Summary is from a newsletter site. Would have more impact if the actual court document was linked. This is the same thing Schiff did, and he went to prison. This case may be retried as well. If the author of the article is giving the straight poop, this would be picked up by all the gold newsletters....and it's not happened. What's strange is that the website's disclaimer page is 10X the length of the articles.
Part of this is that the employer is paying his employees per the stamped face value of the gold coins...ie $50 for one ounce (vs a market value of $735 today). If that's a loophole, consider it gone.
I always wondered why an arbitrary $50 value was assigned to our 1 oz gold coins rather than nothing at all.
I think this is excellent and the way it should be.
If one department of the Federal Government is allowed to issue coins with a legal tender face value of $50, then another department should recognize them at that legal tender face value. It's not like Congress and the Treasury were caught unawares with big bullion price swings, they know exactly what they are doing with NCLT.
If the government wants to eliminate or curtail this practice, they can always limit the legal tender nature of bullion coins similar to what the Marshall Islands has done.
Of course, having people get paid in gold is just cool.
<< <i>Part of this is that the employer is paying his employees per the stamped face value of the gold coins...ie $50 for one ounce (vs a market value of $735 today). If that's a loophole, consider it gone. >>
It will be interesting to see how this is handled since it goes to the meaning of legal tender. US coins have a legal tender value assigned by the US government, not the value of the metal inside, whether it's $735 for a $50 coin or 8 cents for a $1 coin. The IRS may want something like the face value or the bullion content, which ever is higher. Otherwise, people could pay in Prexy bux and get taxed on 8 cents per dollar.
I have been wondering what the legal and tax ramifications are of doing this.
For my examples, assume employees earn $735/week, the current melt value of 1oz of gold and assume gold is bought and sold at this price.
1. What can the employer deduct as expenses? The purchase of the gold pieces (presumably ~$735/oz), and then again the payment of wages $50/wk (gold piece)?
2. The employee would get a W2 for $2600/year ($50 x 52). Would the employee pay capital gains on the value of the gold when sold? After all he earned the gold rather than bought it. What if my employer paid me $800 in $20 paper bills, and I went to spend them and the vendor gave me $5000 in merchandise. I guess the $4200 should be taxed as gift income?
3. What about federal minimum wage laws?
4. The employee is at great risk if he agrees to work for $50/wk as I don't know if you could specify $50 gold pieces for payment, I think the employer could decide to pay in $50 paper bills if he chooses to and then the employee is screwed.
<< <i>zoins, in your example they would be taxed $1.00 trust me >>
I agree, but the reason they are taxed on $1 is because $1 is the legal tender face value of the coin, just like $50 is the legal tender face value of a 2007 AGE. Under the law, AGEs are real US coins. My point is that if the IRS wants to tax people on the bullion value of US legal tender coins instead of the legal tender face value, they have to make an exception for certain kinds of coins, e.g. post-1964 CLT coins. The IRS can't have a simple rule to always use bullion value.
Other countries get around this by placing limitations on the legal tender nature of NCLT and/or demonetizing old coins like classic US gold and silver. It will be interesting to see what the US decides to do.
Question: Let's say I get paid a one-ounce gold eagle for my $50 and declare it as $50 worth of income. I may not owe any taxes at this point, but if I turn around and sell it for the price of gold bullion, don't I have to declare the $700+ as income? If, as I would guess, this is true, then it shafts the employees and is yet one more way the employer can avoid paying his fair share. And if that's true, then this isn't a grand gesture, it sucks.
Edited to add: BTW, I am assuming I got the $50 piece instead of being paid $700 owed to me.
<< <i>Question: Let's say I get paid a one-ounce gold eagle for my $50 and declare it as $50 worth of income. I may not owe any taxes at this point, but if I turn around and sell it for the price of gold bullion, don't I have to declare the $700+ as income? If, as I would guess, this is true, then it shafts the employees and is yet one more way the employer can avoid paying his fair share. And if that's true, then this isn't a grand gesture, it sucks. >>
Perhaps... but the capital gains would be far less than the income taxes, I reckon.
Actually, there are several companies in Texas who have been doing just this for several years now.
One, up in Fort Worth has been doing it for over a decade.
The IRS doesn't mess with either the companies or the employees and probably stays away because they are afraid of just this outcome. The precedent has already been set many times now. Always a news blackout, always the court records are sealed by a compliant Federal Judge.
