LostHead just can't figure out why wages are being garnished

[Joey Smith]

Funny thread. I'll swear, sometimes I think those losers at LostHeads exist just to give me a daily bellylaugh.

scrubbs


171 Posts
Posted - 05/19/2007 : 9:38:12 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Company I have worked for, has stolen 30 percent of my paycheck each week, for the last 4 years. I have never filed a 1040 form.

Now the IRS says I owe money. Their own documents show that the money is in a kind of holding pattern. They have the money. Yet they will not file a subsitute return. They do not acknowledge that their claim has already been paid, that they are just waiting for me to file their form to ACKNOWLEDGE that fact.

WHY do I have to acknowledge a presumed fact? If they have a proper claim, then why should I have to file their form? Shouldn't they be able to just do a subsitute return and refund the differance? What are they waiting for?

And if I file a zero amount owed 1040 form, they will penalize me, or try to, and try to get me to change my sworn (jurat) statement.

I just don't get it.



(personal note to my brother) Hey mac, call mom. She said your phone is out of order, and shes been trying to get ahold of you.


richardf614


523 Posts
Posted - 05/19/2007 : 11:47:48 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why don't you just file according to your knowledge from CtC and end this game?

What are you waiting for? Why do you allow the IRS to act from an offensive stance and you from an defensive stance?

Get on with it! It is much easier to win, when you have all of your teeth, once you are knocked down and your teeth are laying on the ground, you are always playing catch up.

DO IT!


hughg


114 Posts
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 07:18:52 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"And if I file a zero amount owed 1040 form, they will penalize me, or try to, and try to get me to change my sworn (jurat) statement."

He already answered that.


BiggDooger


259 Posts
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 10:20:06 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by scrubbs

The Company I have worked for, has stolen 30 percent of my paycheck each week, for the last 4 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like a matter for a state court lawsuit
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have never filed a 1040 form.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you're not a taxpayer, why would you?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now the IRS says I owe money.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They have unrefuted info returns on you. Why wouldn't they?


richardf614


523 Posts
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 1:09:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They have info returns on him and he has never filed. I guess he could
just set around and let the IRS add numbers on top of numbers, until
they levy him or he could file correctly and get HIS money back.

I fail to see the problem here, letting a presumption stand or taking
it away?

Letting the payer and IRS determine the outcome is crazy.


standinpeace


229 Posts
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 1:41:53 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scrubbs has been a participant on this forum for at least a year and knows what to do if he wants his money back. Obviously he prefers to complain than file a CtC return, because he knows the only answer he is going to get is to file a CtC return, so I'm confused as to why he complains.


John J. Bulten


288 Posts
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 4:36:40 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scrubbs, do you really owe them money? If you owe, you should file your return to assess and pay it. If you don't owe, then why would it make a difference if they add a fictitious penalty claim to a fictitious tax claim?! You should file your return to halt collection of the money they claim now.

What has most likely happened is that they compared the W-2s to the withholding (what you call the 30%), and found that in the worst light you owed more tax than the withholding, and they want it. If you file in the worst light they get immediate claim to it without having to go through a long-drawn-out SFR process. If you don't file, they get claim after the long process. But they also must give you the chance to file in another (CtC) light.

You say the claim was paid and suggest that they are only asking for an amount less than the withholding they already have. I would doubt that; if you recheck, it's possible you may find you made an error and realize what they are actually asking for. It is uncharacteristic for them to ask for money they already have.

>> WHY do I have to acknowledge a presumed fact? If they have a proper claim, then why should I have to file their form? Shouldn't they be able to just do a substitute return and refund the difference? What are they waiting for?

Umm, you don't have to acknowledge the IRS's presumption: but, in fact, if it's wrong, you should rebut it under oath. If you DON'T rebut a false presumption, they proceed to the next and next horrid steps.

Umm, if they have a proper claim, pay it! If they have a proper claim and you've overpaid it, they have NO interest in refunding you while you don't file.

If they think you owe MORE than was withheld, many steps are required for them to perfect their claim. If you do nothing, they WILL perfect those steps and it will be much harder to contest their bill. From the info you posted, I suspect this is the true state of affairs.

If they think you owe LESS than was withheld, they have NO interest in filing an SFR (substitute for return: NOT substitute return). Why would they, if it required them to refund you money which they can otherwise keep after the statute of limitations expires?!?

