Hand It Over, Now!

[7th trump]

Sure I'll bite, but you're just going to say I don't have a clue anyway.

When you redeem lawful money THERE IS NO REPORTING. So that entire section means nothing to people like me who redeem. I do not contribute so there is nothing to report or to request for a return.

Your social slave number is used for reporting / accounting purposes for the endorsement of Private Credit. It's also used to track what you contribute and what they owe you in "benefits." Stop endorsing private credit, you owe them nothing, and they owe you nothing.

Ok Ares heres where Merrill goes silent and only responds by making shit up to avoid what he cant get around.
The corner stone of Social Security is "employment".
"Employment" is defined as-

(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..................

Now the pay you receive when in "employment" is a "wage".
This "wage" is defined term.

(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—

Now Ares you do understand what is meant by "means all remuneration for employment"?
This means anything and everything....even includes "cash value" of benefits.

My question posed to merrill which hasnt yet been answered "CORRECTLY" (Merrill always sidesteps in giving a straight up "yes" or "no" answer).
Let me ask you the same question I've asked Merrill and maybe you'll see where I'm coming from.

If an employee decides to participate in Social Security (being statutorily employed) where the earnings are tallied and reported as "income" via the employers transmittal W3 to the SSA and endorses his paycheck for lawful money at the end of the week. How is the employee not liable for taxes?
These same Chapter 21 Social Security 3121(a) "wages" the private sector earns ONLY through participating in Social Security the government also defines as 3401(a) "wages" in chapter 24 for the deduction of the Section 1 "income" tax.

My question Merrill never answers (and pete hendrickson) and avoids the question like the plaque raises the question that by participating in Social Security your earnings are not only subject to reporting, but also subject to deduction and withholding regardless how or what you are paid for your services.
Merrill has yet to explain if the employee endorses lawful money (after all taxes are deductions) and yet still has a W3 reporting amounts earned to the government how does his THEORY stop all the info in the SSA databanks from going to the IRS who will assess a tax based on what is reported?

My arguement is the SSA doesnt stop the W3 info from going the IRS. The IRS will eventually catch up and send a deficiency letter, a demand a 1040 be filed, or letter stating a substitute return has been file by the IRS who will then file a deficiency (from a lack of deductions withheld) which if goes ignored you'll be noticed to a day in court to explain why you didnt pay up.

As far as why nobody has been to jail using merrills theory of endorsing is because hes practically new to the scene.....give this some time Ares....hendrickson wasnt sent to jail for several years after his book was published as well as Schiff wasnt convicted for almost a decade afterwards.

Give it some time Ares as merrill hasnt completely thought through his theory yet.
Merrill is following Hendrickson foot steps to a TEE as far as leaving out the reporting aspect of "income".

Just give it some time!

[Hatha Sunahara]

Money was used to balance out unequal trades.

And the serfs paid their taxes in whatever they produced. Chickens, bushels of wheat, jugs of wine, &c. If you don't accept money for your labor, but take something else--like gold or silver coins (which are no longer money), your income--they way they measure it on the 1040 is ZERO (in dollars)

There is a great discussion of money that illustrates your point Palani, here:

http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html about one third down the page:

A ‘fairy’ tale

Let us look at another historical instance of clearing that was vitally important in the Middle Ages: the institution of city fairs. The most notable ones were the annual fairs of Lyon in France, and Seville in Spain. They lasted up to a month and attracted fair-goers from places as far as 500 miles away. People brought their merchandise to sell, and a shopping list of merchandise to buy. One thing they did not bring was gold coins. They hoped to pay for their purchases with the proceeds of their sales. This presented the problem that one had to sell before one could buy, but the amount of gold coins available at the fair was far smaller than the amount of merchandise to sell. Fairs would have been a total failure but for the institution of clearing. Buying one merchandise while, or even before, selling another could be consummated perfectly well without the physical mediation of the gold coin. Naturally, gold was needed to finalize the deals at the end of the fair, but only to the extent of the difference between the amount of purchases and sales. In the meantime, purchases and sales were made through the use of scrip money issued by the clearing house to fair-goers when they registered their merchandise upon arrival.