RR, with all due respect, they aren't doing exactly what Irwin Shiff was preaching.
I love this! The reason so many folks around here get outraged is because they are simply jealous that somebody else thought of the correct defense first and they realize they have been the victims of the biggest swindle in history.
Instead of people getting upset with me, as they did last time, they should focus their attention on our tax laws, such as they are, and Congress which could settle this entire thing very easily and simply create a proper tax law. Assuming they could actually get it ratified properly. Might be a bit difficult as the 16th amendment never was.
Even the Supreme Court has agreed that there is no law requiring people to file with the IRS and pay an "income" tax.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
One has nothing to do with the other. Two separate taxes. Look into what the city of Galveston did almost 30 years ago and see what sort of pensions those folks receive. You'll be shocked.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
As citizens we should be protesting in the streets when court records like this are sealed. There is no reason that this shouldn't be public information.
I think this is just an anti govmt rant really...doesn't ring true with statements like the government must desperately hide from the people.
However, just for my own curiosity, what would happen if a business paid its people in trinkets or beads or something and a portion of them were gold. Do you have to report it to the irs?
What if you got paid in nickels? legal tender but their metal content is more valuable. Do you have to claim the nickel 'bullion' value?
Great BST experiences: abitofthisabitofthat, silvercoinsdude, gerard, coinfame, mikescoins, wondercoin
<< <i>As citizens we should be protesting in the streets when court records like this are sealed. There is no reason that this shouldn't be public information. >>
The problem is that less than half the people in this country pay income taxes and the number is getting smaller every year. Only a small percentage are actually carrying the load for everyone else. When the Government creates this sort of situation, and you can bet it was intentional, then only a small minority actually care. That's why there is no public public outrage over our illegal tax laws and the corrupt actions of the IRS.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>The problem is that less than half the people in this country pay income taxes and the number is getting smaller every year. Only a small percentage are actually carrying the load for everyone else. When the Government creates this sort of situation, and you can bet it was intentional, then only a small minority actually care. That's why there is no public public outrage over our illegal tax laws and the corrupt actions of the IRS. >>
Lately, the people have to be wary. Not only of the "big lie", but in the last 50 years or so, we have to be skeptical of the "big omission". Records get sealed, evidence gets lost, brains of presidents are misplaced, and defeats given to the government get covered up. Move along, move along, nothing to see here.
Not sure about this case, but I'm betting they will be soon if not already.
Virtually all cases where the IRS loses are quickly sealed by a Federal Judge. Just do a little googling and you'll see what I mean by that.
My tax attorney has beaten them twice now, one of them a fairly famous case. We've had lots of talks about these things. He used to be a collection agent and represented the IRS in court many times till he started to see the light and left the dark side.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Deadhorse, I defer to your knowledge in this area. All I know is I want to keep what I got....and not lose to inflation, derivatives, and all the other games heaped upon us since 1913.
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
Therein lies a serious issue....If one does not contribute to a max Dollar amount in benefits then that person will not collect their share.If you are paid $50 dollars and taxed at that rate then there is a problem at retirement..!!
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
Therein lies a serious issue....If one does not contribute to a max Dollar amount in benefits then that person will not collect their share.If you are paid $50 dollars and taxed at that rate then there is a problem at retirement..!! >>
Whether or not that's a problem depends on whether you end up needing to live on Social Security or not.
Of course, some people consider planning on depending on Social Security in the future to be a problem already.
<< <i>Deadhorse, I defer to your knowledge in this area. All I know is I want to keep what I got....and not lose to inflation, derivatives, and all the other games heaped upon us since 1913.
roadrunner >>
I'm with you there. I pay my taxes but I never pay any more than I have to, surprisingly, over 95% of the tax paying citizens do pay more than they are obligated to. It pays to have a great tax attorney.
Shiff's problem was that he would file and fill in a zero. His argument was what constituted "income" and by doing so, he left open the door for a conviction of tax fraud.
It's the folks who notify the IRS that they are no longer going to volunteer to continue that tend to win their cases. Income tax is voluntary, in spite of what some will try and convince you of. In fact, upon receipt of said letter that the IRS immediately puts them into a separate category and doesn't even look into it for 3-5 years, if ever. They then pick their battles based on the assumption that they can get a verdict in their favor based on one thing or another. They are now finding less and less "things" that indicate to them that a court battle will be worth it.