Is it possible you're actually waiting for the IRS to refund you money which you haven't claimed?!?!

If you haven't "got it" yet, please keep asking. But please also answer: why would you NOT file an accurate return? If the only reason is your fear that they will unlawfully reject your accurate return and unlawfully add an unwarranted penalty, you are putting your trust in lawlessness rather than justice. You'll need to decide first whether doing what is right is more important than the risk of criminals or fools attacking you.


standinpeace


229 Posts
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 6:15:35 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The only reason anyone is required to file a return at all is because the private employer was given government forms to report your earnings. The W-2 form itself is a LIE because you are not a 3121 or 3401 employee. So there's no such thing as having an accurate amount in one box and an inaccurate amount in another box. If you don't earn wages at all, that form should not be issued to you.


scrubbs


171 Posts
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 12:31:46 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by richardf614

Why don't you just file according to your knowledge from CtC and end this game?

What are you waiting for? Why do you allow the IRS to act from an offensive stance and you from an defensive stance?

Get on with it! It is much easier to win, when you have all of your teeth, once you are knocked down and your teeth are laying on the ground, you are always playing catch up.

DO IT!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Why don't I just do it?
Because my brother you all know as Macwildstar, got me into this stuff a few years ago and we argue about it weeks on end.

I have been reading and doing research based on the Long V Rasmussen case, aka Chineese chamber of commerce case. That if there is no liablity, one cannot be a "taxpayer" as defined by law.

Mac and I have argued over the Social Security issue, making one a "taxpayer". However, I agree with him, that making you a "taxpayer" for purposes of chapter 21 does not necessarily make you a taxpayer for any other tax or chapter.

Further more I argued that most of us including myself applied for a SSN only becasue the corporations would not hire me without one. I know. I tried several different times to get hired without one before I finally applied at age 19 for one. I specificaly wrote on the SSA5 form that the purpose of applying for one, was so that I could get a job. To which I was sent a letter from some one at the SSA office telling hem that there is no law requiring me to have one to get a job.

Yet reality speaks different volumes. So I had to get one to get a job, other than picking apples or something of the like.

I sit here and watch various groups, and I see how the courts are refusing to up hold the law.

I see where cops violate law and peoples rights on a daily basis, as if it is normal operational procedures to do so.

So, I see where people use a 1040 form, where they claim the form is not a legitimate form, (does not mean the PRA requirements). And I have seen various conversations about if the IRS is required by some law or not to be subject to the PRA.

Ive seen discussions on the 668 notices of levy forms.
Ive seen reports about people getting levied without any previous notifications.

And I have seen people who have received notices, but did not know how to proceed.

Overall, the law is too complicated for me to comprehend it. Mac seems to know what hes doing, but I admit, I'm dumbfounded.

When I say the company is stealing 30 percent of my paycheck, I mean for a tax that I'm sure that I do not owe. Thats Federal, State, and City taxes.

Now I hear We The people's petition has been thrown out by the appeals court. Does that mean it goes to the US Supreme court?

I just don't know what to do. I guess we will just have to abandon the SSA number and all become pesants again, or we will have to pay this blackmail fee to the IRS.





Submarine Veteran


590 Posts
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 08:05:28 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the petition issue, We The People have petitioned the servant government for answers. This is the MASTER asking the SERVANT. The audacity of the servant to tell the master that they have no requirement to "answer"!

A "redress" is the receipt of satisfaction for injuries sustained.

For the court to state that our servant government is applying "sovereignty" says that they are "over" us and this is completely wrong.




juju


500 Posts
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 09:52:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by John J. Bulten

Scrubbs, if it's wrong, you should rebut it under oath. If you DON'T rebut a false presumption, they proceed to the next and next horrid steps.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Why not file an affidavit w/ the secreatary he was never in any Revenue District and as such no liability exists.

Further, prompt the Secretary and congress to investigate the company filing bogus 'reportable income' statements outside of Federal Territory?

Question that keeps getting sidetracked:

Does filing a 1040 make one a "taxpayer"?

[Disilloosianed]

(personal note to my brother) Hey mac, call mom. She said your phone is out of order, and shes been trying to get ahold of you.

Those two sentences right there say so much about the genetic component of insanity.

[webhick]

The Company I have worked for, has stolen 30 percent of my paycheck each week, for the last 4 years.