Those who would call scrip money "credit created out of nothing" were utterly blind to the true nature of the transaction. Fairgoers did not need a loan. What they needed, and got, was an instrument of clearing: the scrip, representing self-liquidating credit.

In this example the scrip money at the fair had value only through its use at the fair, not intrinsic in itself. After the fair, if you ended up with a trade surplus (extra scrip money), you turned in your medium of exchange for gold coins, the tradable store of value at the time. Can you imagine how this concept could work in a fair that's open for business 24/7/365?

But if you don't accept FRNs, what logic does the IRS use to tax you? Do you remember that fellow who paid his employees in gold coins? The IRS made up a rule that forced him to stop. I don't remember what that rule was--but it drives them crazy if people don't measure their compensation in FRNs.

Maybe if we used BitCoins to effect exchanges we could get out of paying taxes for as long as it takes the IRS to make it taxable. I seriously doubt that anyone reports bitcoin transactions to the IRS.

Hatha

.

[Serpo]

And the serfs paid their taxes in whatever they produced. Chickens, bushels of wheat, jugs of wine, &c. If you don't accept money for your labor, but take something else--like gold or silver coins (which are no longer money), your income--they way they measure it on the 1040 is ZERO (in dollars)

There is a great discussion of money that illustrates your point Palani, here:

http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html about one third down the page:

But if you don't accept FRNs, what logic does the IRS use to tax you? Do you remember that fellow who paid his employees in gold coins? The IRS made up a rule that forced him to stop. I don't remember what that rule was--but it drives them crazy if people don't measure their compensation in FRNs.

Maybe if we used BitCoins to effect exchanges we could get out of paying taxes for as long as it takes the IRS to make it taxable. I seriously doubt that anyone reports bitcoin transactions to the IRS.

Hatha

.

They seem closely related to the FED

[palani]

There is a great discussion of money that illustrates your point
Hatha

.

Good find. Thanks

[7th trump]

Here another angle of why merrill is wrong and palani (only because he follows Merrill).
Coins are minted by the US Mint....they are NOT fiat reserve coins, but US Treasury issue.
By Merrills standards (411 statute) lawful money is any Treasury issue currency.

See if the IRS cant ask the DOJ to prosecute you for not paying taxes because you were paid in "lawful" US mint dollar coins.
See how far Merrills theory last in court.

Stop the reporting and the IRS has nothing on what you earned.
To stop the reporting one must stop the W3 and in order to stop the W3 one must not sign a W4.
No where was the statute on the requirement to file a W4?
Ohhhhhh Yaaaaaa.......... it right here 26usc 3402(f)(2)

(2) Exemption certificates
(A) On commencement of employment
On or before the date of the commencement of employment with an employer, the employee shall furnish the employer with a signed withholding exemption certificate relating to the number of withholding exemptions which he claims, which shall in no event exceed the number to which he is entitled.

And just where is the definition to "employment" again?
Ohhh yes.........its located in the Social Security Act, having no legal standing outside the purpose of the Act which is to calculate welfare benefits.
"Employment" has no legal bearing outside the Act.
And looky here............an administrative regulation stating a SSN is not required if the individual wishes not to participate....whats this mean?

(d) Obtaining a taxpayer identifying
number—(1) Social security number. Any
individual required to furnish a social
security number pursuant to paragraph
(b) of this section shall apply for one, if
he has not done so previously, on Form
SS–5, which may be obtained from any
Social Security Administration or Internal
Revenue Service office. He shall
make such application far enough in
advance of the first required use of
such number to permit issuance of the
number in time for compliance with
such requirement. The form, together
with any supplementary statement,
shall be prepared and filed in accordance
with the form, instructions, and
regulations applicable thereto, and
shall set forth fully and clearly the
data therein called for. Individuals who
are ineligible for or do not wish to participate
in the benefits of the social security
program shall nevertheless obtain
a social security number if they
are required to furnish such a number
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section

It means a W4 is not required to work in the US.

Its not magic to know when the IRS catches up with Merrill its not going to be pretty for him!
And all those fools who beleived in Merrill will retreat thinking theres a conspiracy when the reality of it is they were listen to an idiot who couldnt find one statute supporting his "lawful money" theory.
Theres a reason why theres a lawful money clause, but it has nothing at all to do with why your taxed on your labor.
Stupid is what stupid does!