In the case that this thread is about, the owner of the company notified the IRS of his intentions numerous times via certified mail and he did it well in advance of actually doing so. The IRS waited for years before acting and in doing so, they themselves set a precedent that put them in a very bad light from the get go.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
Therein lies a serious issue....If one does not contribute to a max Dollar amount in benefits then that person will not collect their share.If you are paid $50 dollars and taxed at that rate then there is a problem at retirement..!! >>
You are confusing two separate issues here. Social Security and Income Tax are two completely different things. One has nothing to with the other. SS funds go into the general revenue, there is no "lockbox" as Al Gore told us. Income Tax funds go into the Federal Reserve, a private bank, and tend to vanish. Some say a portion of it goes to pay debt, where the rest goes is hard to track down.
SS is, BTW, a huge rip-off and pays less than 1%. Again, see the City of Galveston and how quickly their employees are looking towards retirement. They dropped out pf the system back in the late 70's and people draw pensions well in excess (as much as 250%) of their salaries at retirement, further, it is passed down to their heirs as well.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i> Income tax is voluntary, in spite of what some will try and convince you of. In fact, upon receipt of said letter that the IRS immediately puts them into a separate category and doesn't even look into it for 3-5 years, if ever. They then pick their battles based on the assumption that they can get a verdict in their favor based on one thing or another. They are now finding less and less "things" that indicate to them that a court battle will be worth it. >>
The income .."Money"..that your employer pays you belongs to the Govt.You are only using it.The more you have ..the more you have to pay to use it...You are only renting the .."Money"....you gotta pay ...get it....!!!
<< <i> Income tax is voluntary, in spite of what some will try and convince you of. In fact, upon receipt of said letter that the IRS immediately puts them into a separate category and doesn't even look into it for 3-5 years, if ever. They then pick their battles based on the assumption that they can get a verdict in their favor based on one thing or another. They are now finding less and less "things" that indicate to them that a court battle will be worth it. >>
The income .."Money"..that your employer pays you belongs to the Govt.You are only using it.The more you have ..the more you have to pay to use it...You are only renting the .."Money"....you gotta pay ...get it....!!! >>
NO.
I don't "get it". In fact I have no clue what you are saying. Sorry.
What I do know is that fiat money is simply paper, a promissory note, it has no intrinsic value in and of itself. Sort of like those coupons that have a cash value of 1/20th of a cent.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
IOW, they strong armed this poor guy. Threatened him, and God knows what else to get a guilty plea. He should have stood his ground and he would have won like everyone else involved did. A "voluntary" guilty plea is hardly the same thing as winning an actual verdict. As I said earlier, they pick their battles. Maybe they had something else on the guy, maybe they threatened his children, they aren't above such things.
Somehow I doubt the DOJ will publish the the rest of the story. In fact, I'll bet money on it.
Sorry, no cigar.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>Deadhorse If all you put into SS each month is $50 Dollars you are not going to get the same as someone who contibuted a max amount each year.. >>
I understand that. I also understand that if you never put a dime into it you won't get all that much less than someone who paid the max for their 20 quarters.
Damnit! Just look at what Galveston did with their SS money. Just think if you could do the same.
Just think what you could have if you put your tax dollars and/or SS dollars into an interest bearing account over all the years.
An illegal alien who sneaks in at age 66 will draw close to half of what you will if you put in the max for 40 years! Great system we've got here.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
There is nothing inherently objectionable with bartering services for commodities – heating oil, silver, peanut butter, pork bellies, etc. The financial implications occur when: 1) legal tender is converted into a commodity which is then bartered, or 2) when the accepted commodity is con-verted into legal tender. For example, if farmer Brown exchanges products from his farm with products from farmer Jones, the transaction will most often be a like-kind exchange. If each con-sumes the products there is no cash implication. If Jones used the bartered blueberries as ingredi-ents for pies and sells the pies to Smith for legal tender, then Jones has converted produce into a commercial commodity and sold it for legal tender triggering all of the normal financial activities of a business or hobby.
In the supposed example mentioned on the web page, two key points are how did the business owner acquire the coins with a face value of $50 each, and were they acquired with legal tender or something akin to a legal tender.
