More Crackhead Questions Answered!

[Gregg]

Our friends over at Lost on the Horizons have again accumulated a bundle of questions just begging to be answered. As always, I have selected several of them that are unlikely to get correct answers over there (okay, I picked ones just begging to be made fun of) and brought them over here for a more balanced perspective.
So, without further ado, here we go! And remember, feel free to play at home and send your own wacky Q&As

I have been listening lately to Dave Champion. He proposes that there are a great number of American workers who should actually be non-taxpayers. I'm okay with that and it seems to parallel what PH says.

DC states that Congress, under its taxing authority, has no way to compel a non-taxpayer to use a 1040. Only those classes of persons that fall within Subtitle A (USC 26) are required to use a 1040. If you're a non-taxpayer, where would the form be used? So if you file a 1040, you're essentially saying that you fall under Subtitle A and therefore, implicitly, are a taxpyer. And, according to DC, that is something PH cannot get past.

I know that DC disagrees with PH's stance about how to get your money back. DC seems to advocate that if you've already filed and paid, just forget it, let the IRS keep the money, and don't repeat that mistake again.

QUESTION: What is so different between PH and DC?

Pete is likely to get an upward departure at sentencing due to more serious prior convictions.

title of thread Read What Thomas Jefferson said about MONEY
I think some of you may find this useful as it pertains to you being paid MONEY for work. Make the IRS prove you were ever paid money for services as they claim.

I think it is time to audit the Federal Reserve, don't you? Anyway, my favorite author defines it for us. Who would know better the intent, when they wrote the constitution?

Thomas Jefferson was in France while Messr.s Madison, Mason and friends were writing the Constitution, and this mistake has been my pet peeve since I CORRECTLY answered it in 5th grade "History Bee" and my teacher, another teacher and the Principal all agreed I was wrong....

Hi Folks,
this is my first substantial question. At the end of 2008 I took a big distribution from my IRA because I think these "tax advantaged" instruments will be confiscated soon enough (to be replaced by government bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, of course). The IRA was self-directed and I invested in stocks of private companies not associated with the Feds.

To my questions, first I need to go through my past statements and add up dividends paid from money market funds because these would certainly have paid interest from treasuries (and therefore reflect the exercise of a privelege).

Second, I would LIKE to file 'married filing separately' to insulate my wife from IRS nastiness if/when it comes. BUT I don't think there is a way to claim the IRA is "personal" vs. "community property" because a) I contributed to the IRA while we were together, b) we live in Texas which is a community property state, and c) because I distributed the IRA funds into a joint trading account.

AND SO, though I've given considerable evidence why I can't claim the "income" was only mine and file MFS, perhaps you folks know something I don't!

Thanks for your help with this.

you're making this way to hard. What you do is take the amount you withdrew, and if you're under the age of 59 1/2 you take 20% off the top, then multiply the amount withdrawn (make sure to include the 20% you paid the IRS, it's taxable as well!) by your effective top tax rate, and add this to the first amount. There ya go, simplicity itself.

Except when expressly limited, - as, for instance, where the power which is given to levy taxes is restricted by the provisions that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States," that "no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any State," and that "no capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken," a power granted to Federal Government is construed to be absolute in character.

What am I missing? The 16th amendment replaced The Federal Corporation Tax Of 1909, but the excise tax remained on state chartered corporations did it not? Help me out here, my senior mind is turning to mush.

Uhhh, mush was a long time ago, you're doing what the guy in Tropic Thunder called "a full retard" and his advice was just as good then as now, 'Never go full retard"

this one was Richard614, by the way. Assuming the number is his area code, I think he may be close enough to me that on a quiet night I could here the stupid boiling over his brain.

I recently had to go to NYC to do a couple of jobs. I was asked to fill out the requisite W9 and W2. How do you correctly fill out these forms if you are not a U.S. (District of Columbia ) citizen or an 'employee'?
I filled in the W2, but did not sign it,therefor it is void. The W9 I filled out and went ahead and checked US citizen ,even though I knew it was incorrect.
Should I have asked for a W8?
Am I considered a Non-resident Alien?
Should I have checked 'exempt payee'and checked 'other'?
..I can fit 'non federally connected private sector worker' in the description window.

Thoughts?

So many questions, grasshopper.
If you are from another country, or arrived in the USA on an extraterrestrial spacecraft, you are an alien. If you do not live here in addition to all the above, you are a non-resident alien.

If you do not work or live in the District of Columbia, you don't have to pay DC earnings tax, but all the other ones still apply.
The window is so small because we try to discourage idiots like you from improvising. Most people get it, you don't.