[palani]

Here another angle of why merrill is wrong and palani (only because he follows Merrill).

The government pays no interest on minted coinage. Neither are these coins reportable to any private entity. Re-think episodes in the past where people have attempted to pay fines and such with coinage and the trouble they find themselves in. Not only does the system not want to be paid in lawful money they want their own DEBT INSTRUMENTS back. I don't believe government is ABLE to be paid in any form of coinage (for the entire amount due).

As to following David Merrill's advice, I accept no checks and neither do I issue any. His non-endorsement method only applies to checks. I have no such account.

It means a W4 is not required to work in the US.

I am without the United States.

[7th trump]

The government pays no interest on minted coinage. Neither are these coins reportable to any private entity. Re-think episodes in the past where people have attempted to pay fines and such with coinage and the trouble they find themselves in. The system does not want to be paid in lawful money. They want their own DEBT INSTRUMENTS back.

As to following David Merrill's advice, I accept no checks and neither do I issue any. His non-endorsement method only applies to checks. I have no such account.


I am without the United States.

Without the United States hu......... well good for you Palani.
But your point is moot!

For one, Palani the term "United States" is found in the Social Security Act.

(e) State, United States, and citizen
For purposes of this chapter—
(1) State
The term “State” includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
(2) United States
The term “United States” when used in a geographical sense includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.

That definition is describing federal jurisdiction isnt it Palani?
So if you are participating in Social Security you are within their jurisdiction and not any reserve banks.
See how much Merrill doesnt understand?
Hes legally incompetent....and it shows!
It would have been funny to see the look on his face when I asked him why they dont make you file a w4 when opening a bank account1
He didnt like it one bit, but then again I was exposing the idiot for what he is.


I made the point that being paid in lawful or not the Social Security Administration will report the amounts to the IRS.
I can be paid in fiat and not participate (stopping the reporting) and the IRS still knows nothing of what I earned.
This is why the IRS never knows anything when working under the "W4" table.
Its really that simple Palani!
Besides from 1913 to 1935 millions of Americans had fiat in their pockets and werent required to file an income tax. Not until they applied and recieved a ssn to work under the reporting requirments of Social Security's 3121(b) "employment".

[palani]

Without the United States hu......... well good for you Palani.
But your point is moot!

For one, Palani the term "United States" is found in the Social Security Act.

(e) State, United States, and citizen
For purposes of this chapter—
(1) State
The term “State” includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
(2) United States
The term “United States” when used in a geographical sense includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.

That definition is describing federal jurisdiction isnt it Palani?
So if you are participating in Social Security you are within their jurisdiction and not any reserve banks.

I have no social security number. If the State of Iowa were anything other than an administrative subdivision of the United States then I might be there but they are not so there is another MOOT point for you.

I can be paid in fiat and not participate (stopping the reporting) and the IRS still knows nothing of what I earned.

I refuse fiat because the U.S. debt is so out of whack ... there might be no fraud (aka material misrepresentation of a material matter of fact) in the accepting of it but the act of passing the debt along to another unsuspecting schmuck is rife with fraud. I don't accept fiat for that reason. If I did accept fiat I would be required to play by the rules established for this lawform. To do otherwise also involves fraud. Here is why:

Cujus est commodum ejus debet esse incommodum. He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantage.

Contra negantem principia non est disputandum. There is no disputing against or denying principles.

[Bigjon]

https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0100206065



Yeah he doesnt want that getting out just like he doesnt want this one getting to his followers.




https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0100206066

And you want to tell me Social Security has nothing at all to do with the IRS and their record source huh?
You're gullible Ares.....and to an "incompetent" at that.

When I click on your links, I get

"Error 404
HTTP Web Server: Lotus Notes Exception - Entry not found in index"

Apparently you have special access I don't have.

My question is just who are you and who is your employer?

[BrewTech]

When I click on your links, I get

"Error 404
HTTP Web Server: Lotus Notes Exception - Entry not found in index"

Apparently you have special access I don't have.

My question is just who are you and who is your employer?

Funny, I thought that question was answered long ago.