| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Aug 2003 : 23:47:00
|
I know of a former (retired) IRS agent who does Offer In Compromises if you ever become interested in doing that. From what I've been told by The Free Enterprise Society he's done quiet a few OIC's for people who are/were in the tax honesty movement. His fee is $2,500 but he will arrange a payment plan with you for as little as $100 a month. From what I've heard, the levy is release almost immediately once you get the paperwork back to him.
I don't know his name off the top of my head, but if you're interested, I'd find it for you.
|
 |
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 14 Aug 2003 : 10:07:41
|
Standing Complete,
Glad to hear you understand 'holder in due course'.
I don't have time to post right now, but just wanted to tell you that I really believe in the Accepted for Value process. Had you Accepted for Value every notice they sent you, I doubt they would have gotten as far as they have with you.
Anyway, gotta run..
|
Edited by - Livefree on 14 Aug 2003 10:08:14 |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 07 Sep 2003 : 19:19:39
|
Loy wrote: quote:
But realize that you cannot pay a debt with a debt-based currency such as Federal Reserve notes.
Realize also that the STATE can only ask for lawful money for payment of debt, they must, by law, accept Federal Reserve notes if offered, but they cannot specifically ask for them.
Received a letter from FTB on Friday saying that if I do not pay the balance due with a "legitimate negotiable instrument", additional interest and/or penalties will accrue...
What if I wrote them back saying, Enclosed please find 100 legitimate negotiable instruments [FRNs]. Please credit my account. Thank you. ???
Loy, what you are saying then is that they CAN accept FRNs, but they can't ask for them, is that correct?
|
Edited by - Livefree on 07 Sep 2003 19:30:01 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
19 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2003 : 23:32:52
|
| What is the current up to date Information on 1041's.Filed as reccommended by Rice Mcleod or ARL? I do know that if filled out incorrectly there is a $500 fine.when filed correctly refunds have been issued.Has that changed in the last 10 months? |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 10 Sep 2003 : 11:23:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by maat
What is the current up to date Information on 1041's.Filed as reccommended by Rice Mcleod or ARL? I do know that if filled out incorrectly there is a $500 fine.when filed correctly refunds have been issued.Has that changed in the last 10 months?
The latest information I've heard is from Barton Buhtz on Truth Radio. Find the audio dated 8/13/03 http://www.soundwaves2000.com/lforum/index.asp?how=1
He said that you have to file an Commercial Affidavit in lieu of your 1040, then you can file your 1041. If you don't file the Commercial Affidavit in lieu of the 1040 first you will get a $500 penalty. You can get a copy of the Commercial Affidavit by purchasing his property protection package for $20. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
19 Posts |
Posted - 11 Sep 2003 : 14:50:27
|
Livefree== I'm a new subscriber and I was reading your post of May 4, 2003, wherein you gave some real life examples of people in California replying to the FTB with Accepted For Value docs., and the accounts being gerry-rigged back to 0. When you got to the one wherein "they didn't honor his AFV, but he'd made other arrangements", my interest really peaked. I fast forwarded here, and failed to read past that first page.
Has no one yet surmised that the terrocrats are now accessing the "non-existent" Treasury Direct Accounts belonging to the creditors (those who've done the AFV process with the Secretary of the Treasury)? With the duplicity, arrogance, and greed of our public servants, it's only natural
they would claim to own the private side account when the straw man account disappears;No? |
|
|
|
mathyou714
Junior Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2003 : 04:45:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Livefree
I don't see how anyone can understand Roger Elvick's Redemption by reading those transcribed telephone conversations at freedomdomain. He's hard to understand because the conversations are so BoRiNg.
I don't know what is on that Roger Elvick CD they are selling over there, but if it's nothing but, or more of those telephone conversations, I think I'll pass.
I like Rice McLeod, so I think I'm going hang out with him for a while, i.e., order a few of his tapes and get his redemption book and see how it goes.
Thanks Lewish
|
|
|
|
mathyou714
Junior Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2003 : 04:49:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Livefree
I don't see how anyone can understand Roger Elvick's Redemption by reading those transcribed telephone conversations at freedomdomain. He's hard to understand because the conversations are so BoRiNg.
I don't know what is on that Roger Elvick CD they are selling over there, but if it's nothing but, or more of those telephone conversations, I think I'll pass.
I like Rice McLeod, so I think I'm going hang out with him for a while, i.e., order a few of his tapes and get his redemption book and see how it goes.
Thanks Lewish
|
|
|
|
mathyou714
Junior Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2003 : 04:55:52
|
to livefree regarding Roger Elvick being boring,
are you kidding me? if you are serious about that statement, you belong in the system, and if i have offended you, i pray for forgiveness. In god we trust. |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2003 : 22:50:05
|
MathYou714, the Roger Elvick transcripts I was reading at that time bored me. If show them to me again today, I may not find them boring. People change, ya know!
Maybe if I was out of the system I would think Roger Elvick was the most interesting man in the world, but the fact is, I'm not completely out. I vacillate back and forth, back and forth, in and out, in and out. :-)
|
Edited by - Livefree on 24 Oct 2003 02:27:25 |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 18 Dec 2003 : 14:32:19
|
Loybost wrote:quote:
But realize that you cannot pay a debt with a debt-based currency such as Federal Reserve notes. Realize also that the STATE can only ask for lawful money for payment of debt, they must, by law, accept Federal Reserve notes if offered, but they cannot specifically ask for them. If we are to pay the alleged tax debt that we have been burdened with then we must do so with gold or silver. It is, I believe, our duty to specifically ask the IRS which they prefer gold silver or FRNs, and they can’t ask for FRNs. The local IRS office is not equipped to accept Lawful money since it, like us, is of an incompatible legal attitude from the laws that they enforce. Government agencies operating under a colorable jurisdiction cannot deal with anything real. If you attempt to make lawful payment (gold or silver) and the IRS refuses to accept it, then the debt has been legally and Lawfully nullified. Truth is also real; does it set you free? Indeed it does, because Caesar can have no part of it.