As you may already know, your company has submitted an information return on a sworn affidavit (IRS Form W-3) alleging that you worked for an "employer", that you were an "employee", and that you earned "wages." This information, although 3rd party, is being preferred over your own first-hand testimony. Most companies submit this information in complete ignorance of the law because they are taught by the IRS that they must do this for every "employee" they have. So we want to have a form that is in plain English, that they can understand, and that they can accurately subscribe, which will tell the real story and support your own testimony.

Hey there Pablo, the W-3 they submit is also sworn first hand testimony. They swear they paid you, you swear they didn't. Their proof is canceled checks with your signature, your proof is an absurd definition of "includes". I dunno how many times your argument has been brought up, but I do know that no court has ever bought it, and quite a few were so annoyed by it they charged extra. Good luck with that.

thread titleFinal Notice of Intent to Levy

Has anyone here been able to stop this from taking place?

Using CTC? no

I did not file in for Tax Year 2006 because I was reading and trying to digest CtC. I did file my TY 2006 in 2008 along with my TY 2007 return. I got everything back for 2007 but screwed up my 2006 (Form 4852) filing by putting the wrong Year on the 4852. The IRS used bad payer data to compute my 2006 taxes that shorted me by 28k (and change). I also received a CP-12 ltr. I responded to the CP-12 stating that I had entered the wrong year on the 4852. This was followed by a LTR 89C. I responded with this:

To Whom It May Concern,
THIS LETTER CONSTITUTES CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF FACTS TO THE IRS in order to facilitate the timely processing of my refund claim.
I received a signed LTR 89C (hereafter referred to as “LTR”) dated November 18, 2008, a copy of which is enclosed. Also find enclosed an additional copy of all forms used in my Tax Year 2006 filing.

snip the usual nonsense


The above ltr was sent out registered mail to the Atlanta IRS office on 19 Dec 08 and was signed for at 1:54pm 22 Dec 08.

I have not heard a peep from my friends at the helpful IRS. By not responding to my letter above the IRS has agreed to its content (silence is concurrence). That being so there is nothing in dispute. Any suggestions on my next step.

You could hope that they lost it, but I suspect after they finished laughing about it, and got it back after it was passed around for amusement, they decided to look a little deeper in your file. They have heard of super duper legal genius sovereign citizens, and they're very careful with any letters you send. You'll be hearing from them in good time, be patient.

I remember reading, in passing, didn't bookmark it, about the IRS obtaining our money from banks and credit unions. It said something about the difference between the different terminology the IRS uses and the meanings..


Does anyone remember that and can refer me to it, please?

Reason why, I am going after the credit union surrender of my money to the IRS. Approaching them that the levy was illegal so they should not have paid the money.. Want as much ammunition as I can get..

Aloha.

It's called a levy. It's not illegal and they should have paid the money. You can write letters in protest that we will post on the bulletin board in the break room as a joke, we call it our 'Letters from Loonies" board and we all get a big kick out of it. Since the IRS is taking anything you have, we're not too worried about losing you as a customer, we always thought you were a loser anyhow. You can keep the toaster, though. Fair trade for the laughs. But if you make us mad, we may send you a 1099 for it. (just kidding)

I am always amazed how one leaves money in a bank or credit union, when
they have received multiple letters leading up to the levy. I can understand
loosing money via a levy on your pay as you have little recourse, but to lose money that can be withdrawn from a bank account, since prior notices have been received stumps me. This is not meant as an attack or rebuke, but help me to understand how one just lets the thief take the money, when you watched him walk up the drive?

Well, we're not dealing with Nobel Prize winning scientists here, are we.

What is the highest number that can be entered to reduce witholding without being flagged. I know it used to be 9 but it was increased.

Since you all are so high on "First hand testimoney, signed and sworn under penalty of perjury" this is what we call a "teachable moment" in which you learn about the penalties for perjury. Won't hurt a bit...



Well, that's about all for now, tune in next time!

[Judge Roy Bean]

Our friends over at Lost on the Horizons have again accumulated a bundle of questions just begging to be answered. As always, I have selected several of them that are unlikely to get correct answers over there (okay, I picked ones just begging to be made fun of) and brought them over here for a more balanced perspective.
So, without further ado, here we go! And remember, feel free to play at home and send your own wacky Q&As

I have not heard a peep from my friends at the helpful IRS. By not responding to my letter above the IRS has agreed to its content (silence is concurrence). That being so there is nothing in dispute. Any suggestions on my next step.