Since none of the so-called sources appear to specify the case citation, one can go no further. If this was an alleged tax matter it would have been argued in United States Tax Court, not a United States District Court (Ninth Circuit, Clark County, NV). PS: There were no Tax Court opinions with any of the names mentioned in the article for the dates specified. Robert Kahre filed before the Tax Court in 2005 (Docket #008359-05L), but the case remains open.
Deadhorse I'm afraid our discussions will lead us to subjects beyond the borders of the board.We probably share some great common interests and I am sure we can have a great debate..!!!......The subjects would be endless....!!!........
Well.....that's a marvelously self incriminatory load of BS. I wonder who was behind all that nonsense? Can I have an hour of my life back now?
Rule number one in any internet discussion: NEVER use Wikipedia as an example of the truth as it is more often false and/or prejudicial than anything else. I stopped counting the lies and contradictions somewhere around 50 and I hadn't read more than a third of it by that time.
What part of "the DOJ cannot represent any agency headquartered outside the United States and yet the IRS is indeed headquartered in Puerto Rico (that would be OUTSIDE the United States for those that don't have a globe or map handy) and is still represented by the DOJ". Do you not find to be confounding?
Just bring in a flat tax, make it legal and I'll stop questioning this nightmare of citizen harassment. Oh yeah, and I do want a refund, with interest, BTW.
"Lenin is certainly right. There is no subtler or more severe means of overturning the existing basis of society(destroy capitalism) than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
Rule number one in any internet discussion: NEVER use Wikipedia as an example of the truth as it is more often false and/or prejudicial than anything else. I stopped counting the lies and contradictions somewhere around 50 and I hadn't read more than a third of it by that time. >>
I'm sure a person with your super-human intellect knows that Wikipedia is to be used as a starting point and one should really read the sources quoted and go one from there.
BTW, who said it's the absolute truth? If you were paying attention you would've noticed I said "an interesting read".
<< <i>Can I have an hour of my life back now? >>
Please send me an invoice and I promise to frame it and send you a pic
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
in 2007, one would be dumb to work 40 years to retire on nothing but SS. If they don't at least establish themselves an IRA it would be hard to sympathize with that person
About 10 yrs ago my friend's cousin worked for a Las Vegas construction company. He had just bought a new truck and a house on the Colorado River. When I asked how he could afford this he bragged at that time that he doesn't pay taxes. He said when he picks up his weekly earnings from the payroll company he's given several gold coins at one 'window'. He then walks over to the next 'window' and cash them in for paper currency based on the gold's value that day. I told him that he was playing with fire and at the time he said that this payment system has been fought by the IRS for many years and has always been ruled completly legal.
Duke9163
Posts: 30
Comments
That's awsome, and I applaud the jury for doing the right thing.
I also see an attempt at a law change in the future.
Part of this is that the employer is paying his employees per the stamped face value of the gold coins...ie $50 for one ounce (vs a market value of $735 today). If that's a loophole, consider it gone.
I always wondered why an arbitrary $50 value was assigned to our 1 oz gold coins rather than nothing at all.
roadrunner
If one department of the Federal Government is allowed to issue coins with a legal tender face value of $50, then another department should recognize them at that legal tender face value. It's not like Congress and the Treasury were caught unawares with big bullion price swings, they know exactly what they are doing with NCLT.
If the government wants to eliminate or curtail this practice, they can always limit the legal tender nature of bullion coins similar to what the Marshall Islands has done.
Of course, having people get paid in gold is just cool.
<< <i>Part of this is that the employer is paying his employees per the stamped face value of the gold coins...ie $50 for one ounce (vs a market value of $735 today). If that's a loophole, consider it gone. >>
It will be interesting to see how this is handled since it goes to the meaning of legal tender. US coins have a legal tender value assigned by the US government, not the value of the metal inside, whether it's $735 for a $50 coin or 8 cents for a $1 coin. The IRS may want something like the face value or the bullion content, which ever is higher. Otherwise, people could pay in Prexy bux and get taxed on 8 cents per dollar.
g
www.brunkauctions.com
www.brunkauctions.com
For my examples, assume employees earn $735/week, the current melt value of 1oz of gold and assume gold is bought and sold at this price.
1. What can the employer deduct as expenses? The purchase of the gold pieces (presumably ~$735/oz), and then again the payment of wages $50/wk (gold piece)?
