharge for accommodation
status of parties in all related transactions is demanded.
Auth: ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251-275; Title 12 U.S.C. §411, §95a(2).


Any better or more precise/concise thoughts on how the maker can remove any remaining ambiguity restrict the transacting and payment of their check/draft to "lawful money" of the United States and keep their business affairs on the U.S. Treasury side of the house?

http://1040relief.blogspot.com/p/get...arted.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.

[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.

[Chex]

When you file would one still use Schedule A? turbo tax does that for me.

Line 21. 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.

This is reporting.....> By following FRCP 803(6) rule of hearsay exceptions, one is making a substantive record on documents used in the normal course of business. By writing “lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)” on all commercial instruments (deposit slips, checks, etc), one enables the equitable title transfer of the credit (labor) held by the United States Treasury via the Federal Reserve Banks since the April 5, 1933 Executive Order 6102 of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, which transfer then enables the Trustee to setoff the national debt to that extent. This 803(6) rule of hearsay exceptions was just amended on 12/1/14 (see 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 "

[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.