0 sats \ 17 replies \ @Undisciplined 1 Jan \ on: If your employer tells you they MUST withhold taxes... libertarian
That's fascinating. So, anyone employed by the government or a corporate officer has to have taxes withheld, but even a normal employee of a corporation does not.
Do you have any idea why it was written that way? I assume it has something to do with legal challenges.
So, anyone employed by the government or a corporate officer has to have taxes withheld, but even a normal employee of a corporation does not.
I think it gets even deeper than that. That's just a minimum requirement.
Do you have any idea why it was written that way?
Deception. Plain and simple. The BAR has ruined liberty in America. It's up to The People to learn how to beat them at their own game.
reply
@Undisciplined here are a few more examples:
Legal definitions matter.
26 USC § 7701 - Definitions
(a)(1) PERSON
The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.
With this definition, we must apply ejusdem generis. "Individual" in this definition refers to a single entity within the same class of commercial entities in the definition - NOT a human being.
26 USC § 7701 - Definitions
(a)(14) TAXPAYER
The term “taxpayer” means any person subject to any internal revenue tax.
See (a)(1) above.
26 CFR 1.441-1(b)(8)
Taxpayer. Taxpayer has the same meaning as the term person as defined in section 7701(a)(1) (e.g., an individual, trust, estate, partnership, association, or corporation) rather than the meaning of the term taxpayer as defined in section 7701(a)(14) (any person subject to tax).
26 USC § 7343 - Definition of term “person”
The term “person” as used in this chapter includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
I hope things are becoming clear.
reply
When these decisions end up being sealed, is there a public explanation for why it was sealed?
reply
The public typically isn't aware that it's sealed AFAIK. The only reason we know about the case with Steve Emerson is because Alphonse Faggiolo is a friend of his and has taught him. He's using what he's been taught from Steve in his own property tax suit, as well as teaching others the same.
reply
Is there also a gag order or is Alphonse free to discuss it?
reply
reply
An NDA would usually be something that was agreed to, so it's different than a gag order, which is just the court telling you that you can't discuss something.
I was just thinking about what a racket it is that courts can seal a case that's inconvenient for the state and there's not much recourse that the public has.
If there really have been cases that determined that normal people have no obligation to pay various types of taxes, then being able to prevent that knowledge from getting out is a big advantage for the regime.
reply
I was just thinking about what a racket it is that courts can seal a case that's inconvenient for the state and there's not much recourse that the public has.
Absolutely. Happens all the time.
If there really have been cases that determined that normal people have no obligation to pay various types of taxes, then being able to prevent that knowledge from getting out is a big advantage for the regime.
Although there aren't many, if any cases, that say that specifically, the constitutions, case law and statute dance around the truth and are often in line with the constitutions. For example, if I have a right to acquire, possess, and protect property, no matter what form that property is in, whether it's LAND or my LABOR or something else, and it is well-settled that a right is not taxable, then... you can find ways to make the proper arguments.
I just started reading about this and am planning on acting once I have enough information. I work for a large corporation. Can anyone share their experience on stopping withholding?
reply
It depends.
Some people start filing EXEMPT on their withholding and start learning how to sue the IRS in case they ever try to give them a notice of deficiency.
I use Kelly with www.mytaxremedy.com. Some people think it's sovereign citizen nonsense, but what she does is 100% legit and I've encountered many people over who've used the same statute (12 USC 411) for their taxes without ever a peep from the IRS.
Apparently there are other ways to deal with them too.
reply
Ok I just read Dave Champion, Income Tax: Shattering the Myths.
He comes at this from a completely different angle.
He simply eliminates generating an information return to the IRS by not signing a w-4
Can you explain the strategy about redeeming in lawful money?
reply
reply
So if I already signed one 10 years ago, there no way to un do it?
My employer has an option to change status to “exempt”
reply
What you could try to do is have them remove the W4 on file and, if they won't, offer to sign a waiver of liability for them regarding the IRS. I think technically a W4 must be renewed every year or every few years, but I'm not sure about that one.
What Kelly does is easier (except that you still pay into SS/Medicare) - there is no need to try to remove the W4. You will just be sent a refund from the IRS of any unfiled taxes within the past 3 years. You can then start filing EXEMPT. I take home ~85% of my check and it will be ~90% once my state gets rid of its income tax laws in a few years. Some states honor lawful money, some don't. But in federal it always applies.
To be very brief, lawful money is not taxable, so you are using 12 USC 411 to demand lawful money for your FRNs. Nothing changes physically, because the cash in your pocket can be used as both. But on paper, and in your bank account, is where things "change". What is changed is how they money is viewed/treated.
reply
He has a whole fund to pay for court, letters, etc.
Thoughts on this guy? His “plan” is a lifetime guarantee of legal support.