Yes. Find someone to take care of your family.

[Nikki]

I have been listening lately to Dave Champion. He proposes that there are a great number of American workers who should actually be non-taxpayers. I'm okay with that and it seems to parallel what PH says.

DC states that Congress, under its taxing authority, has no way to compel a non-taxpayer to use a 1040. Only those classes of persons that fall within Subtitle A (USC 26) are required to use a 1040. If you're a non-taxpayer, where would the form be used? So if you file a 1040, you're essentially saying that you fall under Subtitle A and therefore, implicitly, are a taxpyer. And, according to DC, that is something PH cannot get past.

I know that DC disagrees with PH's stance about how to get your money back. DC seems to advocate that if you've already filed and paid, just forget it, let the IRS keep the money, and don't repeat that mistake again.

QUESTION: What is so different between PH and DC?

Pete is likely to get an upward departure at sentencing due to more serious prior convictions.

Actually you are missing a couple of fine points:
(1) Dave doesn't post his acolytes' information on the Internet, thereby giving the IRS and state authorities a perfect idea whom to look for.

(2) Pete hasn't (yet) sold anyone down the river to get the feds off his back. Dave surrendered his entire customer and correspondence list as soon as the least bit of pressure was brought on him.

(3) As of today, Dave doesn't have an active criminal porosecution running against him.

(4) Dave's fees are MUCH higher than the cost of Pete's book.

[LPC]

I have been listening lately to Dave Champion.

Just "listening" is good, because that means he doesn't know your name. But if you have communicated with him and given him your name, you should immediately bend over, grab your ankles, and assume the position.

The 16th amendment replaced The Federal Corporation Tax Of 1909, but the excise tax remained on state chartered corporations did it not? Help me out here, my senior mind is turning to mush.

The 16th Amendment was never properly ratified, the 16th Amendment doesn't really give Congress the power to tax incomes, the Constitution never gave Congress the power to tax the average worker regardless of what the 16th Amendment says, the Internal Revenue Code was never enacted, it doesn't apply to wages, it doesn't actually require anyone to file a return or pay any tax, and the IRS has never properly adopted any regulations. All of the Supreme Court decisions, Circuit Court decisions, and criminal convictions that have said the opposite for the last 95 years are all mistakes.

So don't worry, no matter what you do, you're safe.

I recently had to go to NYC to do a couple of jobs. I was asked to fill out the requisite W9 and W2. How do you correctly fill out these forms if you are not a U.S. (District of Columbia ) citizen or an 'employee'?

How to fill them out "correctly"? Who cares? We're talking about a corrupt, unlawful, de facto government here. (What state was that again?)

You don't want to pay taxes, do you? And you know you don't really need to, right? So just do whatever you need to do. If that means lying, then so be it. They'd do it to you if they could.

You know you want to.

And you'll be glad you did.

As you may already know, your company has submitted an information return on a sworn affidavit (IRS Form W-3) alleging that you worked for an "employer", that you were an "employee", and that you earned "wages." This information, although 3rd party, is being preferred over your own first-hand testimony.

Do you really believe that the company you work for doesn't know why they paid you?

If you do, you're dumber than I thought possible when I wrote the other crappy answers above.

Final Notice of Intent to Levy

So what part of "final" didn't you understand?

I did not file in for Tax Year 2006 because I was reading and trying to digest CtC.

I didn't stop at the red light because I was mixing a rum and coke.

Do what I did, and just explain it to the grand jury. I'm sure they will understand.

[absdes96]

At this point, it may be appropriate to quote the philosophy and wisdom of Dale Gribble (from the King of the Hill): "Enacted in 1966, the Freedom of Information Act — or FOIA — gives any citizen the right to request access to federal agency records or information. It's what I used when I took on the IRS for disallowing my status as a tax-exempt church."

[Gregg]

In all seriousness, I want to go back to this point,

As you may already know, your company has submitted an information return on a sworn affidavit (IRS Form W-3) alleging that you worked for an "employer", that you were an "employee", and that you earned "wages." This information, although 3rd party, is being preferred over your own first-hand testimony.

I cannot figure out what mental block prevents the crackheads from seeing that the W-3 is ALSO sworn and signed under penalty of perjury. And as I always point out, they have the canceled checks, you have your legal definition. The rub is, in court, you cannot argue the law, ie: "what they paid me was not wages", that is a dispute of law and is up to the Judge, (none of whom has ever agreed with it), the only thing you can put to a jury is argument of fact, ie: "did you get the money" and, well, no one, not even the crackheads, deny that.
And just once, I wish that some court would draft a ruling that makes precedent that when you "sign under penalty of perjury" that you "received no wages blah blah blah..." you are committing perjury (is that such a leap of logic?) and lock one of these idiots up as an example.

