Help with FRNs and 1040

[delawarejones]

[font="Century Gothic"]Hey Weishaupt and David:

Thank you for your posts.

Delawarejones

[delawarejones]

[font="Century Gothic"]Hey Weishaupt and David:

Thank you for your posts.

I do not post much on sui juris as I have only been aware for about 1 year that what I have been raised to believe is the "truth" is not what it appears to be, especially legal issues. Rather than post on topics I am not knowledgable about, I merely read, learn and verify. I do spend a lot of time posting on GIM (Gold is Money) and my avatar is "The Great Ag," a very wise Vaudvillean! Are Vaudvilleans wise? Probably not, but they comcial.

Concerning federal taxation, I now understand it is a game, and for the second year of my life, I was not concerned about the outcome of the 1040. It's just a game, so why get all worked up about it? As long the owners of the private money supply get a "fair" share of mine, they will not harass me. I am trying to learn how to play the game by different rules.

I do know that by signing the paycheck in that manner, I am correcting the error on the front that I received "dollars." I also, thanks to David Merrill, understand the difference between "public" and "private" monies. In my opinion when I cash a paycheck and create "public" monies, that creation only occurs in the ideasphere, and no where else. I do not think it has any legal validity. My reasoning is that how does a vendor know if he/she received "public" or "private" monies? They do not. The differrence occurred only in my mind.

Weishaupt, I appreciate the remarks concerning the jurat. I have been researching Title 26 for the past year (therefore I am an expert, yeah right), and I was planning on attaching the following "affadavit of truth".

This affidavit of Truth attachment is hereby made part of our tax returns and becomes the signature page for:

1. 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return (2006)
2. Delaware Individual Resident Income Tax Return Form 200-01 (2006)

This affidavit is to declare that all currency transactions involved concerning this return are/were denominated in Federal Reserve notes with the following exceptions:

1. Paychecks earned for XXXXXXX in the months of January and February totalling $XXXXXXXX
2. All paychecks earned for XXXXXXXX totalling XXXX

In accordance with Title 18 > Part 1 > Chapter 1 > paragraph 8, All Federal Reserve notes are obligations of the United States, and are not redeemable per Title 31 > Subtitle IV > Chapter 51 > Subchapter II > Paragraph 5119. Lastly, Artilce 1 Section 10 of the Constitution considers such forms of money to be “bills of credit.”

We do swear, declare and affirm all paychecks and rent checks from any source whatever that were involved and/or associated with either signor, minus the noted exceptions listed above, were endorsed:

DEPOSITED FOR CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OR EXCHANGED FOR NON-NEGOTIABLE/NON-REDEEMABLE FREDERAL RESERVE NOTES OF FaCE VALUE.

These transactions were performed through County Bank, a member of the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK SYSTEM and include:

1. Paychecks for XXXXXXX from XXXXX
2. Paychecks for XXXXXX from XXXXXX

Signed under pain and penalty of perjury

As far as I know, I am not creating a "false" jurat (if that is correct), merely stating what I know to be true.

It is my understanding, and I may be wrong, but by correcting the error on the front of the checks, makes them a non-taxable event. The reason being that there are two legal systems in place, the Constitutional (public law) and Civil (private law). I understand this from LB Borks, The Red Amendment, which I am still reading. The correction signifies that I did not receive "dollars" but an iou, a worthless security, bad debt. Such an exchange of value (my labor) for a worthless security puts me at a huge loss, and therefor deductible. When I claim for my income the amount my company sent in to the irs on my 1040 and deduct the loss, I only get a deduction of $700. I am not totally sure this is legal by Title 26. Although my reading of the code it is. I thought I would get a much larger deduction.

That's why I started this thread to see where I screwed up. I have made an error somewhere and was hoping Sui Juris could help me out.

Delawarejones

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

Putting anything OTHER THAN JUST your signature could very well be classified as an "altered jurat" by the IRS

THIS could easily be construed as Frivolous Penalty #11


http://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/ch10s18.html

THis then gets the ball rolling for a $5,000 penalty
Then, they proceed with trying to collect that penalty money via wage garnishments, etc . . .

You either file - straight up with no voodoo attached

or you don't - - - there is no DMZ

if you choose not to file, you better hope that you didn't get that job on the basis of an SSN.

If you did, then they will garnish the pants off of you until you

A. Quit
B. Get fired

Thanks, weis for point that out. I have been sign like that for years, I don't know why they didn't say anything about it, maybe because I payback or Public notice or return prepared by my accountant and sign it in front of my accountant without any question ask about UCC 1-308 on my autograph, I don't know. It gets to be something makes them say, let it go or leave him alone is paying after all. I have to file because of type of business I'm operating and property. I just sign this year return the same way. Oh well!! We see.

[delawarejones]

[font="Century Gothic"]Hey Weishaupt and David:

Thank you for your posts.

I do not post much on sui juris as I have only been aware for about 1 year that what I have been raised to believe is the "truth" is not what it appears to be, especially legal issues. Rather than post on topics I am not knowledgable about, I merely read, learn and verify. I do spend a lot of time posting on GIM (Gold is Money) and my avatar is "The Great Ag," a very wise Vaudvillean! Are Vaudvilleans wise? Probably not, but they comcial.

Concerning federal taxation, I now understand it is a game, and for the second year of my life, I was not concerned about the outcome of the 1040. It's just a game, so why get all worked up about it? As long the owners of the private money supply get a "fair" share of mine, they will not harass me. I am trying to learn how to play the game by different rules.

I do know that by signing the paycheck in that manner, I am correcting the error on the front that I received "dollars." I also, thanks to David Merrill, understand the difference between "public" and "private" monies. In my opinion when I cash a paycheck and create "public" monies, that creation only occurs in the ideasphere, and no where else. I do not think it has any legal validity. My reasoning is that how does a vendor know if he/she received "public" or "private" monies? They do not. The differrence occurred only in my mind.

Weishaupt, I appreciate the remarks concerning the jurat. I have been researching Title 26 for the past year (therefore I am an expert, yeah right), and I was planning on attaching the following "affadavit of truth".

This affidavit of Truth attachment is hereby made part of our tax returns and becomes the signature page for:

1. 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return (2006)
2. Delaware Individual Resident Income Tax Return Form 200-01 (2006)

This affidavit is to declare that all currency transactions involved concerning this return are/were denominated in Federal Reserve notes with the following exceptions:

1. Paychecks earned for XXXXXXX in the months of January and February totalling $XXXXXXXX
2. All paychecks earned for XXXXXXXX totalling XXXX

In accordance with Title 18 > Part 1 > Chapter 1 > paragraph 8, All Federal Reserve notes are obligations of the United States, and are not redeemable per Title 31 > Subtitle IV > Chapter 51 > Subchapter II > Paragraph 5119. Lastly, Artilce 1 Section 10 of the Constitution considers such forms of money to be “bills of credit.”

We do swear, declare and affirm all paychecks and rent checks from any source whatever that were involved and/or associated with either signor, minus the noted exceptions listed above, were endorsed:

DEPOSITED FOR CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OR EXCHANGED FOR NON-NEGOTIABLE/NON-REDEEMABLE FREDERAL RESERVE NOTES OF FaCE VALUE.

These transactions were performed through County Bank, a member of the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK SYSTEM and include:

1. Paychecks for XXXXXXX from XXXXX
2. Paychecks for XXXXXX from XXXXXX

Signed under pain and penalty of perjury

As far as I know, I am not creating a "false" jurat (if that is correct), merely stating what I know to be true.

It is my understanding, and I may be wrong, but by correcting the error on the front of the checks, makes them a non-taxable event. The reason being that there are two legal systems in place, the Constitutional (public law) and Civil (private law). I understand this from LB Borks, The Red Amendment, which I am still reading. The correction signifies that I did not receive "dollars" but an iou, a worthless security, bad debt. Such an exchange of value (my labor) for a worthless security puts me at a huge loss, and therefor deductible. When I claim for my income the amount my company sent in to the irs on my 1040 and deduct the loss, I only get a deduction of $700. I am not totally sure this is legal by Title 26. Although my reading of the code it is. I thought I would get a much larger deduction.

That's why I started this thread to see where I screwed up. I have made an error somewhere and was hoping Sui Juris could help me out.

Delawarejones

[Shoonra]

Delaware: Any comment I make is sure to be followed by an avalanche of invective, but I would be remiss if I didn't point out that virtually every suggestion being made on this thread has been tried before, and failed in court, and some of the people who tried them are still serving time. Goodness knows there are plenty of real accountants and real tax lawyers in the State of Delaware who could give you advice that wouldn't land you in hot water.

[David Merrill]

I do not know how to delete them; you can edit them down to ten letters though.

It sounds as though you have a grasp on the money redemption. I suggest that you send in a copy of Title 12 §411 if just a printout from your computer - if you still have time. Otherwise simply fill out a regular 1040 reporting only the private credit.

Yes, it is only in your mind that you are receiving US Notes in the form of FRNs. But you have that right. So your assertion of that right on the non-endorsement makes it so. It is inconsequential to the vendor receiving the notes from you when you purchase things cash.

If the vendor insists it is US Notes you gave him, fine. That is in his mind. He is not cashing a paycheck. He is trading goods and services.




Regards,

David Merrill.

[ezrhythm]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I do not know how to delete them; you can edit them down to ten letters though.

What is this statement in regards to if I may ask?

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by ezrhythm

What is this statement in regards to if I may ask?

Delaware was submitting about ten duplicate Posts. Apparently the moderator deleted them or maybe Delaware figured out how to?

Shoonra lies again.

The OMB# Fiasco caused the criminal matter of Robert Lawrence to be dismissed. He is misled and misleads himself about why the DOJ backed off.

The topic has been beaten to death but in the appeal court Lawrence or his attorney summed the whole thing up by saying...

That's the 1980 PRA; We are talking about the 1995 PRA.

Since they were talking about the 1980 PRA the justices just let Bob's comment go by without comment...



Regards,

David Merrill.