Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

To my good freind Marsha

Expand Messages
  • nickster97@Yahoo.com
    Here in Black and White is the definition of foreign and domestic and residents Sec. 301.7701-5 Domestic, foreign, resident, and nonresident persons. A
    Message 1 of 21 , Nov 25 11:12 PM
      Here in Black and White is the definition of foreign and domestic and residents
       
      Sec. 301.7701-5  Domestic, foreign, resident, and nonresident persons.
       
          A domestic corporation is one organized or created in the United
      States, including only the States (and during the periods when not
      States, the Territories of Alaska and Hawaii
      ), and the District of
      Columbia, or under the law of the United States or of any State or
      Territory. A foreign corporation is one which is not domestic. A
      domestic corporation is a resident corporation even though it does no
      business and owns no property in the United States. A foreign
      corporation engaged in trade or business within the United States is
      referred to in the regulations in this chapter as a resident foreign
      corporation, and a foreign corporation not engaged in trade or business
      within the United States, as a nonresident foreign corporation.
       
      How are agreements to the Social Security accomplished???
       
       
      26 USC 3121

      (l) Agreements entered into by American employers with respect to foreign affiliates

      (1) Agreement with respect to certain employees of foreign affiliate
       
      The Secretary shall, at the American employer's request, enter into an agreement (in such manner and form as may be prescribed by the Secretary) (Application for EIN number) with any American employer who desires (VOLUNTARY) to have the insurance system established by title II of the Social Security Act extended to service performed outside the United States in the employ of any 1 or more of such employer's foreign affiliates by all employees who are citizens or residents of the United States, (Private citizens) except that the agreement shall not apply to any service performed by, or remuneration paid to, an employee if such service or remuneration would be excluded from the term ''employment'' or ''wages'', as defined in this section, had the service been performed in the United States. ( If employed with NO SS #!!) Such agreement may be amended at any time so as to be made applicable, in the same manner and under the same conditions, with respect to any other foreign affiliate of such American employer. Such agreement shall be applicable with respect to citizens or residents of the United States who, on or after the effective date of the agreement, are employees of and perform services outside the United States for any foreign affiliate specified in the agreement. (Private Citizens who work for these employers are subjected to this agreement)Such agreement shall provide -
      (A)
      that the American employer shall pay to the Secretary, at such time or times as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, (Quarterly) amounts equivalent to the sum of the taxes which would be imposed by sections 3101 and 3111 (including amounts equivalent to the interest, additions to the taxes, additional amounts, and penalties which would be applicable) (Social security taxes 1/2 from employer, 1/2 from employee) with respect to the remuneration which would be wages if the services covered by the agreement constituted employment as defined in this section; ( as long as the employee has an SS# )and
      (B)
      that the American employer will comply with such regulations relating to payments and reports as the Secretary may prescribe to carry out the purposes of this subsection.
      (2) Effective period of agreement
       
      An agreement entered into pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be in effect for the period beginning with the first day of the calendar quarter in which such agreement is entered into or the first day of the succeeding calendar quarter, as may be specified in the agreement; except that in case such agreement is amended to include the services performed for any other affiliate and such amendment is executed after the first month following the first calendar quarter for which the agreement is in effect, the agreement shall be in effect with respect to service performed for such other affiliate only after the calendar quarter in which such amendment is executed. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, the period for which any such agreement is effective with respect to any foreign entity shall terminate at the end of any calendar quarter in which the foreign entity, at any time in such quarter, ceases to be a foreign affiliate as defined in paragraph (6).
      (3) No termination of agreement
       
      No agreement under this subsection may be terminated, either in its entirety or with respect to any foreign affiliate, on or after June 15, 1989.
      ONCE YOUR IN, YOU CANT GET OUT!!!!
       
      Sec. 3102. - Deduction of tax from wages
       

      (b) Indemnification of employer

      Every employer required so to deduct the tax shall be liable for the payment of such tax, and shall be indemnified against the claims and demands of any person for the amount of any such payment made by such employer.

      (You can't sue the employer)

      (one is taxed on wages)

      (a) Wages

      For purposes of this chapter, the term ''wages'' means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash;

      (SAME DEFINITION AT 3401 AS 3121)

      a) Requirement of withholding

      (1) In general

      Except as otherwise provided in this section, every employer making payment of wages shall deduct and withhold upon such wages a tax determined in accordance with tables or computational procedures prescribed by the Secretary.

      (THESE ARE SUBTITLE A TAXES)

      26 USC section 6413

      (C) Employees of certain foreign affiliates

      For purposes of paragraph (1) of this subsection, the term ''wages'' includes such remuneration for services covered by an agreement made pursuant to section 3121(l) as would be wages if such services constituted employment;

      WAGES DOES NOT MEAN AN EXCHANGE OF LABOR

      WHAT THIS ALL MEANS

      If you are working for an employer who has agreed to uphold the SS scheme AND you give them a SS#, you have lost your sovereignty by agreement. Before you go beserk, there is a remedy.

      Someone tell me where 861 applies here??

      All those arguing subtitle A taxes and wondering how one can be taxed, it is an indirect tax on the future benefits of SS and medicare. Why should we argue about the definition of income? it doesn't apply. I was informed tonight that there is a way to bust the SS# and trust in your name.

      More to come 



      Tax Consulting Services

      Email to Nickster97@...


      Do you Yahoo!?
      Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
    • Marsha Breazeale
      Look, there is nothing to argue about here. I will assume that the Sec. 301.7701-5 is from 26 CFR? And 26 U. S. C. 3121 is from the IRS Code. Both of
      Message 2 of 21 , Nov 26 8:21 AM
        Look, there is nothing to argue about here.  I will assume that the "Sec. 301.7701-5" is from 26 CFR?  And 26 U. S. C. 3121 is from the IRS Code.  Both of these cites apply only to TAXPAYERS.  If someone is not a taxpayer, they cannot look to either of these cites to find anything that applies to them.


         
        Here in Black and White is the definition of foreign and domestic and residents
         
        Sec. 301.7701-5  Domestic, foreign, resident, and nonresident persons.
         
           
        26 USC 3121

         
        Sec. 3102. - Deduction of tax from wages
         

         

        More to come 



         


      • Angela Stark
        You are only subject to the tax that you are liable for. If I were a bookmaker and I asked the IRS, what law requires me to pay, they would easily point to
        Message 3 of 21 , Nov 28 4:48 AM
          You are only subject to the tax that you are liable for.

          If I were a bookmaker and I asked the IRS, what law requires me to
          pay, they would easily point to sec. 4401(c) Persons liable for tax.
          Or, if I was an importer of tobacco products and I asked the IRS,
          show me the law that requires me to pay, they would quickly point to
          sec. 5703 Liability for tax and method of payment. When I ask the IRS
          what law makes me liable, they say oh, were not here to discuss
          constitutional issues. Why is it when I ask them the same question as
          the above examples, it is now a constitutional issue? The answer is,
          because it really IS a constitutional issue and they don't want to
          discuss it.

          The Internal Revenue Code of 1939 changed with the new 1954 code. The
          new code no longer contained the words "salaries", "wages", and
          compensation for "personal" services. They were removed. They were
          removed so that the new Internal Revenue code would fall in line with
          the 16th amendment. The 16th amendment gave no new taxing powers to
          congress, it actually limited their taxing powers to what was
          constitutional.

          You can see the actual comparison of the 1939 and 1954 codes posted
          here >> http://irwinschiff.homestead.com/ConstitutionalSense.html

          Here is the intent of congress from HR 1337
          HR 1337 states: IN DISCUSSING SEC. 61(A) OF THE 1954 CODE, THE HOUSE
          REPORT STATES:

          "THIS SECTION CORRESPONDS TO SECTION 22(A) OF THE 1939 CODE. WHILE
          THE LANGUAGE IN EXISTING SECTION 22(A) HAS BEEN SIMPLIFIED, THE ALL
          INCLUSIVE NATURE OF STATUTORY GROSS INCOME HAS NOT BEEN AFFECTED
          THEREBY. SECTION 61(A) IS AS BROAD IN SCOPE AS SECTION 22(A).

          "SECTION 61(A) PROVIDES THAT GROSS INCOME INCLUDES 'ALL INCOME FROM
          WHATEVER SOURCE DERIVED.' THIS DEFINITION IS BASED UPON THE 16TH
          AMENDMENT AND THE WORD 'INCOME' IS USED IN ITS CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE."
          H.R. REP. NO. 1337, SUPRA, NOTE 10, AT A18.
          A VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL STATEMENT APPEARS IN S. REP. NO. 1622, SUPRA,
          NOTE 10, AT 168.

          Income in the constitutional sense refers to the Corporations Excise
          Tax Act of 1909 which means that income in the constitutional sense
          is a corporate profit. You must have a corporate activity going on
          like the bookmaker or the tobacco importer to be liable for the
          income tax. You can't be taxed on your personal labor, well... not
          legally. Although they do it all the time. You can only be liable for
          the tax imposed by the rule of apportionment. (based on the head
          count of each state)

          Section 6201: Assessment authority. (a)The Secretary is authorized
          and required to make the inquiries, determinations, and assessments
          of all taxes (including interest, additional amounts to the tax and
          assessable penalties) imposed by this title, or accruing under any
          former internal revenue law, which have not been duly paid by stamp
          at the time and in the manner provided by law. Such authority shall
          extend to and include the following (1) "Taxes shown on return". The
          Secretary shall assess all taxes "Determined by the taxpayer" or by
          the Secretary as to which returns or lists are made under this title.