Loy, why can't the state or IRS ask for FRNs?
What I am hearing on another forum is that the IRS or State will take your gold or silver but they will only give you the face value of the coin. For example, if you send them a 1904 $20 gold coin, they will credit your account with only $20.
|
Edited by - Livefree on 18 Dec 2003 14:35:44 |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 18 Dec 2003 : 15:05:30
|
The IRS can't ask for FRNs because that is asking for more debt. If they want $1,000 and you pay them $1,000 in FRNs, you now owe $2,000. Why?
Well, look at what it says on the FRN. "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE". Most people have know idea as to what that means. Let's start with the word "NOTE". What does it mean? Definition - "A promise to pay". Hmmm, a promise; not payment. Definition - "legal" - "conforming to the law". Definition - "tender" - "an offer".
So, when you give someone an FRN, all you have done is to "offer them a promise to pay which conforms to the law". You have not paid them anything. You have not paid the debt they are claiming you owe. You can't pay a debt with only a promise.
So, if you give them only a promise, they are now owed not only the original amount they asked for, but also the amount of the promise.
Does everyone follow this?
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 18 Dec 2003 : 16:50:04
|
This is what HRJ 192 says:
"Every obligation, heretofore or hereafter incurred, whether or not any such provisions is contained therein or made with respect thereto, shall be discharged upon payment, dollar for dollar, in any such coin or currency which at the time is legal tender for public and private debts. Any such provision contained in any law
authorizing obligations to be issued by or under authority of the United States, is hereby repealed, but the repeal of any such provision shall not invalidate any other provision or authority contained in such law."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It says "shall be discharged upon payment, dollar for dollar.
Doesn't "dollar for dollar" mean frns? |
Edited by - Livefree on 18 Dec 2003 16:54:03 |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 20 Dec 2003 : 13:16:59
|
No, go back to the Constitution of the united States for the definition of dollar. It is a unit of measure of silver. It cannot be FRNs. The original "dollar sign" as a capital "U" on top of a capital "S".
Looking at HJR-192, it says "in any such coin or currency". Is there any LAWFUL coin or currency in circulation today? No.
Hope this helps.
Lewis
|
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 20 Dec 2003 : 18:13:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lewish
No, go back to the Constitution of the united States for the definition of dollar. It is a unit of measure of silver. It cannot be FRNs. The original "dollar sign" as a capital "U" on top of a capital "S".
I guess what I don't understand is this: Why did HJR 192 say "dollar for dollar", when the term 'dollar' means a unit of measure of silver? Why didn't they just say, "Federal Reserve Note for Federal Reserve Note"? The term 'dollar', in legal contemplation, has only ONE meaning, and that is a unit measure of silver, but they are using that term ambiguously in HJR 192.
I guess I still don't understand why they just don't use the words "Federal Reserve Note" - the words are unambigous.
I read your answer as to why they don't use the words 'Federal Reserve Notes', i.e., the amount due would double, but I'm not sold on that as a reason why they don't use those words.  |
Edited by - Livefree on 20 Dec 2003 18:16:08 |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2003 : 14:54:06
|
Livefree,
Would it make sense to have said "Every obligation shall be discharged upon payment with more obligation"? A Federal Reserve Note being more obligation.
Can an obligation, as descirbed in HJR-192, be measured in anything other than dollars? I don't see how, as that is the only measure provided under the Constitution.
Does this help any?
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2003 : 18:30:31
|
Hi Lewis,
Why couldn't they have left the words, dollar for dollar, out?
"shall be discharged upon payment in any such coin or currency which at the time is legal tender for public and private debts."
"Any such coin or currency" means the same thing as "dollar for dollar", don't you think?
|
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2003 : 20:43:17
|
Hi Livefree,
Nope, don't think so. How about this, "I am going to pay you 3 coin to take care of the debt I owe you." Is the debt I owe you 3 coin? What kind of coin? Are all coin the same? See?
No, they had to describe how to assign a value to the declared debt. And, a dollar was the only value recognized under the Constitution or under Common Law.
Does that make it any clearer?
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2003 : 21:25:07
|
Lewis wrote: quote:
No, they had to describe how to assign a value to the declared debt. And, a dollar was the only value recognized under the Constitution or under Common Law.
Yes, that's it. Thanks, Lewis! 
"Dollar for Dollar" assigns value to the DEBT.. not value to Federal Reserve Note type dollars.
FRNS have no (0.00) "dollar" value. So if you ever want something that has "$" value, don't ever ask for a Federal Reserve Note!
|
Edited by - Livefree on 22 Dec 2003 04:02:36 |
|
|
|
DerekR
Junior Member
USA
20 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jan 2004 : 21:57:46
|
"Any such provision contained in any law
authorizing obligations to be issued by or under authority of the United States, is hereby repealed, but the repeal of any such provision shall not invalidate any other provision or authority contained in such law"
Just thought i might get a clarification on this phrase. Seesm it says that that any provision in any law that allow the United States or someone with authority under, the right to issue obligations? I know I just rephrased that, hopefully you see what I am asking, it seems this says the United States cant issue an obligation including fiscal, and neither does the IRS with authority under the United States. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Taxes