2. The employee would get a W2 for $2600/year ($50 x 52). Would the employee pay capital gains on the value of the gold when sold? After all he earned the gold rather than bought it. What if my employer paid me $800 in $20 paper bills, and I went to spend them and the vendor gave me $5000 in merchandise. I guess the $4200 should be taxed as gift income?
3. What about federal minimum wage laws?
4. The employee is at great risk if he agrees to work for $50/wk as I don't know if you could specify $50 gold pieces for payment, I think the employer could decide to pay in $50 paper bills if he chooses to and then the employee is screwed.
<< <i>zoins, in your example they would be taxed $1.00 trust me >>
I agree, but the reason they are taxed on $1 is because $1 is the legal tender face value of the coin, just like $50 is the legal tender face value of a 2007 AGE. Under the law, AGEs are real US coins. My point is that if the IRS wants to tax people on the bullion value of US legal tender coins instead of the legal tender face value, they have to make an exception for certain kinds of coins, e.g. post-1964 CLT coins. The IRS can't have a simple rule to always use bullion value.
Other countries get around this by placing limitations on the legal tender nature of NCLT and/or demonetizing old coins like classic US gold and silver. It will be interesting to see what the US decides to do.
Edited to add: BTW, I am assuming I got the $50 piece instead of being paid $700 owed to me.
Eventually a judge will declare that the jury is incapable of understanding
the charges and they will be directed to find the defendant guilty.
surprising it took so long for this to come to light.
Perhaps it did only because of the new law regarding reporting of bullion sales.
<< <i>Question: Let's say I get paid a one-ounce gold eagle for my $50 and declare it as $50 worth of income. I may not owe any taxes at this point, but if I turn around and sell it for the price of gold bullion, don't I have to declare the $700+ as income? If, as I would guess, this is true, then it shafts the employees and is yet one more way the employer can avoid paying his fair share. And if that's true, then this isn't a grand gesture, it sucks. >>
Perhaps... but the capital gains would be far less than the income taxes, I reckon.
Hahahahahahaha!!!!
This is great!
Actually, there are several companies in Texas who have been doing just this for several years now.
One, up in Fort Worth has been doing it for over a decade.
The IRS doesn't mess with either the companies or the employees and probably stays away because they are afraid of just this outcome. The precedent has already been set many times now. Always a news blackout, always the court records are sealed by a compliant Federal Judge.
RR, with all due respect, they aren't doing exactly what Irwin Shiff was preaching.
I love this! The reason so many folks around here get outraged is because they are simply jealous that somebody else thought of the correct defense first and they realize they have been the victims of the biggest swindle in history.
Instead of people getting upset with me, as they did last time, they should focus their attention on our tax laws, such as they are, and Congress which could settle this entire thing very easily and simply create a proper tax law. Assuming they could actually get it ratified properly. Might be a bit difficult as the 16th amendment never was.
Please look here
Even the Supreme Court has agreed that there is no law requiring people to file with the IRS and pay an "income" tax.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
One has nothing to do with the other. Two separate taxes. Look into what the city of Galveston did almost 30 years ago and see what sort of pensions those folks receive. You'll be shocked.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
However, just for my own curiosity, what would happen if a business paid its people in trinkets or beads or something and a portion of them were gold. Do you have to report it to the irs?
What if you got paid in nickels? legal tender but their metal content is more valuable. Do you have to claim the nickel 'bullion' value?
<< <i>As citizens we should be protesting in the streets when court records like this are sealed. There is no reason that this shouldn't be public information. >>
The problem is that less than half the people in this country pay income taxes and the number is getting smaller every year. Only a small percentage are actually carrying the load for everyone else. When the Government creates this sort of situation, and you can bet it was intentional, then only a small minority actually care. That's why there is no public public outrage over our illegal tax laws and the corrupt actions of the IRS.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>The problem is that less than half the people in this country pay income taxes and the number is getting smaller every year. Only a small percentage are actually carrying the load for everyone else. When the Government creates this sort of situation, and you can bet it was intentional, then only a small minority actually care. That's why there is no public public outrage over our illegal tax laws and the corrupt actions of the IRS. >>
If you can't beat them ... ?
Proud recipient of two "You Suck" awards
<< <i>Who said the records were sealed? >>
Not sure about this case, but I'm betting they will be soon if not already.
Virtually all cases where the IRS loses are quickly sealed by a Federal Judge. Just do a little googling and you'll see what I mean by that.
