Public Money by right - direct experiences please!

[PANICPASS]

There is a schedule that payroll abides by and they calculate the withholdings by how many exemptions you declare based upon your position as a taxpayer - number of children, married etc.

It doesn't matter what the payroll schedule says because it is not made a part of the W-4. Employees/Taxpayers do not agree to anything withheld from their pay unless they stipulate the $$ on the W-4.

You agree that the W4 withholdings are not a matter of cashing part of your paycheck.

W-4 withholdings are not a matter of cashing part of your paycheck because they were never made a part of it.

If you use the stamp cashing for non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes then there is no taxable event.

The money that you did not receive as a part of your paycheck is a taxable event. You signed a W-4, digits were subtracted from your pay. The IRS is going to assume you had a taxable event because digits were subtracted--you authorized those digits substracted from the W-4.


At the end of the tax year, if you have no taxable events to declare private credit with the Federal Reserve, then the Treasury is obligated to release the withholdings held in anticipation of taxable events - Refund.

At the end of the year you will have a taxable event to declare with the digits that were withheld from your pay and allegedly sent to the Treasury.

[David Merrill]

The money that you did not receive as a part of your paycheck is a taxable event. You signed a W-4, digits were subtracted from your pay. The IRS is going to assume you had a taxable event because digits were subtracted--you authorized those digits substracted from the W-4.

But there were no taxable events. That is what shows on the tax return. The withholdings are exactly that, withholdings. They are withheld. They are not a taxable event.

At the end of the year you will have a taxable event to declare with the digits that were withheld from your pay and allegedly sent to the Treasury.

You keep saying that and that is incorrect. The taxable events were the cashing for private credit. If you cashed nothing for private credit then you have zero taxable income for the year. When that happens in all honesty, the withholdings are Refunded. I do not see any way for the Treasury to say the withholdings are private credit and tax upon them. If they were to do that they would be obligated to send part of that Refund - say you fell into a %40 tax bracket; they would send back 60% of the withholdings. That is if the withholdings were a taxable event.

But you had me thinking it through carefully. Thanks for that exercise. I missed my usual chess today and I like to get some mental cybernetics.

I think you are incorrect about withholdings being arbitrary. They are based upon a schedule and exemptions declared on the W4. But either way, it is a faulty foundation for the point you are making - that withholdings itself is a taxable event. Withholdings are withheld in anticipation of taxable events.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[PANICPASS]

But there were no taxable events. That is what shows on the tax return. The withholdings are exactly that, withholdings. They are withheld. They are not a taxable event.

A taxable event occurs at the time digits are subtracted from your pay via a W-4. The digits withheld are taxable because you signed a tax form (W-4) authorizing the event of withholding. No 1040 is required if there is no taxable event.


You keep saying that and that is incorrect. The taxable events were the cashing for private credit.


And you keep saying that and that is incorrect. The taxable event occurs at the time the tax is authorized to be withheld (W-4). If you anticipate no taxable event, then no taxes (digits) are required to be withheld.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by PANICPASS

But there were no taxable events. That is what shows on the tax return. The withholdings are exactly that, withholdings. They are withheld. They are not a taxable event.

A taxable event occurs at the time digits are subtracted from your pay via a W-4. The digits withheld are taxable because you signed a tax form (W-4) authorizing the event of withholding. No 1040 is required if there is no taxable event.


You keep saying that and that is incorrect. The taxable events were the cashing for private credit.


And you keep saying that and that is incorrect. The taxable event occurs at the time the tax is authorized to be withheld (W-4). If you anticipate no taxable event, then no taxes (digits) are required to be withheld.

You may be right - however that defeats the purpose of calling it withholdings. The Readers can decide for themselves. I hold that the withholdings are set aside in anticipation of taxable events as declared on the 1040 Form.

You are correct that there are no taxable events with non-negotiable FRNs and that the 1040 Form is no longer necessary. It is however required if you want to get the Withholdings Refunded.

Of course if you are correct and the Withholdings are themselves taxable then a percentage will be taken in as tax paid and the remainder will be Refunded. Since I have explained myself clearly though, I believe you are just making a nonsense argument for the sake of argument. - For the sake of boring the Readers off the point that they can exercise their right to public money according to the article.

So above the signature line on the W4 Form place your stamp. A suitor showed me one the other day. They can be made up small enough to fit on about any signature line. I feel it is unnecessary but then try convincing your corporate employer you have a right to public money?



Regards,

David Merrill.

[jekylisland]

Keep in mind that 1040's and 1041's are financing statements. Witholdings are a forecast of taxable events anticipated based on the trust's performance for the year. This is reconciled on a return at the end of the year.

For my juristic person (a strawman as some people call it), I file a 1041. The juristic person, a Social Security trust, is employed. I lend it corporation sole to do the work. It owes me fiduciary fees for lending it corporation sole. The juristic person always seems to owe me more in fiduciary fees than it made, so the witholdings are refunded to it.

The witholdings are not a taxable event because the trust realized a loss.

[David Merrill]

The juristic person always seems to owe me more in fiduciary fees than it made, so [a portion of] the witholdings are refunded to it.

If I may be so bold as to modify/correct your sentence.

That is very interesting perspective on the functions of fiduciary in the relationship to the juristic person created for the trust. It sounds as though you agree with me on the point I have been debating with PANICPASS - that one can in theory declare no taxable events and if proven out so, get a full Refund of withholdings.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[jekylisland]

David-

Yes, I agree with you, and thank you for the correction. In my case specifically the only witholdings the juristic person experiences are Social Security tax and Medicare, and those account for the "portion" in my case.

I suppose we could look at witholdings as prepaid interest in anticipation of a taxable event, that being redemption of FRN's rather than USN's.

I haven't figured out how to get the employer's share of the Social Security tax back. If it is prepaid interest for the privilege of discharging employee obligations with FRN's, I should be able to. If it is prepaid interest for the privilege of employing the trust, I probably can't.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by jekylisland

David-

Yes, I agree with you, and thank you for the correction. In my case specifically the only witholdings the juristic person experiences are Social Security tax and Medicare, and those account for the "portion" in my case.

I suppose we could look at witholdings as prepaid interest in anticipation of a taxable event, that being redemption of FRN's rather than USN's.

I haven't figured out how to get the employer's share of the Social Security tax back. If it is prepaid interest for the privilege of discharging employee obligations with FRN's, I should be able to. If it is prepaid interest for the privilege of employing the trust, I probably can't.

There are the traditional ways. I went through two of the three steps of getting mine back and decided that I would risk needing it some day after 65 like others.

[PANICPASS]

You may be right - however that defeats the purpose of calling it withholdings.

The W-4 is an Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate. You don't claim withholdings. You clam allowances.

When you sign the W-4 "under penalties of perjury" you allow withholding. What those withholdings are are a mystery. You can call them what you want on the form but if you anticipate no taxable events, you need not sign the form. If you are an employee or officer of the United States, then you are required to sign the form.


I believe you are just making a nonsense argument for the sake of argument. - For the sake of boring the Readers off the point that they can exercise their right to public money according to the article.

I think you are causing undue troubles ahead for many the readers. I'm sorry so many people read your nonsense and believe it.

[Big Al]

Originally Posted by PANICPASS

You may be right - however that defeats the purpose of calling it withholdings.

It is not called withholdings. When you sign the W-4 "under penalties of perjury" you allow withholding. What those withholdings are are a mystery. You can call them what you want on the form but if you anticipate no taxable events, you need not sign the form. If you are an employee or officer of the United States, then you are required to sign the form.


I believe you are just making a nonsense argument for the sake of argument. - For the sake of boring the Readers off the point that they can exercise their right to public money according to the article.

I think you are causing undue troubles ahead for many the readers. I'm sorry so many people read your nonsense and believe it.

Pardon me, but did you have something to add to this thread PANICPASS, concerning experiences with public money?

I understand that some subscribers here like to try and offend fellow subscribers. Please offer proof with your rebuttal. I thought the purpose of this thread was to explore this concept.

Would you agree to keep this a debate using some site information if you disagree? Or do you consider this request unfair?