[Gregg]

I have another one that I just have to respond to

Someday people will wake up to how they have been duped from birth. The illusion of freedom est. 1865 with the murder of Lincoln. They killed him before presidential orders could reestablish a congressional quarum. Doesn't anyone ever wonder why those responsible were never punished? Hell, you need not look any farther than the year said people established their organization...the founders of the KKK. I know, its all a great big crazy conspiracy, really though...investigate it for yourself. You will come to the same ending place I'm sure:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7515.html

What does any of this have to do with income tax? Think about it, check into for yourself...you just cant make this sh*t up.

How are ye stupid, let me count the way....

Lincoln was murdered by an egotistical nutjob, who had some shaky connections to the Confederate Government but he was not likely operating on orders from them. There was a conspiracy, and 4 members of it were hanged, several more were sentenced to prison for long periods. They not only got the killer, they got his friends all the way down to the Doctor who treated his broken leg. (the infamous Dr Samuel Mudd)
The KKK was formed in Vicksburg years after the assasination and none of the founders had any connection whatsoever with the Lincoln plot beyond being a Confederate Veterans club (at the time of it's original organization)

and yes they can "make this *^$$ up", you just did. Your knowledge of History is as good as your knowledge of Tax Law.

[LPC]

And just once, I wish that some court would draft a ruling that makes precedent that when you "sign under penalty of perjury" that you "received no wages blah blah blah..." you are committing perjury (is that such a leap of logic?) and lock one of these idiots up as an example.

That would be Hendrickson.

He hasn't been indicted for perjury, but for filing false returns, but that's pretty much the same thing, so we may get the ruling we're looking for.

[Gregg]

and another

I know I havent posted on here in quite some time, so hello to all. I recieved a 3176 in the mail today with all the standard information. Heres the problem, the IRS paid me already. Now it appears they are going to try and get the money back. How many of you here have recieved a 3176 after you have gotten the check?

Victory! II, the sequel

[The Operative]

Suggestions for all crackheads:

If you file using your "CTC education", and if you receive a refund, take the following steps:

1. For each year of filing 'CTC', multiply the amount of your refund by two.
2. add $5,000 ($10,000 if you filed married filing jointly).
3. Put that total amount in a savings account.

When the IRS gets around to placing a levy on your assets, the total in that account might just cover it.

[Nikki]

and another

I know I havent posted on here in quite some time, so hello to all. I recieved a 3176 in the mail today with all the standard information. Heres the problem, the IRS paid me already. Now it appears they are going to try and get the money back. How many of you here have recieved a 3176 after you have gotten the check?

Victory! II, the sequel

How about "at least six, including Pete, most of whom have conceded or lost at trial?"

[Famspear]

Just released yesterday, by the Internal Revenue Service:

IR-2009-41, April 13, 2009

WASHINGTON --The Internal Revenue Service today issued its 2009 "dirty dozen" list of tax scams, including schemes involving phishing, hiding income offshore and false claims for refunds.

"Taxpayers should be wary of scams to avoid paying taxes that seem too good to be true, especially during these challenging economic times," IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman said. "There is no secret trick that can eliminate a person's tax obligations. People should be wary of anyone peddling any of these scams."

Tax schemes are illegal and can lead to problems for both scam artists and taxpayers who risk significant penalties, interest and possible criminal prosecution.

The IRS urges taxpayers to avoid these common schemes:

[ . . . . ]Filing a phony wage- or income-related information return to replace a legitimate information return has been used as an illegal method to lower the amount of taxes owed. Typically, a Form 4852 (Substitute Form W-2) or a "corrected" Form 1099 is used as a way to improperly reduce taxable income to zero. The taxpayer also may submit a statement rebutting wages and taxes reported by a payer to the IRS. Sometimes fraudsters even include an explanation on their Form 4852 that cites statutory language on the definition of wages or may include some reference to a paying company that refuses to issue a corrected Form W-2 for fear of IRS retaliation. Taxpayers should resist any temptation to participate in any of the variations of this scheme.

[ . . . . ]

EDIT: Oops, I just noticed that Demo had already started a thread on this release.

[Nikki]

IRS' post is irrelevant. It doesn't mention Pete or even CtC.

And it comes nowhere close to rebutting the taxability requirement to have a federal nexus.