My tax attorney has beaten them twice now, one of them a fairly famous case. We've had lots of talks about these things. He used to be a collection agent and represented the IRS in court many times till he started to see the light and left the dark side.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
roadrunner
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
Therein lies a serious issue....If one does not contribute to a max Dollar amount in benefits then that person will not collect their share.If you are paid $50 dollars and taxed at that rate then there is a problem at retirement..!!
<< <i>
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
Therein lies a serious issue....If one does not contribute to a max Dollar amount in benefits then that person will not collect their share.If you are paid $50 dollars and taxed at that rate then there is a problem at retirement..!! >>
Whether or not that's a problem depends on whether you end up needing to live on Social Security or not.
Of course, some people consider planning on depending on Social Security in the future to be a problem already.
<< <i>Deadhorse, I defer to your knowledge in this area. All I know is I want to keep what I got....and not lose to inflation, derivatives, and all the other games heaped upon us since 1913.
roadrunner >>
I'm with you there. I pay my taxes but I never pay any more than I have to, surprisingly, over 95% of the tax paying citizens do pay more than they are obligated to. It pays to have a great tax attorney.
Shiff's problem was that he would file and fill in a zero. His argument was what constituted "income" and by doing so, he left open the door for a conviction of tax fraud.
It's the folks who notify the IRS that they are no longer going to volunteer to continue that tend to win their cases. Income tax is voluntary, in spite of what some will try and convince you of. In fact, upon receipt of said letter that the IRS immediately puts them into a separate category and doesn't even look into it for 3-5 years, if ever. They then pick their battles based on the assumption that they can get a verdict in their favor based on one thing or another. They are now finding less and less "things" that indicate to them that a court battle will be worth it.
In the case that this thread is about, the owner of the company notified the IRS of his intentions numerous times via certified mail and he did it well in advance of actually doing so. The IRS waited for years before acting and in doing so, they themselves set a precedent that put them in a very bad light from the get go.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
such a nugget of wisdom in a very interesting thread.
what was once a safety net is now many people's retirement plan.
big govt is my daddy :-|
<< <i>
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
Therein lies a serious issue....If one does not contribute to a max Dollar amount in benefits then that person will not collect their share.If you are paid $50 dollars and taxed at that rate then there is a problem at retirement..!!
You are confusing two separate issues here. Social Security and Income Tax are two completely different things. One has nothing to with the other. SS funds go into the general revenue, there is no "lockbox" as Al Gore told us. Income Tax funds go into the Federal Reserve, a private bank, and tend to vanish. Some say a portion of it goes to pay debt, where the rest goes is hard to track down.
SS is, BTW, a huge rip-off and pays less than 1%. Again, see the City of Galveston and how quickly their employees are looking towards retirement. They dropped out pf the system back in the late 70's and people draw pensions well in excess (as much as 250%) of their salaries at retirement, further, it is passed down to their heirs as well.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i> Income tax is voluntary, in spite of what some will try and convince you of. In fact, upon receipt of said letter that the IRS immediately puts them into a separate category and doesn't even look into it for 3-5 years, if ever. They then pick their battles based on the assumption that they can get a verdict in their favor based on one thing or another. They are now finding less and less "things" that indicate to them that a court battle will be worth it.
>>
The income .."Money"..that your employer pays you belongs to the Govt.You are only using it.The more you have ..the more you have to pay to use it...You are only renting the .."Money"....you gotta pay ...get it....!!!
Guilty
<< <i>
<< <i> Income tax is voluntary, in spite of what some will try and convince you of. In fact, upon receipt of said letter that the IRS immediately puts them into a separate category and doesn't even look into it for 3-5 years, if ever. They then pick their battles based on the assumption that they can get a verdict in their favor based on one thing or another. They are now finding less and less "things" that indicate to them that a court battle will be worth it.
>>
The income .."Money"..that your employer pays you belongs to the Govt.You are only using it.The more you have ..the more you have to pay to use it...You are only renting the .."Money"....you gotta pay ...get it....!!! >>
NO.
I don't "get it". In fact I have no clue what you are saying. Sorry.
What I do know is that fiat money is simply paper, a promissory note, it has no intrinsic value in and of itself. Sort of like those coupons that have a cash value of 1/20th of a cent.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
If all you put into SS each month is $50 Dollars you are not going to get the same as someone who contibuted a max amount each year..