Wow, the labor market must be really hurting for a company to keep this guy for four years even though he's probably been yelling and screaming at them for at least that long about how they're stealing 30% of his paycheck.

[.]

why wages are being garnished

Actually, it sounds like this idiot is just whining about withholding. He'll get around to whining about being garnished later.

[Disilloosianed]

If you DON'T rebut a false presumption, they proceed to the next and next horrid steps.

...quietly readying the rack...

[webhick]

If you DON'T rebut a false presumption, they proceed to the next and next horrid steps.

...quietly readying the rack...

And the fondu. Man, we can't have a good racking without fondu.

[Nikki]

And of course, the expert chimes in

Scrubbs has been a participant on this forum for at least a year and knows what to do if he wants his money back. Obviously he prefers to complain than file a CtC return, because he knows the only answer he is going to get is to file a CtC return, so I'm confused as to why he complains.

John J. Bulten

and

Scrubbs, if it's wrong, you should rebut it under oath. If you DON'T rebut a false presumption, they proceed to the next and next horrid steps.

Is this something along the line of "misery loves company", is Bulten getting some kind of payoff for everyone he can drag farther into the scheme, or is John just a f**king moron?

[Quixote]

Now the IRS says I owe money. Their own documents show that the money is in a kind of holding pattern. They have the money. Yet they will not file a subsitute return.

If the IRS says he owes money, they have filed a substitute return. First comes the assessment, then the collection notice.

Shouldn't they be able to just do a subsitute return and refund the differance? What are they waiting for?

Now he's changed his story. If the IRS said he owes them money, there is no refund. If, in fact, his withholding exceeds his tax, IRS is waiting for the RSED (refund statute expiration date) to pass. That way, the government keeps all of his withheld tax, not just his tax liability.

[John J. Bulten]

Sometimes I think those Quatloosers exist just to give me and my wife a daily bellylaugh.

Nikki, the first paragraph you quoted was not from me but from standinpeace.

So, is there anyone here who disagrees with me that Scrubbs should file his returns, truthfully and accurately and lawfully and asap?

[Nikki]

Sometimes I think those Quatloosers exist just to give me and my wife a daily bellylaugh.

Nikki, the first paragraph you quoted was not from me but from standinpeace.

So, is there anyone here who disagrees with me that Scrubbs should file his returns, truthfully and accurately and lawfully and asap?

I'm sure your interpretation of the highlighted terms is vastly different from ours.

My apologizies for attributing something to you which was not your own work. The format of the post (BAD Joey ) was difficult to interpret.

However

Scrubbs, if it's wrong, you should rebut it under oath. If you DON'T rebut a false presumption, they proceed to the next and next horrid steps.

is yours, correct? Actually incorrect, because the entire concept of filing a rebuttal, outside a legal proceeding, is an exercise in futility.

But, I'm sure you'll learn that as your cases move into the Criminal Investigation phases.

[grixit]

Sometimes I think those Quatloosers exist just to give me and my wife a daily bellylaugh.

Yes, you quatlosers do.

[silversopp]

I just don't know what to do. I guess we will just have to abandon the SSA number and all become pesants again, or we will have to pay this blackmail fee to the IRS.

Actually I see some a glimmer of hope in this statement. The author recognized that he could continue down the TP road and live in poverty or in prison (David Van Pelt / Schiff), or he could just pay his taxes.

That's the choice that lies in front of all of us. Pay taxes or be poor/imprisoned. That is how a government has to function. If the government only could ask politely, it wouldn't be able to do much of anything (The Articles of Confederation mistake). The Constitution gave the government enough bite to back up its bark now.

I don't think anyone pays taxes for the joy of it, but rather to avoid the penelties that come with not paying taxes.

Welcome to the world.

[webhick]

Peasant:

1. A member of the class constituted by small farmers and tenants, sharecroppers, and laborers on the land where they form the main labor force in agriculture.
2. A country person; a rustic.
3. An uncouth, crude, or ill-bred person; a boor.

W'll gosh durn it! I gots to gets me dem taxes back so I can stop matin' wit Rita Mae and spend all day fightin' da IRS to get me dat money dey dem dere stole!

Edit: I should also point out that most of the farmers I know are generous to a fault and would give you the shirt off their own backs. They care more for the real wealth in this world - health, their family, a strong sense of community, and what they leave behind in their children when they're gone - than the monetary wealth. They take pride in their land, and they pay their taxes.

And you know what else? They don't spend all day screaming at people about how the IRS or their employer is stealing their money. They spend it earning a good living and they come home feeling fulfilled. And they don't regret it.

[John J. Bulten]

is yours, correct? Actually incorrect, because the entire concept of filing a rebuttal, outside a legal proceeding, is an exercise in futility.

Yes, it's mine.

Fascinating. So, Nikki, how does the IRS handle the following hypothetical? Someone sends me a form signed under jurat showing they paid me a certain amount in a certain taxable category, and we disagree that that was the amount paid in the taxable category, and the other party refuses to change the form. What should I do if not rebut the party's claim which I believe to be erroneous? Shouldn't I report my position at filing time? What are my due process options to have my disagreement heard and judged? Thanks!

[Joey Smith]

What are my due process options to have my disagreement heard and judged?

You can always go to court. You know, where the CtCers always lose.

[Quixote]

is yours, correct? Actually incorrect, because the entire concept of filing a rebuttal, outside a legal proceeding, is an exercise in futility.

Yes, it's mine.

Fascinating. So, Nikki, how does the IRS handle the following hypothetical? Someone sends me a form signed under jurat showing they paid me a certain amount in a certain taxable category, and we disagree that that was the amount paid in the taxable category, and the other party refuses to change the form. What should I do if not rebut the party's claim which I believe to be erroneous? Shouldn't I report my position at filing time? What are my due process options to have my disagreement heard and judged? Thanks!

Why would you have to rebut a claim that the party made only to you? It would be different if he made the claim on an official document filed with a tax agency. Did you intend to include that in your hypothetical? Why don't you stick with actual fact situations? That way, we can fill in the gaps with our knowledge of the real world, instead of your fantasy world in which W-2-like documents contain jurats.

[John J. Bulten]

I accept the friendly amendment.

So, Nikki, how does the IRS handle the following hypothetical? Someone sends me a form that was also transmitted in duplicate to the IRS under jurat showing they paid me a certain amount in a certain taxable category, and we disagree that that was the amount paid in the taxable category, and the other party refuses to change the form. What should I do if not rebut the party's claim which I believe to be erroneous? Shouldn't I report my position at filing time? What are my due process options to have my disagreement heard and judged? Thanks!

Any other amendments, or does someone actually want to answer the question and provide some real tax analysis for the folks who may encounter this situation (which is not unique to the tax honesty movement)?

[Nikki]

The form -- just for laughs, lets call it a W-2 or a 1099 -- makes absolutely no mention of (as you put it) "a certain taxable category."

It merely states that a certain amount of money was paid to you.

If you fail to report this on your tax return, the IRS will raise a question concerning its omission.

Eventually, it will be up to you, either in District Court or Tax Court, to adequately rebut the Commissioner's presumption that the reported amounts were income to you.

However. I strongly suggest that you do NOT make that allegation at filing time, unless you wish to contribute $5,000 towards reducing the national debt.

It would be a much smarter (actually -- much less stupid but still not smart) move to pay the taxes according to the IRS' computation and then sue for refund in District Court.

[Quixote]

So, Nikki, how does the IRS handle the following hypothetical? Someone sends me a form that was also transmitted in duplicate to the IRS under jurat showing they paid me a certain amount in a certain taxable category, and we disagree that that was the amount paid in the taxable category, and the other party refuses to change the form. What should I do if not rebut the party's claim which I believe to be erroneous?

The use of too high a level of abstraction often leads to misunderstandings. Besides, one size seldom fits all. Let's make your hypothetical more concrete. You have received a Form 1099-DIV reporting as dividends money that was actually interest. The simplest solution is to just go with the flow and report the interest as dividends. (I'm assuming that the interest was not of a sort excluded from gross income, because if that were the case, the error was not just a mischaracterization of the type of income received, as in your hypothetical, but rather an error in the amount of income received.) No harm is done and you won't confuse the IRS computer when it tries to match your income by types.

[Quixote]

It would be a much smarter (actually -- much less stupid but still not smart) move to pay the taxes according to the IRS' computation and then sue for refund in District Court.

He would first have to file an administrative claim for refund and have it disallowed or ignored for 6 months. The district court would otherwise lack jurisdiction over the refund suit.