Owning an IRS attorney

[midnight rambler]

Marc Stevens is pretty sharp.

Scroll down to the 2nd item.

http://marcstevens.net/

[woodman]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

[7th trump]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Well I'll tell you my experience with taxation and its laws and dealing with the IRS.
Income is quite easy to define as far as its roll in taxation.
Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........
The tax laws are not hard to follow, but every Tom, Dick and Harry beleives and writes books that they can tell the IRS to go suck ice sickles and keep their social security because they put so much into SS over the years. Thats why they are all in jail! You just dont get anything or everything for nothing from the government.
The 16th amendment didnt give the government any new taxing powers. Infact, it doesnt say what or who is or is not taxable. And the courts are absolutely correct!

[woodman]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

[7th trump]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

I did lay it down in laymans terms. Your problem is you are not listening or dont want to listen or take the time to research the laws yourself. I'm not here to hand feed you with a spoon.
Here it is again.

What money and occupations that are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.

My advice to you is to stop buying all the snake skin oil Tom, Dick and Harry's taxation theories out there and read the law unadulterated for what it says.

[midnight rambler]

The members of the BAR intentionally obfuscate the laws as much as possible when they write them so that it's extremely difficult to grasp what's been said and as a result there can be different interpretations - it's called job security for shysters.

[BrewTech]

The members of the BAR intentionally obfuscate the laws as much as possible when they write them so that it's extremely difficult to grasp what's been said and as a result there can be different interpretations - it's called job security for shysters.


This fact is quite clear if one goes to court to defend themselves. The judge will tell the defendant that if he wants to act as his own attorney, that's fine, but (and I mean this literally) he must use all the right terminology (i.e. speak legalese - gibberish to those not in the club) or his defense will be considered invalid.

I heard it with my own ears. Total corrupt BS.

[Glass]

Title 26 Chapt 24 S3401


(c) Employee

For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.


Link (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_3401)

[7th trump]

Title 26 Chapt 24 S3401


(c) Employee

For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.


Link (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_3401)

What is your point glass?

[7th trump]

The members of the BAR intentionally obfuscate the laws as much as possible when they write them so that it's extremely difficult to grasp what's been said and as a result there can be different interpretations - it's called job security for shysters.


This fact is quite clear if one goes to court to defend themselves. The judge will tell the defendant that if he wants to act as his own attorney, that's fine, but (and I mean this literally) he must use all the right terminology (i.e. speak legalese - gibberish to those not in the club) or his defense will be considered invalid.

I heard it with my own ears. Total corrupt BS.
You obvious dont understand the second layer of what the SS5 form does to ones political status?
In laymans terms: you have no idea there a legal difference between being a "US citizen" (you volunteer this) and The People of the United States of America.
Nothing is corrupt when you volunteer. Theres nothing unconstitutional about Social Security. The US Constitution doesnt say you cannot be a slave if you volunteer being one.
What upsets you is you were stupid enough to sign your damn signiture on a government form to accept government handouts. Problem is you didnt look at the core issue all the while you were out about making merry with the world.

[Glass]

Title 26 Chapt 24 S3401


(c) Employee

For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.


Link (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_3401)

What is your point glass?


My point is that "includes" is inclusive when used at law AFAIK. Things not listed are "not included". So to be an employee you must be one of the included things. There are two not so obvious things included in that list which could (IMO) result in someone being liable for income tax: any political subdivision thereof or officer of a corporation.

Would a 14th amendment citizen or an officer of a corporation - sole trader, legal fiction person (also a corporation) be examples that would fit?

[iOWNme]

WOW.

I have only listened to the first 5 min. If you didnt tell me this lady was an IRS attorney, i would have guessed she was a reality TV show star. DUMB AS A BRICK.

I heard an uneducated, barely understandable, high school cheerleader. Seriously, that was ridiculous....

[7th trump]

Title 26 Chapt 24 S3401


(c) Employee

For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.


Link (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_3401)

What is your point glass?


My point is that "includes" is inclusive when used at law AFAIK. Things not listed are "not included". So to be an employee you must be one of the included things. There are two not so obvious things included in that list which could (IMO) result in someone being liable for income tax: any political subdivision thereof or officer of a corporation.

Would a 14th amendment citizen or an officer of a corporation - sole trader, legal fiction person (also a corporation) be examples that would fit?

Glass, you are simply over looking what 3401(a) "wages" consists of to fully understand what encompasses a 3401(c) "employee". Basically a 3401(c) , by law, only earns 3401(a) "wages". To fully understand and appreciate the courts and the law they enforce study what 3401(a) wages" consists of and you'll fully appreciate 3401(c). You see the Tom, Dick and Harry tax guru's who find themselves in prison beleive that only federal and state employees are liable, but if you seriously look into the law for what it says you'll quickly notice that 3401(a) "wages" also includes everything that Social Security deems as 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" except what is legally excluded from those two SS terms. This is why I say you will find the exact same exclusions to the SS rule as exclusion to the 3401(a) "wage" rule. What is not considered (3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" is not reported and taxed.
The courts have been saying time and time again that "includes" is expansive to include the private sector. They are correct and heres why!

The employee term use to say "means" but now uses "includes" because since 1935 those in the private sector, who have volunteered into the Social Security program, now earn 3401(a) "wages" as well as federal and or state employees do. This doesnt mean the private sector is a federal or state employee by any means at all. It just means in order for you to earn Social Security credits your pay is going to be classified through and by Social Security.
Take any revenue act before the 1939 code and you wont see chapter 21 in any of them. Chapter 21 wasn't introduced into Title 26, subtitle C-Employment Taxes until the 1939 revenue act after the enactment of Social Security in 1935.
The 16th amendment didnt give any new taxing power. All the 16th did was give the feds a way around the apportioning clause to tax its subjects. (nothing apportionate wise seperated the 14th amendment "US citizen" from citizens of the several states. Prior the 16th the 14th amendment US citizen was still protected by the apportioning clause.)
The feds started taxing non government subjects who were not recognized as state citizens in 1913 via the passing of the 16th.
It wasnt until 1935 via the Social Security Act that Americans (state citizens not 14th amendment citizens) that the feds had a way to tax them by classifying the volunteering applicate by penalty of perjury as a "US citizen". See SS5 form.
(aka 14th amendment citizen). See 26 CFR 1.1-1(C)

[woodman]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

I did lay it down in laymans terms. Your problem is you are not listening or dont want to listen or take the time to research the laws yourself. I'm not here to hand feed you with a spoon.
Here it is again.

What money and occupations that are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.

My advice to you is to stop buying all the snake skin oil Tom, Dick and Harry's taxation theories out there and read the law unadulterated for what it says.


The problem here is that you are unable to articulate just what constitutes taxable income. Therefore you refer to meaningless numbers, sections of the tax code I reckon. If it is so complex a question that you must refer to multiple sections of the tax code, then I submit to you that you are unable to give anyone here a succint explanation as to the question answered and by your inability you have reinforced my position, i.e. that the law is so vague and convoluted (puposefully so) as to constitute nullity (legal invalidity). So we come to my second assertion, the courts are completely corrupt or they would routinely strike down this monstrosity of a code.

As for the statement by glass: Glass hit it on the head. It is well understood that the term employee has originally been meant to cover only priveledged positions with the federal government or those workers employed in US domain, not the several states.

[7th trump]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

The problem here is that you are unable to articulate just what constitutes taxable income. Therefore you refer to meaningless numbers, sections of the tax code I reckon. If it is so complex a question that you must refer to multiple sections of the tax code, then I submit to you that you are unable to give anyone here a succint explanation as to the question answered and by your inability you have reinforced my position, i.e. that the law is so vague and convoluted (puposefully so) as to constitute nullity (legal invalidity). So we come to my second assertion, the courts are completely corrupt or they would routinely strike down this monstrosity of a code.

As for the statement by glass: Glass hit it on the head. It is well understood that the term employee has originally been meant to cover only priveledged positions with the federal government or those workers employed in US domain, not the several states.
Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

I did lay it down in laymans terms. Your problem is you are not listening or dont want to listen or take the time to research the laws yourself. I'm not here to hand feed you with a spoon.
Here it is again.

What money and occupations that are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.

My advice to you is to stop buying all the snake skin oil Tom, Dick and Harry's taxation theories out there and read the law unadulterated for what it says.


You are simply to lazy to look up the terms yourself and would rather take the OPINION of con men who are now incarcerated.
If you dont know what 3121(a), 3121(b), 3401(c) and 3401(a) are or consists of you have no business even posting in this thread bitching about how the law is convoluted and vague.
The law is not convoluted nor vague.................its you that is infected by being convoluted, vague and simply........................lazy to think your simple minded ass is above the law!

As far as privileged goes.......................were the early settlers of this nation "privileged" with volunteering themselves into Social Security to get federal government benefits?
You see, unless you have ssn you are not "privileged" to access a credit card to buy things you need that otherwise requires cash in hand to purchase.

You have no idea how much Pete Hendrickson has you infected with his hillbilly train of thought.......................and thats why hes now enjoying his greybar hotel.

[po boy]

The members of the BAR intentionally obfuscate the laws as much as possible when they write them so that it's extremely difficult to grasp what's been said and as a result there can be different interpretations - it's called job security for shysters.


This fact is quite clear if one goes to court to defend themselves. The judge will tell the defendant that if he wants to act as his own attorney, that's fine, but (and I mean this literally) he must use all the right terminology (i.e. speak legalese - gibberish to those not in the club) or his defense will be considered invalid.

I heard it with my own ears. Total corrupt BS.
You obvious dont understand the second layer of what the SS5 form does to ones political status?

So know could one opt out of Social Security and restore their rights.


In laymans terms: you have no idea there a legal difference between being a "US citizen" (you volunteer this) and The People of the United States of America.
Nothing is corrupt when you volunteer. Theres nothing unconstitutional about Social Security. The US Constitution doesnt say you cannot be a slave if you volunteer being one.
What upsets you is you were stupid enough to sign your damn signiture on a government form to accept government handouts. Problem is you didnt look at the core issue all the while you were out about making merry with the world.

[palani]

It is well understood that the term employee has originally been meant to cover only priveledged positions with the federal government or those workers employed in US domain, not the several states.
Does use of a zip code place one in the US domain .... federal territory?

[sirgonzo420]

Here's 3121(a):


(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration for employment, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include—
(1) in the case of the taxes imposed by sections 3101 (a) and 3111 (a) that part of the remuneration which, after remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) equal to the contribution and benefit base (as determined under section 230 of the Social Security Act) with respect to employment has been paid to an individual by an employer during the calendar year with respect to which such contribution and benefit base is effective, is paid to such individual by such employer during such calendar year. If an employer (hereinafter referred to as successor employer) during any calendar year acquires substantially all the property used in a trade or business of another employer (hereinafter referred to as a predecessor), or used in a separate unit of a trade or business of a predecessor, and immediately after the acquisition employs in his trade or business an individual who immediately prior to the acquisition was employed in the trade or business of such predecessor, then, for the purpose of determining whether the successor employer has paid remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) with respect to employment equal to the contribution and benefit base (as determined under section 230 of the Social Security Act) to such individual during such calendar year, any remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) with respect to employment paid (or considered under this paragraph as having been paid) to such individual by such predecessor during such calendar year and prior to such acquisition shall be considered as having been paid by such successor employer;
(2) the amount of any payment (including any amount paid by an employer for insurance or annuities, or into a fund, to provide for any such payment) made to, or on behalf of, an employee or any of his dependents under a plan or system established by an employer which makes provision for his employees generally (or for his employees generally and their dependents) or for a class or classes of his employees (or for a class or classes of his employees and their dependents), on account of—
(A) sickness or accident disability (but, in the case of payments made to an employee or any of his dependents, this subparagraph shall exclude from the term “wages” only payments which are received under a workman’s compensation law), or
(B) medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability, or
(C) death, except that this paragraph does not apply to a payment for group-term life insurance to the extent that such payment is includible in the gross income of the employee;
[(3) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–21, title III, § 324(a)(3)(B), Apr. 20, 1983, 97 Stat. 123]
(4) any payment on account of sickness or accident disability, or medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability, made by an employer to, or on behalf of, an employee after the expiration of 6 calendar months following the last calendar month in which the employee worked for such employer;
(5) any payment made to, or on behalf of, an employee or his beneficiary—
(A) from or to a trust described in section 401 (a) which is exempt from tax under section 501 (a) at the time of such payment unless such payment is made to an employee of the trust as remuneration for services rendered as such employee and not as a beneficiary of the trust,
(B) under or to an annuity plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 403 (a),
(C) under a simplified employee pension (as defined in section 408 (k)(1)), other than any contributions described in section 408 (k)(6),
(D) under or to an annuity contract described in section 403 (b), other than a payment for the purchase of such contract which is made by reason of a salary reduction agreement (whether evidenced by a written instrument or otherwise),
(E) under or to an exempt governmental deferred compensation plan (as defined in subsection (v)(3)),
(F) to supplement pension benefits under a plan or trust described in any of the foregoing provisions of this paragraph to take into account some portion or all of the increase in the cost of living (as determined by the Secretary of Labor) since retirement but only if such supplemental payments are under a plan which is treated as a welfare plan under section 3(2)(B)(ii) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,
(G) under a cafeteria plan (within the meaning of section 125) if such payment would not be treated as wages without regard to such plan and it is reasonable to believe that (if section 125 applied for purposes of this section) section 125 would not treat any wages as constructively received,
(H) under an arrangement to which section 408 (p) applies, other than any elective contributions under paragraph (2)(A)(i) thereof, or
(I) under a plan described in section 457 (e)(11)(A)(ii) and maintained by an eligible employer (as defined in section 457 (e)(1));
(6) the payment by an employer (without deduction from the remuneration of the employee)—
(A) of the tax imposed upon an employee under section 3101, or
(B) of any payment required from an employee under a State unemployment compensation law,
with respect to remuneration paid to an employee for domestic service in a private home of the employer or for agricultural labor;
(7)
(A) remuneration paid in any medium other than cash to an employee for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business or for domestic service in a private home of the employer;
(B) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for domestic service in a private home of the employer (including domestic service on a farm operated for profit), if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than the applicable dollar threshold (as defined in subsection (x)) for such year;
(C) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than $100. As used in this subparagraph, the term “service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business” does not include domestic service in a private home of the employer and does not include service described in subsection (g)(5);
(8)
(A) remuneration paid in any medium other than cash for agricultural labor;
(B) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for agricultural labor unless—
(i) the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such labor is $150 or more, or
(ii) the employer’s expenditures for agricultural labor in such year equal or exceed $2,500,
except that clause (ii) shall not apply in determining whether remuneration paid to an employee constitutes “wages” under this section if such employee (I) is employed as a hand harvest laborer and is paid on a piece rate basis in an operation which has been, and is customarily and generally recognized as having been, paid on a piece rate basis in the region of employment, (II) commutes daily from his permanent residence to the farm on which he is so employed, and (III) has been employed in agriculture less than 13 weeks during the preceding calendar year;
[(9) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–21, title III, § 324(a)(3)(B), Apr. 20, 1983, 97 Stat. 123]
(10) remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for service described in subsection (d)(3)(C) (relating to home workers), if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than $100;
(11) remuneration paid to or on behalf of an employee if (and to the extent that) at the time of the payment of such remuneration it is reasonable to believe that a corresponding deduction is allowable under section 217 (determined without regard to section 274 (n));
(12)
(A) tips paid in any medium other than cash;
(B) cash tips received by an employee in any calendar month in the course of his employment by an employer unless the amount of such cash tips is $20 or more;
(13) any payment or series of payments by an employer to an employee or any of his dependents which is paid—
(A) upon or after the termination of an employee’s employment relationship because of
(i) death, or
(ii) retirement for disability, and
(B) under a plan established by the employer which makes provision for his employees generally or a class or classes of his employees (or for such employees or class or classes of employees and their dependents),
other than any such payment or series of payments which would have been paid if the employee’s employment relationship had not been so terminated;
(14) any payment made by an employer to a survivor or the estate of a former employee after the calendar year in which such employee died;
(15) any payment made by an employer to an employee, if at the time such payment is made such employee is entitled to disability insurance benefits under section 223(a) of the Social Security Act and such entitlement commenced prior to the calendar year in which such payment is made, and if such employee did not perform any services for such employer during the period for which such payment is made;
(16) remuneration paid by an organization exempt from income tax under section 501 (a) (other than an organization described in section 401 (a)) or under section 521 in any calendar year to an employee for service rendered in the employ of such organization, if the remuneration paid in such year by the organization to the employee for such service is less than $100;
(17) any contribution, payment, or service provided by an employer which may be excluded from the gross income of an employee, his spouse, or his dependents, under the provisions of section 120 (relating to amounts received under qualified group legal services plans);
(18) any payment made, or benefit furnished, to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment or such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment or benefit from income under section 127, 129, 134 (b)(4), or 134 (b)(5);
(19) the value of any meals or lodging furnished by or on behalf of the employer if at the time of such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such items from income under section 119;
(20) any benefit provided to or on behalf of an employee if at the time such benefit is provided it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such benefit from income under section 74 (c), 108 (f)(4), 117, or 132;
(21) in the case of a member of an Indian tribe, any remuneration on which no tax is imposed by this chapter by reason of section 7873 (relating to income derived by Indians from exercise of fishing rights);
(22) remuneration on account of—
(A) a transfer of a share of stock to any individual pursuant to an exercise of an incentive stock option (as defined in section 422 (b)) or under an employee stock purchase plan (as defined in section 423 (b)), or
(B) any disposition by the individual of such stock; or
(23) any benefit or payment which is excludable from the gross income of the employee under section 139B (b).
Nothing in the regulations prescribed for purposes of chapter 24 (relating to income tax withholding) which provides an exclusion from “wages” as used in such chapter shall be construed to require a similar exclusion from “wages” in the regulations prescribed for purposes of this chapter. Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any third party which makes a payment included in wages solely by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) shall be treated for purposes of this chapter and chapter 22 as the employer with respect to such wages.

[7th trump]

The members of the BAR intentionally obfuscate the laws as much as possible when they write them so that it's extremely difficult to grasp what's been said and as a result there can be different interpretations - it's called job security for shysters.


This fact is quite clear if one goes to court to defend themselves. The judge will tell the defendant that if he wants to act as his own attorney, that's fine, but (and I mean this literally) he must use all the right terminology (i.e. speak legalese - gibberish to those not in the club) or his defense will be considered invalid.

I heard it with my own ears. Total corrupt BS.
You obvious dont understand the second layer of what the SS5 form does to ones political status?

So know could one opt out of Social Security and restore their rights.


In laymans terms: you have no idea there a legal difference between being a "US citizen" (you volunteer this) and The People of the United States of America.
Nothing is corrupt when you volunteer. Theres nothing unconstitutional about Social Security. The US Constitution doesnt say you cannot be a slave if you volunteer being one.
What upsets you is you were stupid enough to sign your damn signiture on a government form to accept government handouts. Problem is you didnt look at the core issue all the while you were out about making merry with the world.


See Po boy you can opt out and restore your rights.
Theres no legal way the federal government can pass any Act and make such act mandatory that strips you of your constitutional Rights.
This is why there is no mandatory clause in the Social Security Act itself nor on any law books.
Adminstrative regulation 301.6109-1(d) says a person who doesnt wish to participate doesnt have to get a ssn. Its purely voluntary to participate in social security because of what you just said about Rights.

[sirgonzo420]

Here's 3121(b):


(b) Employment
For purposes of this chapter, the term “employment” means any service, of whatever nature, performed
(A) by an employee for the person employing him, irrespective of the citizenship or residence of either,
(i) within the United States, or
(ii) on or in connection with an American vessel or American aircraft under a contract of service which is entered into within the United States or during the performance of which and while the employee is employed on the vessel or aircraft it touches at a port in the United States, if the employee is employed on and in connection with such vessel or aircraft when outside the United States, or
(B) outside the United States by a citizen or resident of the United States as an employee for an American employer (as defined in subsection (h)), or (C) if it is service, regardless of where or by whom performed, which is designated as employment or recognized as equivalent to employment under an agreement entered into under section 233 of the Social Security Act; except that such term shall not include—
(1) service performed by foreign agricultural workers lawfully admitted to the United States from the Bahamas, Jamaica, and the other British West Indies, or from any other foreign country or possession thereof, on a temporary basis to perform agricultural labor;
(2) domestic service performed in a local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority, by a student who is enrolled and is regularly attending classes at a school, college, or university;
(3)
(A) service performed by a child under the age of 18 in the employ of his father or mother;
(B) service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, or domestic service in a private home of the employer, performed by an individual under the age of 21 in the employ of his father or mother, or performed by an individual in the employ of his spouse or son or daughter; except that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to such domestic service performed by an individual in the employ of his son or daughter if—
(i) the employer is a surviving spouse or a divorced individual and has not remarried, or has a spouse living in the home who has a mental or physical condition which results in such spouse’s being incapable of caring for a son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter (referred to in clause (ii)) for at least 4 continuous weeks in the calendar quarter in which the service is rendered, and
(ii) a son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter of such employer is living in the home, and
(iii) the son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter (referred to in clause (ii)) has not attained age 18 or has a mental or physical condition which requires the personal care and supervision of an adult for at least 4 continuous weeks in the calendar quarter in which the service is rendered;
(4) service performed by an individual on or in connection with a vessel not an American vessel, or on or in connection with an aircraft not an American aircraft, if
(A) the individual is employed on and in connection with such vessel or aircraft, when outside the United States and
(B)
(i) such individual is not a citizen of the United States or
(ii) the employer is not an American employer;
(5) service performed in the employ of the United States or any instrumentality of the United States, if such service—
(A) would be excluded from the term “employment” for purposes of this title if the provisions of paragraphs (5) and (6) of this subsection as in effect in January 1983 had remained in effect, and
(B) is performed by an individual who—
(i) has been continuously performing service described in subparagraph (A) since December 31, 1983, and for purposes of this clause—
(I) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after being separated therefrom for a period of less than 366 consecutive days, regardless of whether the period began before, on, or after December 31, 1983, then such service shall be considered continuous,
(II) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after being detailed or transferred to an international organization as described under section 3343 of subchapter III of chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, or under section 3581 of chapter 35 of such title, then the service performed for that organization shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A),
(III) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) is reemployed or reinstated after being separated from such service for the purpose of accepting employment with the American Institute in Taiwan as provided under section 3310 of chapter 48 of title 22, United States Code, then the service performed for that Institute shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A),
(IV) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after performing service as a member of a uniformed service (including, for purposes of this clause, service in the National Guard and temporary service in the Coast Guard Reserve) and after exercising restoration or reemployment rights as provided under chapter 43 of title 38, United States Code, then the service so performed as a member of a uniformed service shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A), and
(V) if an individual performing service described in subparagraph (A) returns to the performance of such service after employment (by a tribal organization) to which section 105(e)(2) [1] of the Indian Self-Determination Act applies, then the service performed for that tribal organization shall be considered service described in subparagraph (A); or
(ii) is receiving an annuity from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, or benefits (for service as an employee) under another retirement system established by a law of the United States for employees of the Federal Government (other than for members of the uniformed service);
except that this paragraph shall not apply with respect to any such service performed on or after any date on which such individual performs—
(C) service performed as the President or Vice President of the United States,
(D) service performed—
(i) in a position placed in the Executive Schedule under sections 5312 through 5317 of title 5, United States Code,
(ii) as a noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive Service or a noncareer member of the Senior Foreign Service, or
(iii) in a position to which the individual is appointed by the President (or his designee) or the Vice President under section 105 (a)(1), 106 (a)(1), or 107 (a)(1) or (b)(1) of title 3, United States Code, if the maximum rate of basic pay for such position is at or above the rate for level V of the Executive Schedule,
(E) service performed as the Chief Justice of the United States, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, a judge of a United States court of appeals, a judge of a United States district court (including the district court of a territory), a judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims, a judge of the United States Court of International Trade, a judge of the United States Tax Court, a United States magistrate judge, or a referee in bankruptcy or United States bankruptcy judge,
(F) service performed as a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner of or to the Congress,
(G) any other service in the legislative branch of the Federal Government if such service—
(i) is performed by an individual who was not subject to subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, or to another retirement system established by a law of the United States for employees of the Federal Government (other than for members of the uniformed services), on December 31, 1983, or
(ii) is performed by an individual who has, at any time after December 31, 1983, received a lump-sum payment under section 8342 (a) of title 5, United States Code, or under the corresponding provision of the law establishing the other retirement system described in clause (i), or
(iii) is performed by an individual after such individual has otherwise ceased to be subject to subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code (without having an application pending for coverage under such subchapter), while performing service in the legislative branch (determined without regard to the provisions of subparagraph (B) relating to continuity of employment), for any period of time after December 31, 1983,
and for purposes of this subparagraph (G) an individual is subject to such subchapter III or to any such other retirement system at any time only if
(a) such individual’s pay is subject to deductions, contributions, or similar payments (concurrent with the service being performed at that time) under section 8334(a) of such title 5 or the corresponding provision of the law establishing such other system, or (in a case to which section 8332(k)(1) of such title applies) such individual is making payments of amounts equivalent to such deductions, contributions, or similar payments while on leave without pay, or
(b) such individual is receiving an annuity from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, or is receiving benefits (for service as an employee) under another retirement system established by a law of the United States for employees of the Federal Government (other than for members of the uniformed services), or
(H) service performed by an individual—

[sirgonzo420]

continued:


(i) on or after the effective date of an election by such individual, under section 301 of the Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act of 1986, section 307 of the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Act (50 U.S.C. 2157), or the Federal Employees’ Retirement System Open Enrollment Act of 1997 [2] to become subject to the Federal Employees’ Retirement System provided in chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code, or
(ii) on or after the effective date of an election by such individual, under regulations issued under section 860 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, to become subject to the Foreign Service Pension System provided in subchapter II of chapter 8 of title I of such Act;
(6) service performed in the employ of the United States or any instrumentality of the United States if such service is performed—
(A) in a penal institution of the United States by an inmate thereof;
(B) by any individual as an employee included under section 5351 (2) of title 5, United States Code (relating to certain interns, student nurses, and other student employees of hospitals of the Federal Government), other than as a medical or dental intern or a medical or dental resident in training; or
(C) by any individual as an employee serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, earthquake, flood, or other similar emergency;
(7) service performed in the employ of a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or any instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, except that this paragraph shall not apply in the case of—
(A) service which, under subsection (j), constitutes covered transportation service,
(B) service in the employ of the Government of Guam or the Government of American Samoa or any political subdivision thereof, or of any instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, performed by an officer or employee thereof (including a member of the legislature of any such Government or political subdivision), and, for purposes of this title with respect to the taxes imposed by this chapter—
(i) any person whose service as such an officer or employee is not covered by a retirement system established by a law of the United States shall not, with respect to such service, be regarded as an employee of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof, and
(ii) the remuneration for service described in clause (i) (including fees paid to a public official) shall be deemed to have been paid by the Government of Guam or the Government of American Samoa or by a political subdivision thereof or an instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, whichever is appropriate,
(C) service performed in the employ of the District of Columbia or any instrumentality which is wholly owned thereby, if such service is not covered by a retirement system established by a law of the United States (other than the Federal Employees Retirement System provided in chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code); except that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to service performed—
(i) in a hospital or penal institution by a patient or inmate thereof;
(ii) by any individual as an employee included under section 5351 (2) of title 5, United States Code (relating to certain interns, student nurses, and other student employees of hospitals of the District of Columbia Government), other than as a medical or dental intern or as a medical or dental resident in training;
(iii) by any individual as an employee serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, snow, earthquake, flood or other similar emergency; or
(iv) by a member of a board, committee, or council of the District of Columbia, paid on a per diem, meeting, or other fee basis,
(D) service performed in the employ of the Government of Guam (or any instrumentality which is wholly owned by such Government) by an employee properly classified as a temporary or intermittent employee, if such service is not covered by a retirement system established by a law of Guam; except that
(i) the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to services performed by an elected official or a member of the legislature or in a hospital or penal institution by a patient or inmate thereof, and
(ii) for purposes of this subparagraph, clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (B) shall apply,
(E) service included under an agreement entered into pursuant to section 218 of the Social Security Act, or
(F) service in the employ of a State (other than the District of Columbia, Guam, or American Samoa), of any political subdivision thereof, or of any instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which is wholly owned thereby, by an individual who is not a member of a retirement system of such State, political subdivision, or instrumentality, except that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not be applicable to service performed—
(i) by an individual who is employed to relieve such individual from unemployment;
(ii) in a hospital, home, or other institution by a patient or inmate thereof;
(iii) by any individual as an employee serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, snow, earthquake, flood, or other similar emergency;
(iv) by an election official or election worker if the remuneration paid in a calendar year for such service is less than $1,000 with respect to service performed during any calendar year commencing on or after January 1, 1995, ending on or before December 31, 1999, and the adjusted amount determined under section 218(c)(8)(B) of the Social Security Act for any calendar year commencing on or after January 1, 2000, with respect to service performed during such calendar year; or
(v) by an employee in a position compensated solely on a fee basis which is treated pursuant to section 1402 (c)(2)(E) as a trade or business for purposes of inclusion of such fees in net earnings from self-employment;
for purposes of this subparagraph, except as provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, the term “retirement system” has the meaning given such term by section 218(b)(4) of the Social Security Act;
(8)
(A) service performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order, except that this subparagraph shall not apply to service performed by a member of such an order in the exercise of such duties, if an election of coverage under subsection (r) is in effect with respect to such order, or with respect to the autonomous subdivision thereof to which such member belongs;
(B) service performed in the employ of a church or qualified church-controlled organization if such church or organization has in effect an election under subsection (w), other than service in an unrelated trade or business (within the meaning of section 513 (a));
(9) service performed by an individual as an employee or employee representative as defined in section 3231;
(10) service performed in the employ of—
(A) a school, college, or university, or
(B) an organization described in section 509 (a)(3) if the organization is organized, and at all times thereafter is operated, exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of a school, college, or university and is operated, supervised, or controlled by or in connection with such school, college, or university, unless it is a school, college, or university of a State or a political subdivision thereof and the services performed in its employ by a student referred to in section 218(c)(5) of the Social Security Act are covered under the agreement between the Commissioner of Social Security and such State entered into pursuant to section 218 of such Act;
if such service is performed by a student who is enrolled and regularly attending classes at such school, college, or university;
(11) service performed in the employ of a foreign government (including service as a consular or other officer or employee or a nondiplomatic representative);
(12) service performed in the employ of an instrumentality wholly owned by a foreign government—
(A) if the service is of a character similar to that performed in foreign countries by employees of the United States Government or of an instrumentality thereof; and
(B) if the Secretary of State shall certify to the Secretary of the Treasury that the foreign government, with respect to whose instrumentality and employees thereof exemption is claimed, grants an equivalent exemption with respect to similar service performed in the foreign country by employees of the United States Government and of instrumentalities thereof;
(13) service performed as a student nurse in the employ of a hospital or a nurses’ training school by an individual who is enrolled and is regularly attending classes in a nurses’ training school chartered or approved pursuant to State law;
(14)
(A) service performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution;
(B) service performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such service, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back;
(15) service performed in the employ of an international organization, except service which constitutes “employment” under subsection (y);
(16) service performed by an individual under an arrangement with the owner or tenant of land pursuant to which—
(A) such individual undertakes to produce agricultural or horticultural commodities (including livestock, bees, poultry, and fur-bearing animals and wildlife) on such land,
(B) the agricultural or horticultural commodities produced by such individual, or the proceeds therefrom, are to be divided between such individual and such owner or tenant, and
(C) the amount of such individual’s share depends on the amount of the agricultural or horticultural commodities produced;
(17) service in the employ of any organization which is performed
(A) in any year during any part of which such organization is registered, or there is in effect a final order of the Subversive Activities Control Board requiring such organization to register, under the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended, as a Communist-action organization, a Communist-front organization, or a Communist-infiltrated organization, and
(B) after June 30, 1956;
(18) service performed in Guam by a resident of the Republic of the Philippines while in Guam on a temporary basis as a nonimmigrant alien admitted to Guam pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(15)(H)(ii));
(19) Service which is performed by a nonresident alien individual for the period he is temporarily present in the United States as a nonimmigrant under subparagraph (F), (J), (M), or (Q) of section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and which is performed to carry out the purpose specified in subparagraph (F), (J), (M), or (Q), as the case may be;
(20) service (other than service described in paragraph (3)(A)) performed by an individual on a boat engaged in catching fish or other forms of aquatic animal life under an arrangement with the owner or operator of such boat pursuant to which—
(A) such individual does not receive any cash remuneration other than as provided in subparagraph (B) and other than cash remuneration—
(i) which does not exceed $100 per trip;
(ii) which is contingent on a minimum catch; and
(iii) which is paid solely for additional duties (such as mate, engineer, or cook) for which additional cash remuneration is traditional in the industry,
(B) such individual receives a share of the boat’s (or the boats’ in the case of a fishing operation involving more than one boat) catch of fish or other forms of aquatic animal life or a share of the proceeds from the sale of such catch, and
(C) the amount of such individual’s share depends on the amount of the boat’s (or the boats’ in the case of a fishing operation involving more than one boat) catch of fish or other forms of aquatic animal life,
but only if the operating crew of such boat (or each boat from which the individual receives a share in the case of a fishing operation involving more than one boat) is normally made up of fewer than 10 individuals; or
(21) domestic service in a private home of the employer which—
(A) is performed in any year by an individual under the age of 18 during any portion of such year; and
(B) is not the principal occupation of such employee.
For purposes of paragraph (20), the operating crew of a boat shall be treated as normally made up of fewer than 10 individuals if the average size of the operating crew on trips made during the preceding 4 calendar quarters consisted of fewer than 10 individuals.
(c) Included and excluded service
For purposes of this chapter, if the services performed during one-half or more of any pay period by an employee for the person employing him constitute employment, all the services of such employee for such period shall be deemed to be employment; but if the services performed during more than one-half of any such pay period by an employee for the person employing him do not constitute employment, then none of the services of such employee for such period shall be deemed to be employment. As used in this subsection, the term “pay period” means a period (of not more than 31 consecutive days) for which a payment of remuneration is ordinarily made to the employee by the person employing him. This subsection shall not be applicable with respect to services performed in a pay period by an employee for the person employing him, where any of such service is excepted by subsection (b)(9).

[sirgonzo420]

3401(a):


(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid—
(1) for active service performed in a month for which such employee is entitled to the benefits of section 112 (relating to certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces of the United States) to the extent remuneration for such service is excludable from gross income under such section; or
(2) for agricultural labor (as defined in section 3121 (g)) unless the remuneration paid for such labor is wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)); or
(3) for domestic service in a private home, local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority; or
(4) for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business performed in any calendar quarter by an employee, unless the cash remuneration paid for such service is $50 or more and such service is performed by an individual who is regularly employed by such employer to perform such service. For purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be deemed to be regularly employed by an employer during a calendar quarter only if—
(A) on each of some 24 days during such quarter such individual performs for such employer for some portion of the day service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business; or
(B) such individual was regularly employed (as determined under subparagraph (A)) by such employer in the performance of such service during the preceding calendar quarter; or
(5) for services by a citizen or resident of the United States for a foreign government or an international organization; or
(6) for such services, performed by a nonresident alien individual, as may be designated by regulations prescribed by the Secretary; or
[(7) Repealed. Pub. L. 89–809, title I, § 103(k), Nov. 13, 1966, 80 Stat. 1554]
(8)
(A) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof)—
(i) performed by a citizen of the United States if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income under section 911; or
(ii) performed in a foreign country or in a possession of the United States by such a citizen if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, the employer is required by the law of any foreign country or possession of the United States to withhold income tax upon such remuneration; or
(B) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States (other than Puerto Rico), if it is reasonable to believe that at least 80 percent of the remuneration to be paid to the employee by such employer during the calendar year will be for such services; or
(C) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within Puerto Rico, if it is reasonable to believe that during the entire calendar year the employee will be a bona fide resident of Puerto Rico; or
(D) for services for the United States (or any agency thereof) performed by a citizen of the United States within a possession of the United States to the extent the United States (or such agency) withholds taxes on such remuneration pursuant to an agreement with such possession; or
(9) for services performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order; or
(10)
(A) for services performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution; or
(B) for services performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such services, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back; or
(11) for services not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, to the extent paid in any medium other than cash; or
(12) to, or on behalf of, an employee or his beneficiary—
(A) from or to a trust described in section 401 (a) which is exempt from tax under section 501 (a) at the time of such payment unless such payment is made to an employee of the trust as remuneration for services rendered as such employee and not as a beneficiary of the trust; or
(B) under or to an annuity plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 403 (a); or
(C) for a payment described in section 402 (h)(1) and (2) if, at the time of such payment, it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be entitled to an exclusion under such section for payment; or
(D) under an arrangement to which section 408 (p) applies; or
(E) under or to an eligible deferred compensation plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 457 (b) which is maintained by an eligible employer described in section 457 (e)(1)(A),[1] or
(13) pursuant to any provision of law other than section 5(c) or 6(1) of the Peace Corps Act, for service performed as a volunteer or volunteer leader within the meaning of such Act; or
(14) in the form of group-term life insurance on the life of an employee; or
(15) to or on behalf of an employee if (and to the extent that) at the time of the payment of such remuneration it is reasonable to believe that a corresponding deduction is allowable under section 217 (determined without regard to section 274 (n)); or
(16)
(A) as tips in any medium other than cash;
(B) as cash tips to an employee in any calendar month in the course of his employment by an employer unless the amount of such cash tips is $20 or more; [2]
(17) for service described in section 3121 (b)(20); [2]
(18) for any payment made, or benefit furnished, to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment or such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment or benefit from income under section 127, 129, 134 (b)(4), or 134 (b)(5); [2]
(19) for any benefit provided to or on behalf of an employee if at the time such benefit is provided it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such benefit from income under section 74 (c), 108 (f)(4), 117, or 132; [2]
(20) for any medical care reimbursement made to or for the benefit of an employee under a self-insured medical reimbursement plan (within the meaning of section 105 (h)(6)); [2]
(21) for any payment made to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment from income under section 106 (b); [2]
(22) any payment made to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment from income under section 106 (d); or
(23) for any benefit or payment which is excludable from the gross income of the employee under section 139B (b).
The term “wages” includes any amount includible in gross income of an employee under section 409A and payment of such amount shall be treated as having been made in the taxable year in which the amount is so includible.

[sirgonzo420]

3401(c):


(c) Employee
For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.


see?


clear as mud


:)

[palani]

clear as mud

Is an agent of the Federal Reserve an officer or employee of a corporation?


Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized.

[woodman]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

The problem here is that you are unable to articulate just what constitutes taxable income. Therefore you refer to meaningless numbers, sections of the tax code I reckon. If it is so complex a question that you must refer to multiple sections of the tax code, then I submit to you that you are unable to give anyone here a succint explanation as to the question answered and by your inability you have reinforced my position, i.e. that the law is so vague and convoluted (puposefully so) as to constitute nullity (legal invalidity). So we come to my second assertion, the courts are completely corrupt or they would routinely strike down this monstrosity of a code.

As for the statement by glass: Glass hit it on the head. It is well understood that the term employee has originally been meant to cover only priveledged positions with the federal government or those workers employed in US domain, not the several states.
Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

I did lay it down in laymans terms. Your problem is you are not listening or dont want to listen or take the time to research the laws yourself. I'm not here to hand feed you with a spoon.
Here it is again.

What money and occupations that are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.

My advice to you is to stop buying all the snake skin oil Tom, Dick and Harry's taxation theories out there and read the law unadulterated for what it says.


You are simply to lazy to look up the terms yourself and would rather take the OPINION of con men who are now incarcerated.
If you dont know what 3121(a), 3121(b), 3401(c) and 3401(a) are or consists of you have no business even posting in this thread bitching about how the law is convoluted and vague.
The law is not convoluted nor vague.................its you that is infected by being convoluted, vague and simply........................lazy to think your simple minded ass is above the law!

As far as privileged goes.......................were the early settlers of this nation "privileged" with volunteering themselves into Social Security to get federal government benefits?
You see, unless you have ssn you are not "privileged" to access a credit card to buy things you need that otherwise requires cash in hand to purchase.

You have no idea how much Pete Hendrickson has you infected with his hillbilly train of thought.......................and thats why hes now enjoying his greybar hotel.



You are not listening to me. I have listened to you and replied to your meanderings. I am not lazy. I will not spend precious time looking through a meaningless code for something that is not there. You are the one who claimed it was simplicity itself. You are wrong and merely bolstered my point by refusing to answer my question. I submit to you again that if it is such a simple and obvious answer, you would not have to refer to multiple sections of the thousands of pages long, tax code to simply explain what constitutes taxable income. I will tell you in a nutshell what it is. It is any 'income' 'derived' from any activity. Now you must get down to the nuts and bolts of the words income and derived. Income is referring only to that which comes in from investments, thus 'derived'. A derivative in this case is a return on an investment. The income tax was sold to the common man as a tax on the fat cats..nothing more, nothing less. The fat cats were laughing because they knew all along they would be able to morph it with complicity by their judges and criminal government cabal into the exact opposite of what was sold to the people.

[7th trump]

Here's 3121(a):


(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration for employment, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include—
(1) in the case of the taxes imposed by sections 3101 (a) and 3111 (a) that part of the remuneration which, after remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) equal to the contribution and benefit base (as determined under section 230 of the Social Security Act) with respect to employment has been paid to an individual by an employer during the calendar year with respect to which such contribution and benefit base is effective, is paid to such individual by such employer during such calendar year. If an employer (hereinafter referred to as successor employer) during any calendar year acquires substantially all the property used in a trade or business of another employer (hereinafter referred to as a predecessor), or used in a separate unit of a trade or business of a predecessor, and immediately after the acquisition employs in his trade or business an individual who immediately prior to the acquisition was employed in the trade or business of such predecessor, then, for the purpose of determining whether the successor employer has paid remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) with respect to employment equal to the contribution and benefit base (as determined under section 230 of the Social Security Act) to such individual during such calendar year, any remuneration (other than remuneration referred to in the succeeding paragraphs of this subsection) with respect to employment paid (or considered under this paragraph as having been paid) to such individual by such predecessor during such calendar year and prior to such acquisition shall be considered as having been paid by such successor employer;
(2) the amount of any payment (including any amount paid by an employer for insurance or annuities, or into a fund, to provide for any such payment) made to, or on behalf of, an employee or any of his dependents under a plan or system established by an employer which makes provision for his employees generally (or for his employees generally and their dependents) or for a class or classes of his employees (or for a class or classes of his employees and their dependents), on account of—
(A) sickness or accident disability (but, in the case of payments made to an employee or any of his dependents, this subparagraph shall exclude from the term “wages” only payments which are received under a workman’s compensation law), or
(B) medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability, or
(C) death, except that this paragraph does not apply to a payment for group-term life insurance to the extent that such payment is includible in the gross income of the employee;
[(3) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–21, title III, § 324(a)(3)(B), Apr. 20, 1983, 97 Stat. 123]
(4) any payment on account of sickness or accident disability, or medical or hospitalization expenses in connection with sickness or accident disability, made by an employer to, or on behalf of, an employee after the expiration of 6 calendar months following the last calendar month in which the employee worked for such employer;
(5) any payment made to, or on behalf of, an employee or his beneficiary—
(A) from or to a trust described in section 401 (a) which is exempt from tax under section 501 (a) at the time of such payment unless such payment is made to an employee of the trust as remuneration for services rendered as such employee and not as a beneficiary of the trust,
(B) under or to an annuity plan which, at the time of such payment, is a plan described in section 403 (a),
(C) under a simplified employee pension (as defined in section 408 (k)(1)), other than any contributions described in section 408 (k)(6),
(D) under or to an annuity contract described in section 403 (b), other than a payment for the purchase of such contract which is made by reason of a salary reduction agreement (whether evidenced by a written instrument or otherwise),
(E) under or to an exempt governmental deferred compensation plan (as defined in subsection (v)(3)),
(F) to supplement pension benefits under a plan or trust described in any of the foregoing provisions of this paragraph to take into account some portion or all of the increase in the cost of living (as determined by the Secretary of Labor) since retirement but only if such supplemental payments are under a plan which is treated as a welfare plan under section 3(2)(B)(ii) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,
(G) under a cafeteria plan (within the meaning of section 125) if such payment would not be treated as wages without regard to such plan and it is reasonable to believe that (if section 125 applied for purposes of this section) section 125 would not treat any wages as constructively received,
(H) under an arrangement to which section 408 (p) applies, other than any elective contributions under paragraph (2)(A)(i) thereof, or
(I) under a plan described in section 457 (e)(11)(A)(ii) and maintained by an eligible employer (as defined in section 457 (e)(1));
(6) the payment by an employer (without deduction from the remuneration of the employee)—
(A) of the tax imposed upon an employee under section 3101, or
(B) of any payment required from an employee under a State unemployment compensation law,
with respect to remuneration paid to an employee for domestic service in a private home of the employer or for agricultural labor;
(7)
(A) remuneration paid in any medium other than cash to an employee for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business or for domestic service in a private home of the employer;
(B) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for domestic service in a private home of the employer (including domestic service on a farm operated for profit), if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than the applicable dollar threshold (as defined in subsection (x)) for such year;
(C) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business, if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than $100. As used in this subparagraph, the term “service not in the course of the employer’s trade or business” does not include domestic service in a private home of the employer and does not include service described in subsection (g)(5);
(8)
(A) remuneration paid in any medium other than cash for agricultural labor;
(B) cash remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for agricultural labor unless—
(i) the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such labor is $150 or more, or
(ii) the employer’s expenditures for agricultural labor in such year equal or exceed $2,500,
except that clause (ii) shall not apply in determining whether remuneration paid to an employee constitutes “wages” under this section if such employee (I) is employed as a hand harvest laborer and is paid on a piece rate basis in an operation which has been, and is customarily and generally recognized as having been, paid on a piece rate basis in the region of employment, (II) commutes daily from his permanent residence to the farm on which he is so employed, and (III) has been employed in agriculture less than 13 weeks during the preceding calendar year;
[(9) Repealed. Pub. L. 98–21, title III, § 324(a)(3)(B), Apr. 20, 1983, 97 Stat. 123]
(10) remuneration paid by an employer in any calendar year to an employee for service described in subsection (d)(3)(C) (relating to home workers), if the cash remuneration paid in such year by the employer to the employee for such service is less than $100;
(11) remuneration paid to or on behalf of an employee if (and to the extent that) at the time of the payment of such remuneration it is reasonable to believe that a corresponding deduction is allowable under section 217 (determined without regard to section 274 (n));
(12)
(A) tips paid in any medium other than cash;
(B) cash tips received by an employee in any calendar month in the course of his employment by an employer unless the amount of such cash tips is $20 or more;
(13) any payment or series of payments by an employer to an employee or any of his dependents which is paid—
(A) upon or after the termination of an employee’s employment relationship because of
(i) death, or
(ii) retirement for disability, and
(B) under a plan established by the employer which makes provision for his employees generally or a class or classes of his employees (or for such employees or class or classes of employees and their dependents),
other than any such payment or series of payments which would have been paid if the employee’s employment relationship had not been so terminated;
(14) any payment made by an employer to a survivor or the estate of a former employee after the calendar year in which such employee died;
(15) any payment made by an employer to an employee, if at the time such payment is made such employee is entitled to disability insurance benefits under section 223(a) of the Social Security Act and such entitlement commenced prior to the calendar year in which such payment is made, and if such employee did not perform any services for such employer during the period for which such payment is made;
(16) remuneration paid by an organization exempt from income tax under section 501 (a) (other than an organization described in section 401 (a)) or under section 521 in any calendar year to an employee for service rendered in the employ of such organization, if the remuneration paid in such year by the organization to the employee for such service is less than $100;
(17) any contribution, payment, or service provided by an employer which may be excluded from the gross income of an employee, his spouse, or his dependents, under the provisions of section 120 (relating to amounts received under qualified group legal services plans);
(18) any payment made, or benefit furnished, to or for the benefit of an employee if at the time of such payment or such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such payment or benefit from income under section 127, 129, 134 (b)(4), or 134 (b)(5);
(19) the value of any meals or lodging furnished by or on behalf of the employer if at the time of such furnishing it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such items from income under section 119;
(20) any benefit provided to or on behalf of an employee if at the time such benefit is provided it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such benefit from income under section 74 (c), 108 (f)(4), 117, or 132;
(21) in the case of a member of an Indian tribe, any remuneration on which no tax is imposed by this chapter by reason of section 7873 (relating to income derived by Indians from exercise of fishing rights);
(22) remuneration on account of—
(A) a transfer of a share of stock to any individual pursuant to an exercise of an incentive stock option (as defined in section 422 (b)) or under an employee stock purchase plan (as defined in section 423 (b)), or
(B) any disposition by the individual of such stock; or
(23) any benefit or payment which is excludable from the gross income of the employee under section 139B (b).
Nothing in the regulations prescribed for purposes of chapter 24 (relating to income tax withholding) which provides an exclusion from “wages” as used in such chapter shall be construed to require a similar exclusion from “wages” in the regulations prescribed for purposes of this chapter. Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any third party which makes a payment included in wages solely by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) shall be treated for purposes of this chapter and chapter 22 as the employer with respect to such wages.



From what is high lighted on nobody realizes that these same exclusions are also found in 3401(a) "wages" for the section 1 federal income tax to NOT be imposed.

For purposes of this chapter, the term “wages” means all remuneration for employment, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include—
I suggest reading these exclusions and connect the dots that Social Security is the nexus why every American that vounteers in Social Security pays federal income taxes.
Think about it! If you didnt volunteer into Social Security your pay wouldnt be classified as 3121(a) "wages" nor your occupations as 3121(b) "employment" for the feds to consider you have statutory "income" and made statutory "liable".

[7th trump]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

The problem here is that you are unable to articulate just what constitutes taxable income. Therefore you refer to meaningless numbers, sections of the tax code I reckon. If it is so complex a question that you must refer to multiple sections of the tax code, then I submit to you that you are unable to give anyone here a succint explanation as to the question answered and by your inability you have reinforced my position, i.e. that the law is so vague and convoluted (puposefully so) as to constitute nullity (legal invalidity). So we come to my second assertion, the courts are completely corrupt or they would routinely strike down this monstrosity of a code.

As for the statement by glass: Glass hit it on the head. It is well understood that the term employee has originally been meant to cover only priveledged positions with the federal government or those workers employed in US domain, not the several states.
Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

I did lay it down in laymans terms. Your problem is you are not listening or dont want to listen or take the time to research the laws yourself. I'm not here to hand feed you with a spoon.
Here it is again.

What money and occupations that are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.

My advice to you is to stop buying all the snake skin oil Tom, Dick and Harry's taxation theories out there and read the law unadulterated for what it says.


You are simply to lazy to look up the terms yourself and would rather take the OPINION of con men who are now incarcerated.
If you dont know what 3121(a), 3121(b), 3401(c) and 3401(a) are or consists of you have no business even posting in this thread bitching about how the law is convoluted and vague.
The law is not convoluted nor vague.................its you that is infected by being convoluted, vague and simply........................lazy to think your simple minded ass is above the law!

As far as privileged goes.......................were the early settlers of this nation "privileged" with volunteering themselves into Social Security to get federal government benefits?
You see, unless you have ssn you are not "privileged" to access a credit card to buy things you need that otherwise requires cash in hand to purchase.

You have no idea how much Pete Hendrickson has you infected with his hillbilly train of thought.......................and thats why hes now enjoying his greybar hotel.



You are not listening to me. I have listened to you and replied to your meanderings. I am not lazy. I will not spend precious time looking through a meaningless code for something that is not there. You are the one who claimed it was simplicity itself. You are wrong and merely bolstered my point by refusing to answer my question. I submit to you again that if it is such a simple and obvious answer, you would not have to refer to multiple sections of the thousands of pages long, tax code to simply explain what constitutes taxable income. I will tell you in a nutshell what it is. It is any 'income' 'derived' from any activity. Now you must get down to the nuts and bolts of the words income and derived. Income is referring only to that which comes in from investments, thus 'derived'. A derivative in this case is a return on an investment. The income tax was sold to the common man as a tax on the fat cats..nothing more, nothing less. The fat cats were laughing because they knew all along they would be able to morph it with complicity by their judges and criminal government cabal into the exact opposite of what was sold to the people.

You dont see or understand the big picture here.
Social Security encompasses every occupation except what little is excluded from the term.
The key to understanding is that what little is excluded from either 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" is also excluded from federal income taxes.
So if you dont volunteer into SS nothing you do can be classified as 3121(a) "wages" nor 3121(b) "employment" for the feds to tax you the federal income tax imposition.............................get it now?
Its that simple!!!!!!!!
If you dont volunteer in SS then the pay you receive is not considered first 3121(a) "wages" to credit a Social Security account that doesnt exist and secondly classified also as 3401(a) "wages" for the feds to tax.
You understand what a w3 transittal from the employer to the SSA is dont you?

[woodman]

Good article. Just what is taxable income....

Income is everything in the public sector that Social Security deems as 3121(b) "employment" and 3121(a) "wages".
Its that simple.
Look up 3401(a) "wages" and tell yourself if you dont see the same exclusions to 3121(a) and 3121(b) found in 3401(a).
What money and occupations are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.
Seriously its that simple folks..........

The problem here is that you are unable to articulate just what constitutes taxable income. Therefore you refer to meaningless numbers, sections of the tax code I reckon. If it is so complex a question that you must refer to multiple sections of the tax code, then I submit to you that you are unable to give anyone here a succint explanation as to the question answered and by your inability you have reinforced my position, i.e. that the law is so vague and convoluted (puposefully so) as to constitute nullity (legal invalidity). So we come to my second assertion, the courts are completely corrupt or they would routinely strike down this monstrosity of a code.

As for the statement by glass: Glass hit it on the head. It is well understood that the term employee has originally been meant to cover only priveledged positions with the federal government or those workers employed in US domain, not the several states.
Not simple to me. It is gibberish. If it is not gibberish then why don't you tell us in layman's terms what is or is not taxable income?



And the courts are absolutely correct!


No. The courts are absolutely corrupt.

Not trying to attack your message, but the laws are incomprehensible to the common man and made that way on purpose. The courts are corrupt as all hell.

I did lay it down in laymans terms. Your problem is you are not listening or dont want to listen or take the time to research the laws yourself. I'm not here to hand feed you with a spoon.
Here it is again.

What money and occupations that are not deemed 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" for the purpose of gaining social security credits are also not considered 3401(a) "wages" for the Section 1 tax imposition to imply. Therefore, people what money and occupations that are excluded from SS is not taxable income.

My advice to you is to stop buying all the snake skin oil Tom, Dick and Harry's taxation theories out there and read the law unadulterated for what it says.


You are simply to lazy to look up the terms yourself and would rather take the OPINION of con men who are now incarcerated.
If you dont know what 3121(a), 3121(b), 3401(c) and 3401(a) are or consists of you have no business even posting in this thread bitching about how the law is convoluted and vague.
The law is not convoluted nor vague.................its you that is infected by being convoluted, vague and simply........................lazy to think your simple minded ass is above the law!

As far as privileged goes.......................were the early settlers of this nation "privileged" with volunteering themselves into Social Security to get federal government benefits?
You see, unless you have ssn you are not "privileged" to access a credit card to buy things you need that otherwise requires cash in hand to purchase.

You have no idea how much Pete Hendrickson has you infected with his hillbilly train of thought.......................and thats why hes now enjoying his greybar hotel.



You are not listening to me. I have listened to you and replied to your meanderings. I am not lazy. I will not spend precious time looking through a meaningless code for something that is not there. You are the one who claimed it was simplicity itself. You are wrong and merely bolstered my point by refusing to answer my question. I submit to you again that if it is such a simple and obvious answer, you would not have to refer to multiple sections of the thousands of pages long, tax code to simply explain what constitutes taxable income. I will tell you in a nutshell what it is. It is any 'income' 'derived' from any activity. Now you must get down to the nuts and bolts of the words income and derived. Income is referring only to that which comes in from investments, thus 'derived'. A derivative in this case is a return on an investment. The income tax was sold to the common man as a tax on the fat cats..nothing more, nothing less. The fat cats were laughing because they knew all along they would be able to morph it with complicity by their judges and criminal government cabal into the exact opposite of what was sold to the people.

You dont see or understand the big picture here.
Social Security encompasses every occupation except what little is excluded from the term.
The key to understanding is that what little is excluded from either 3121(a) "wages" and 3121(b) "employment" is also excluded from federal income taxes.
So if you dont volunteer into SS nothing you do can be classified as 3121(a) "wages" nor 3121(b) "employment" for the feds to tax you the federal income tax imposition.............................get it now?
Its that simple!!!!!!!!
If you dont volunteer in SS then the pay you receive is not considered first 3121(a) "wages" to credit a Social Security account that doesnt exist and secondly classified also as 3401(a) "wages" for the feds to tax.
You understand what a w3 transittal from the employer to the SSA is dont you?


I am not aware of anyone who has opted out of social security to thereby nullify their taxation. Are you claiming you know of this or have done it yourself?

[po boy]

So no SSN = no taxable income.

[woodman]

So no SSN = no taxable income.




I'm looking for proof of this assertion. Does anyone know of anyone who has opted out of SS and thereby negated their income tax obligations.

[woodman]

Waiting.....waiting.....

[sirgonzo420]

So no SSN = no taxable income.




I'm looking for proof of this assertion. Does anyone know of anyone who has opted out of SS and thereby negated their income tax obligations.


I don't have a social security number.

I thought I had one once, but it turns out it belonged to the Social Security Administration....

[po boy]

I believe there have been several Supreme Court decisions in regards to the use of taxes and social security.

library.georgegordon.com/ (http://library.georgegordon.com/) puts on a radio show talking about such issues.

Look in the audio archives for Social Security 1-7 and listen he lists sites from court cases and there is all sorts of good info.

If one opts out then doesn't receive the benefits of SS i.e. work for a .gov franchised business and carries on PRIVATE non-incorporated/licensed business and deals in property they may avoid tax obligations as I comprehend.

[woodman]

So no SSN = no taxable income.




I'm looking for proof of this assertion. Does anyone know of anyone who has opted out of SS and thereby negated their income tax obligations.


?

[SLV^GLD]

I know of someone who never opted in to SSA. This person does not pay taxes nor require a driver's license. This person lives a life that is primarily off the grid and very low profile. No one gives this person problems. They live on land inherited through generations and claims to hold alloidal title. I've met the person only a couple of times but have heard many legends. One of the legends says you don't come on that property unless invited and expected or you stand a damn good chance of never leaving the property. Makes approaching this person for a QA session a small problem.

[7th trump]

So no SSN = no taxable income.




I'm looking for proof of this assertion. Does anyone know of anyone who has opted out of SS and thereby negated their income tax obligations.

Talk with Bill Thornton he has!

http://1215.org/
Also Bill mainly goes into great detail on "People vs Citizen" issue.

To correctly answer your question you as a federal "US citizen" can opt out of SS, but yet still be liable for federal taxes.
To fully stop paying taxes you must and being made liable you must remove yourself from the political status of being a "US citizen" to moving into the political status of the People.
Do you know what government number the various agencies require you to disclose to them and where that number came from that under penalty of perjury you signed as a federal "US citizen"?
Here a good regulation that ties the knot between Ss and the federal government subject.
5USC 552(a) (13)..................look it up sometime!
You must understand the rights and or privileges of the two political choices or I doubt Bill will take to much of your time argueing with you.

[woodman]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.

[sirgonzo420]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.


A "person" is a government creation.

I am a man... a creation of God.


There are "ways out". But to my knowledge, those "ways out" are absolute. You can't play the game in some ways and sit out in other ways.

However, it IS possible to live free... most people just find freedom impractical, unachievable, or downright terrifying.

[cedarchopper]

There is no way to proclaim "freedom" in this system...if you try to challenge them in their own arena, they will put you in one of their system's cages. You are either an outlaw or you play the game.

[sirgonzo420]

There is no way to proclaim "freedom" in this system...if you try to challenge them in their own arena, they will put you in one of their system's cages. You are either an outlaw or you play the game.


Outlaws are free.


:)



from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw

An outlaw in historical legal systems is a person declared as outside the protection of the law. In pre-modern societies, this takes the burden of active persecution of a criminal from the authorities. Instead, the criminal is withdrawn all legal protection, so that anyone is legally empowered to persecute or kill them. Outlawry was thus one of the harshest penalties in the legal system, since the outlaw had only himself to protect himself, but it also required no enforcement on the part of the justice system. In early Germanic law, the death penalty is conspicuosly absent, and outlawing is the most extreme punishment, presumably amounting to a death sentence in practice.

[cedarchopper]

There is no way to proclaim "freedom" in this system...if you try to challenge them in their own arena, they will put you in one of their system's cages. You are either an outlaw or you play the game.


Outlaws are free.


:)



Maybe, maybe not.

The way most people like to refer to 'freedom' is as if there is some secret legal strategy to beat the system at their own game. The way to beat is to sometimes play by the rules and sometimes not :]

[woodman]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.


A "person" is a government creation.

I am a man... a creation of God.


There are "ways out". But to my knowledge, those "ways out" are absolute. You can't play the game in some ways and sit out in other ways.

However, it IS possible to live free... most people just find freedom impractical, unachievable, or downright terrifying.




But what you are calling freedom isn't freedom. You cannot live an ordinary existence without being a slave. Even if you are able to attain this 'freedom' you speak of, you are still a slave. You cannot drive around the country, visit your aunt in Idaho, set up a roadside stand nor make a living as a carpenter unless you are beholden to the beast.

I know a guy, a neighbor of mine who ascribes to this method of freedom. He will not work a job where he pays taxes. He has no running water or electricity. He works the summer months on his daughter's farm and with the proceeds he is able to keep insurance on his pickup truck. He comes around with his wife and they are always needy. We give them food and whatever we have that he can scrap. He is not a bad guy but is considered to be whacko by all around. He raised his daughters without electricity or running water in a couple of old rundown mobile homes put together and heated with a woodstove. He largely got by because people felt sorry for him. His youngest daughter, quite a beautifull young woman, married a farmer a couple counties away. She was 18, he was 48. She obviously was looking for something else out of life besides the life she was brought up in.

Poverty is the antithesis of freedom. I'm not saying that you can't be happy and free if you are poor but usually you are simply taken advantage of by those with more money. In this case an old guy with money got a poor young woman perhaps because she felt she had no other choices.

Freedom alway boils down to a matter of choice. If you can make choices then you have a large degree of freedom. If you can't make choices then you are a slave. The ability to choose=freedom.

[7th trump]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.

Woodman,
Once you leave their system they cannot do anything to you. You are above them. They cannot take away your children nor force them into their system under the guise of health reasons.
Ever wonder why the government allows illegal to live here without proper paperwork? They are no different than the first settlers and the borders are still open to settlers. The only difference with these illegal crossing the borders today from yesteryear is today the federal government takes issue on imigration since the advent of the 14th amendment. Yesteryear it was the individual states (prior the 14th) that settlers dealt with.
Their Roman Civil form of law has no effect on your Common law way of life.
The "Roman Civil Law" form that the 14th impliments is not recognized by the US Constitution.

You are only a slave to yourself.

As far as child support goes..........................well we have one of our own GSUS members (jetgraphics) who was literally thrown out of incarceration for filing the proper paper work with the court over child support.
They removed him from jail and nothing was said about child support because the courts had no standing to incarcerate a sovereign and the child support issue was between the parents as it should be.

[sirgonzo420]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.


A "person" is a government creation.

I am a man... a creation of God.


There are "ways out". But to my knowledge, those "ways out" are absolute. You can't play the game in some ways and sit out in other ways.

However, it IS possible to live free... most people just find freedom impractical, unachievable, or downright terrifying.




But what you are calling freedom isn't freedom. You cannot live an ordinary existence without being a slave. Even if you are able to attain this 'freedom' you speak of, you are still a slave. You cannot drive around the country, visit your aunt in Idaho, set up a roadside stand nor make a living as a carpenter unless you are beholden to the beast.

I know a guy, a neighbor of mine who ascribes to this method of freedom. He will not work a job where he pays taxes. He has no running water or electricity. He works the summer months on his daughter's farm and with the proceeds he is able to keep insurance on his pickup truck. He comes around with his wife and they are always needy. We give them food and whatever we have that he can scrap. He is not a bad guy but is considered to be whacko by all around. He raised his daughters without electricity or running water in a couple of old rundown mobile homes put together and heated with a woodstove. He largely got by because people felt sorry for him. His youngest daughter, quite a beautifull young woman, married a farmer a couple counties away. She was 18, he was 48. She obviously was looking for something else out of life besides the life she was brought up in.

Poverty is the antithesis of freedom. I'm not saying that you can't be happy and free if you are poor but usually you are simply taken advantage of by those with more money. In this case an old guy with money got a poor young woman perhaps because she felt she had no other choices.

Freedom alway boils down to a matter of choice. If you can make choices then you have a large degree of freedom. If you can't make choices then you are a slave. The ability to choose=freedom.


An "ordinary existence" is slavery.


To be free is most certainly to not be ordinary.

[woodman]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.

Woodman,
Once you leave their system they cannot do anything to you. You are above them. They cannot take away your children nor force them into their system under the guise of health reasons.
Ever wonder why the government allows illegal to live here without proper paperwork? They are no different than the first settlers and the borders are still open to settlers. The only difference with these illegal crossing the borders today from yesteryear is today the federal government takes issue on imigration since the advent of the 14th amendment. Yesteryear it was the individual states (prior the 14th) that settlers dealt with.
Their Roman Civil form of law has no effect on your Common law way of life.
The "Roman Civil Law" form that the 14th impliments is not recognized by the US Constitution.

You are only a slave to yourself.

As far as child support goes..........................well we have one of our own GSUS members (jetgraphics) who was literally thrown out of incarceration for filing the proper paper work with the court over child support.
They removed him from jail and nothing was said about child support because the courts had no standing to incarcerate a sovereign and the child support issue was between the parents as it should be.


I remain open to what you are saying 7th Trump. I am a doubter though. I'll believe it when I can verify it myself. I will have to ask Jetgraphics about this. This is fascinating if so. Child support should be between the parents and no one else.

I want nothing from the government, just to be left alone. Unfortunately that is not how the protection racket works. You pay them and they will call off their dogs.

If one declares sovereignty, how do you get an ID that will placate the law?

[woodman]

Thank you for the replies. I was asking and it seems that some have been able to live under the radar. This is not an option for most of us. I personally cannot live in such a marginal way and keep up my family contacts, nor travel, nor have any of the amenities that modern life affords. If one has children and tries to live such a marginal life, your children will be taken away from you and you will be hounded for support and jailed unless you come up with the child support payments to those who have wrested your children from you. In short this is not an option for the ordinary person.

In the end, we all want to believe there is a way out for us. Wish and wish and it will not change reality. We are slaves to a viscious and unrelenting system that has all the courts in it's pocket along with all the judges that matter.


A "person" is a government creation.

I am a man... a creation of God.


There are "ways out". But to my knowledge, those "ways out" are absolute. You can't play the game in some ways and sit out in other ways.

However, it IS possible to live free... most people just find freedom impractical, unachievable, or downright terrifying.




But what you are calling freedom isn't freedom. You cannot live an ordinary existence without being a slave. Even if you are able to attain this 'freedom' you speak of, you are still a slave. You cannot drive around the country, visit your aunt in Idaho, set up a roadside stand nor make a living as a carpenter unless you are beholden to the beast.

I know a guy, a neighbor of mine who ascribes to this method of freedom. He will not work a job where he pays taxes. He has no running water or electricity. He works the summer months on his daughter's farm and with the proceeds he is able to keep insurance on his pickup truck. He comes around with his wife and they are always needy. We give them food and whatever we have that he can scrap. He is not a bad guy but is considered to be whacko by all around. He raised his daughters without electricity or running water in a couple of old rundown mobile homes put together and heated with a woodstove. He largely got by because people felt sorry for him. His youngest daughter, quite a beautifull young woman, married a farmer a couple counties away. She was 18, he was 48. She obviously was looking for something else out of life besides the life she was brought up in.

Poverty is the antithesis of freedom. I'm not saying that you can't be happy and free if you are poor but usually you are simply taken advantage of by those with more money. In this case an old guy with money got a poor young woman perhaps because she felt she had no other choices.

Freedom alway boils down to a matter of choice. If you can make choices then you have a large degree of freedom. If you can't make choices then you are a slave. The ability to choose=freedom.


An "ordinary existence" is slavery.


To be free is most certainly to not be ordinary.


I agree with you on this. 100%

[sirgonzo420]

I remain open to what you are saying 7th Trump. I am a doubter though. I'll believe it when I can verify it myself. I will have to ask Jetgraphics about this. This is fascinating if so. Child support should be between the parents and no one else.

I want nothing from the government, just to be left alone. Unfortunately that is not how the protection racket works. You pay them and they will call off their dogs.

If one declares sovereignty, how do you get an ID that will placate the law?


And marriage should be between a man and a woman.... but with a marriage license, the STATE is right in the middle.

A sovereign doesn't need "ID".

And who is competent to issue an "ID" to a sovereign anyway?

Surely not the corporate state/its subdivisions!

[MNeagle]

I read these threads, & I really wonder how many LIVE like this?

I get what you're saying, but I just don't see the 'real-life' application of it. Mainly because the judges & LEOs don't apply it.

So your butt is in the slammer.

[cedarchopper]

I read these threads, & I really wonder how many LIVE like this?

I get what you're saying, but I just don't see the 'real-life' application of it. Mainly because the judges & LEOs don't apply it.

So your butt is in the slammer.


Nobody that likes to travel, especially worldwide, nobody that wants to have title to material goods, whether in trust or not, nobody that wants to own a business, and nobody that wants wealth.

What some do though is, have one member of the family that is above board and then sorta hide behind that identity for ownership purposes...pretty limiting on what you can do.

My policy is maximum freedom...I want to come and go as I please, I want to own what I want to own, I want wealth, and I want choices. I want to do it my way...and do, at least so far. It is getting more difficult on all fronts.

[midnight rambler]

If one declares sovereignty, how do you get an ID that will placate the law?

I've posted info on tuning into Rod Class and his group of researchers, but only those determined to be free have tuned in.


My policy is maximum freedom...I want to come and go as I please, I want to own what I want to own, I want wealth, and I want choices. I want to do it my way...and do, at least so far.

If you're a ward of the state via YOUR STRAWMAN, then you only have the illusion of freedom - you don't own anything you only have the beneficial interest in property. "The terms title and interest are not synonymous." -Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed.

[cedarchopper]

If one declares sovereignty, how do you get an ID that will placate the law?

I've posted info on tuning into Rod Class and his group of researchers, but only those determined to be free have tuned in.


My policy is maximum freedom...I want to come and go as I please, I want to own what I want to own, I want wealth, and I want choices. I want to do it my way...and do, at least so far.

If you're a ward of the state via YOUR STRAWMAN, then you only have the illusion of freedom - you don't own anything you only have the beneficial interest in property. "The terms title and interest are not synonymous." -Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed.




If you want to get esoteric, everything is a beneficial interest...for as long as you are alive.

[palani]

..I want to come and go as I please, I want to own what I want to own, I want wealth, and I want choices. I want to do it my way...and do, at least so far. It is getting more difficult on all fronts.

Inspiration in song:

Now look at them yo-yo's that's the way you do it
You play the guitar on the MTV
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Money for nothin' and your chicks for free
Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Lemme tell ya them guys ain't dumb
Maybe get a blister on your little finger
Maybe get a blister on your thumb

We gotta install microwave ovens
Custom kitchen deliveries
We gotta move these refrigerators
We gotta move these color TV's

(See the little *f_agg_ot with the earring and the makeup
Yeah buddy that's his own hair
That little *f_agg_ot got his own jet airplane
That little *f_agg_ot he's a millionaire)

Gotta install microwave ovens
Custom kitchen deliveries
We gotta move these refrigerators
Gotta move these color TV's

I shoulda learned to play the guitar
I shoulda learned to play them drums
Look at that mama, she got it stickin' in the camera
Man we could have some
And he's up there, what's that? Hawaiian noises?
Bangin' on the bongos like a chimpanzee
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Get your money for nothin' get your chicks for free

We gotta install microwave ovens
Custom kitchens deliveries
We gotta move these refrigerators
We gotta move these color TV's

Look a' here
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
You play the guitar on your MTV
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Money for nothin' and your chicks for free
Money for nothin' and chicks for free

Money for nothin' and your chicks for free

Look at that, look at that

Money for nothin' and your chicks for free
I want my, I want my, I want my MTV
Money for nothin' and chicks for free

(Fade)
I want my, I want my, I want my MTV

[midnight rambler]

If one declares sovereignty, how do you get an ID that will placate the law?

I've posted info on tuning into Rod Class and his group of researchers, but only those determined to be free have tuned in.


My policy is maximum freedom...I want to come and go as I please, I want to own what I want to own, I want wealth, and I want choices. I want to do it my way...and do, at least so far.

If you're a ward of the state via YOUR STRAWMAN, then you only have the illusion of freedom - you don't own anything you only have the beneficial interest in property. "The terms title and interest are not synonymous." -Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed.




If you want to get esoteric, everything is a beneficial interest...for as long as you are alive.


It's all a spiritual battle. If you don't get that you're lost.

But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it—not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it—they will be blessed in what they do. --James 1:25

“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me."

Man's laws clearly make provision for title to property. If you don't get that, that's another indicator you're lost.

[iOWNme]

So no SSN = no taxable income.



Does anyone know of anyone who has opted out of SS and thereby negated their income tax obligations.



I could also ask:

"Does anyone know of anyone in prison for not paying federal income taxes, and who DID NOT have a SSN?"


I listened to the whole thing, it was quite entertaining. The female Attorner was really just speechless most of the time. This put the IRS and their minions in a whole new light for me. I would have never have imagined that an IRS attorner could be so,... well.........CLUELESS.

(Maybe the IRS sent her on purpose, knowing they were dealing with Marc Stevens. LOL)