<< <i>Not every had the charges dropped in their case...this guy didn't
Guilty >>
IOW, they strong armed this poor guy. Threatened him, and God knows what else to get a guilty plea. He should have stood his ground and he would have won like everyone else involved did. A "voluntary" guilty plea is hardly the same thing as winning an actual verdict. As I said earlier, they pick their battles. Maybe they had something else on the guy, maybe they threatened his children, they aren't above such things.
Somehow I doubt the DOJ will publish the the rest of the story. In fact, I'll bet money on it.
Sorry, no cigar.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>Deadhorse
If all you put into SS each month is $50 Dollars you are not going to get the same as someone who contibuted a max amount each year.. >>
I understand that. I also understand that if you never put a dime into it you won't get all that much less than someone who paid the max for their 20 quarters.
Damnit! Just look at what Galveston did with their SS money. Just think if you could do the same.
Just think what you could have if you put your tax dollars and/or SS dollars into an interest bearing account over all the years.
An illegal alien who sneaks in at age 66 will draw close to half of what you will if you put in the max for 40 years! Great system we've got here.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
There is nothing inherently objectionable with bartering services for commodities – heating oil, silver, peanut butter, pork bellies, etc. The financial implications occur when: 1) legal tender is converted into a commodity which is then bartered, or 2) when the accepted commodity is con-verted into legal tender. For example, if farmer Brown exchanges products from his farm with products from farmer Jones, the transaction will most often be a like-kind exchange. If each con-sumes the products there is no cash implication. If Jones used the bartered blueberries as ingredi-ents for pies and sells the pies to Smith for legal tender, then Jones has converted produce into a commercial commodity and sold it for legal tender triggering all of the normal financial activities of a business or hobby.
In the supposed example mentioned on the web page, two key points are how did the business owner acquire the coins with a face value of $50 each, and were they acquired with legal tender or something akin to a legal tender.
Since none of the so-called sources appear to specify the case citation, one can go no further. If this was an alleged tax matter it would have been argued in United States Tax Court, not a United States District Court (Ninth Circuit, Clark County, NV). PS: There were no Tax Court opinions with any of the names mentioned in the article for the dates specified. Robert Kahre filed before the Tax Court in 2005 (Docket #008359-05L), but the case remains open.
I'm afraid our discussions will lead us to subjects beyond the borders of the board.We probably share some great common interests and I am sure we can have a great debate..!!!......The subjects would be endless....!!!........
<< <i>An interesting read on taxes in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments >>
Well.....that's a marvelously self incriminatory load of BS. I wonder who was behind all that nonsense? Can I have an hour of my life back now?
Rule number one in any internet discussion: NEVER use Wikipedia as an example of the truth as it is more often false and/or prejudicial than anything else. I stopped counting the lies and contradictions somewhere around 50 and I hadn't read more than a third of it by that time.
What part of "the DOJ cannot represent any agency headquartered outside the United States and yet the IRS is indeed headquartered in Puerto Rico (that would be OUTSIDE the United States for those that don't have a globe or map handy) and is still represented by the DOJ". Do you not find to be confounding?
Just bring in a flat tax, make it legal and I'll stop questioning this nightmare of citizen harassment. Oh yeah, and I do want a refund, with interest, BTW.
John Marnard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1920, page 235ff
<< <i>
<< <i>An interesting read on taxes in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments >>
Rule number one in any internet discussion: NEVER use Wikipedia as an example of the truth as it is more often false and/or prejudicial than anything else. I stopped counting the lies and contradictions somewhere around 50 and I hadn't read more than a third of it by that time. >>
I'm sure a person with your super-human intellect knows that Wikipedia is to be used as a starting point and one should really read the sources quoted and go one from there.
BTW, who said it's the absolute truth? If you were paying attention you would've noticed I said "an interesting read".
<< <i>Can I have an hour of my life back now? >>
Please send me an invoice and I promise to frame it and send you a pic
Promises to pay.
roadrunner
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
in 2007, one would be dumb to work 40 years to retire on nothing but SS. If they don't at least establish themselves an IRA it would be hard to sympathize with that person
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>If this happened most of your working years, I would hate to try and make ends meet on the resulting Soc. Sec. pension. >>
If I could take the extra 12.5% today and forgo collecting a Social Security pension, making ends meet would not be an issue.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars