Statutes

[palani]

So why are you scared of statutes?
To the extent REASON exists then it might be found in statutes as well as any other source. Statutes are not law in themselves though and in many cases they are written to deceive rather than to govern. Such are the tax codes. 'Scared' is not an adjective that applies. Cautious is more accurate.


Doesnt makes sense to me unless you are incapable of understanding the tax statutes. Your understanding is faulty. Build your castles on foundations of sand and don't be surprised when they crumble.

[7th trump]

To the extent REASON exists then it might be found in statutes as well as any other source. Statutes are not law in themselves though and in many cases they are written to deceive rather than to govern. Such are the tax codes. 'Scared' is not an adjective that applies. Cautious is more accurate.

Your understanding is faulty. Build your castles on foundations of sand and don't be surprised when they crumble.

So what you are saying is that the statutes found in Title 26 "revenue", that pertain, and relate directly to Constitutional tax provisions such as tariffs on imports are "statutes" and therefore written to deceive?
Is that what you are saying?

Its your way of thinking that's faulty and the other way around. You can recite all the Latin your heart desires Palani, but that isnt going magically make the IRS or citations go away.

When a person participates in Social Security they are earning 3121(a) "wages" that are tallied on a quarterly basis and designated as a "credit".
These 3121(a) "wages" are what the government has an interest in. These Social Security 3121(a) "wages" is what causes all wage "reporting" to the government.
Without 3121(a) "wages" there is no "reporting". The revenue and Social Security statutes are crystal clear about this.

Heres why your belief that I'm going to jail for not participating in Social Security is faulty.
Pay close attention to whats in bold and underlined.


(a) Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance
In addition to other taxes, there is hereby imposed on the income of every individual a tax equal to the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)) received by him with respect to employment (as defined in section 3121 (b))—

You can earn all the FRN's you want and they are not subject to any internal revenue laws when not participating in Social Security.
When you don't participate in Social Security you don't earn 3121(a) "wages" and therefore the FRN's are not subject to reporting.
Its nontaxable FRN's.........blows your conspiracy theory of FRN's being taxable if you touch then right out of the water!

Merrill is going to get a drastic blow when his followers start receiving deficiency notices because they believed his bullshit.
You are going to have to swallow your own words and humble yourself.

[palani]

I doubt if I will be eating many words. Not only do I not participate in social security but neither do I engage in commerce using Federal Reserve notes or any other fake currency. I admit to transactions in specie when I can but those transactions are few and far between as there are few opportunities. Most potential trading pardners are in lock-step with the Federal Reserve (agency).

See if you can confine your arguments to exclude references to Merrill. I don't know him. Have never spoken to him but agree with him (from his posts on the topic) that 12 USC 411 creates a thing called a Federal Reserve note and that lawful money is available for the asking ... as that is what the statute states after all. The topic is moot however because I just stated I don't transact commerce with Federal Reserve notes ... so what matter my thoughts on the topic?