          Notice above it says "TAXES ON RETURN" AND "DETERMINED BY THE
          TAXPAYER"

          The income tax is unique as it is the only tax that I know of, where
          an individual has the authority to determine the amount. I mean, If
          you dine at a restaurant, do you have to determine the tax? If you
          fill up at the gas station, do you have to determine the tax? If you
          pay your property taxes do you have to first determine what they
          might be? Of course not. The genuine intent of congress was
          to give "individuals the right to determine their own income tax" if
          they are liable for any of the code sections in the IRC.
          There is no law or code section that I can find that makes me liable,
          or authorizes the IRS to make a 1040 return for me, or change the
          determination of tax based on ones own self assessment. Taxes have to
          be determined by the taxpayer. If the individual determines that they
          had no taxable income, then the amount on their return has to be
          zero. How could it be anything but zero? Actually an individual
          shouldn't have to even make a return, unless they are engaging in
          corporate activities.

          I have income in the ordinary sense but not in the constitutional
          sense... Therefore, I am not required to make a return or pay the
          income tax that is required on income in the constitutional sense.

          Happy Holidays!

          Angela
          Irwin Schiff News
          www.taxfreedomnow.com


          --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Marsha Breazeale"
          <MBreazeale@n...> wrote:
          > Look, there is nothing to argue about here. I will assume that
          the "Sec. 301.7701-5" is from 26 CFR? And 26 U. S. C. 3121 is from
          the IRS Code. Both of these cites apply only to TAXPAYERS. If
          someone is not a taxpayer, they cannot look to either of these cites
          to find anything that applies to them.
          >
          >
        • Marsha
          This is why we must all understand that the days of administrative remedy are over. Angela is correct in her post, that the IRS will NOT discuss
          Message 4 of 21 , Nov 28 10:15 AM
            This is why we must all understand that the days of "administrative
            remedy" are over. Angela is correct in her post, that the IRS will
            NOT discuss constitutional issues-- but it's because they are not
            supposed to. For them to have authority to even communicate with
            you, you must have already stepped across the threshhold of
            determining you are a "taxpayer". They do not make that
            determination. They ASSUME you are a taxpayer automatically, just
            because they received some form of information submitted to them on
            THEIR form (W-2, 1099, or report from a bank or other financial
            institution). Unless you give them "constructive knowledge" that
            their assumption is erroneous, and then you must be prepared to take
            the issue to a federal court (NOT the Tax Court!! That's not a part
            of the Judicial Branch, it is a part of the Executive Branch!) to
            force the IRS to concede that your money is not "income" as defined
            in the statutes they are empowered to execute and administer.

            --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Angela Stark"
            <angelastark@c...> wrote:
            > You are only subject to the tax that you are liable for.
            >
            > If I were a bookmaker and I asked the IRS, what law requires me to
            > pay, they would easily point to sec. 4401(c) Persons liable for
            tax.
            > Or, if I was an importer of tobacco products and I asked the IRS,
            > show me the law that requires me to pay, they would quickly point
            to
            > sec. 5703 Liability for tax and method of payment. When I ask the
            IRS
            > what law makes me liable, they say oh, were not here to discuss
            > constitutional issues. Why is it when I ask them the same question
            as
            > the above examples, it is now a constitutional issue? The answer
            is,
            > because it really IS a constitutional issue and they don't want to
            > discuss it.
            >
            > The Internal Revenue Code of 1939 changed with the new 1954 code.
            The
            > new code no longer contained the words "salaries", "wages", and
            > compensation for "personal" services. They were removed. They were
            > removed so that the new Internal Revenue code would fall in line
            with
            > the 16th amendment. The 16th amendment gave no new taxing powers to
            > congress, it actually limited their taxing powers to what was
            > constitutional.
          • JD
            Even though the W-2 is on the IRS forms site, it is a SSA form and is sent directly to the SSA computer center, with the transmittal document of W-3 I think
            Message 5 of 21 , Nov 28 2:41 PM
               
              Even though the W-2 is on the IRS forms site, it is a SSA form and is sent directly to the SSA computer center, with the transmittal document of W-3  I think the center is in Indiana.  The W-2 the IRS gets is the one you send in with your form attesting that this is income to you and the bottom line on the form is "taxable income".
               
               
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: Marsha

              This is why we must all understand that the days of "administrative
              remedy" are over.  Angela is correct in her post, that the IRS will
              NOT discuss constitutional issues-- but it's because they are not
              supposed to.  For them to have authority to even communicate with
              you, you must have already stepped across the threshhold of
              determining you are a "taxpayer".  They do not make that
              determination.  They ASSUME you are a taxpayer automatically, just
              because they received some form of information submitted to them on
              THEIR form (W-2, 1099, or report from a bank or other financial
              institution).  Unless you give them "constructive knowledge" that
              their assumption is erroneous, and then you must be prepared to take
              the issue to a federal court (NOT the Tax Court!!  That's not a part
              of the Judicial Branch, it is a part of the Executive Branch!) to
              force the IRS to concede that your money is not "income" as defined
              in the statutes they are empowered to execute and administer.

            • Nick
              ... wrote: Angela is correct in her post, that the IRS will ... Estates are ficticous entities and do not have constitutional rights. They ASSUME you are a
              Message 6 of 21 , Nov 29 5:39 PM
                --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Marsha" <thebreaze@s...>
                wrote:
                Angela is correct in her post, that the IRS will
                > NOT discuss constitutional issues-- but it's because they are not
                > supposed to. For them to have authority to even communicate with
                > you, you must have already stepped across the threshhold of
                > determining you are a "taxpayer".

                Estates are ficticous entities and do not have constitutional rights.

                They ASSUME you are a taxpayer automatically, just
                > because they received some form of information submitted to them
                on
                > THEIR form (W-2, 1099, or report from a bank or other financial
                > institution).


                All these forms are tax class 5, estate and gift tax class forms.



                >Unless you give them "constructive knowledge" that
                > their assumption is erroneous, and then you must be prepared to
                take
                > the issue to a federal court (NOT the Tax Court!!)

                this is where the courts say your argument is frivolous unless you
                really know who the subject of the tax is.
              • Scott
                Marsha, How would you go about giving constructive notice to the IRS that all the W-2, W-4, 1099, 941, 940 forms you sent as a business owner where a mistake
                Message 7 of 21 , Dec 1, 2003
                  Marsha,
                  How would you go about giving constructive notice to the IRS that all the
                  W-2, W-4, 1099, 941, 940 forms you sent as a business owner where a mistake
                  that you just learned after reading the code that you are not a federal
                  employer, nor were you authorized to withhold nor did you accept w-4, nor
                  are you a GUAM, Virgin Islands, or Puerto Rico Company, nor are you in a
                  territory subject to the United States Government but are only subject to
                  the State and United States of America government?
                  Scott Williams
                  Denver, Colorado
                • Marsha Breazeale
                  Ficticious entities do, indeed, have constitutional rights. And an estate taxable for the federal tax on incomes must be triggered by the event of DEATH of
                  Message 8 of 21 , Dec 2, 2003
                    Ficticious entities do, indeed, have constitutional rights. And an estate taxable for the federal tax on incomes must be triggered by the event of DEATH of the testator. The subject of the tax is not a "who" but a "what".

                    NICK WROTE:
                    Estates are ficticous entities and do not have constitutional rights.

                    All these forms are tax class 5, estate and gift tax class forms.

                    this is where the courts say your argument is frivolous unless you
                    really know who the subject of the tax is.
                  • Marsha Breazeale
                    I do that every January for the preceding year, using a Declaration of Monetary Receipts which I have developed and use exclusively for this purpose. Please
                    Message 9 of 21 , Dec 2, 2003
                      I do that every January for the preceding year, using a "Declaration of Monetary Receipts" which I have developed and use exclusively for this purpose.

                      Please email me at thebreaze@... and I will email you the template and instructions for it, no charge.

                      Thanks.

                      Marsha

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Scott [mailto:scott@...]
                      Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 12:22 PM
                      To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: To my good freind Marsha


                      Marsha,
                      How would you go about giving constructive notice to the IRS that all the
                      W-2, W-4, 1099, 941, 940 forms you sent as a business owner where a mistake
                    • Rob
                      Ok guys, I’ll be sending this to my “employer” for the past year and the coming one, let me know what you think and if I need any corrections? You may
                      Message 10 of 21 , Dec 4, 2003

                        Ok guys, I’ll be sending this to my “employer” for the past year and the coming one, let me know what you think and if I need any corrections? You may use/change it for your own needs, Rob NJ. Here it is :

                        <<NAME/ Address/ City/ State/ ZIP>>

                        DATE Certified Mail No.

                        <<Company Name/ Dept./ Attn: Official/ Address/ City/ State/ Zip>>

                        Re: W-2 Form for the year 2002

                         

                        Dear Sir or Madam:

                         

                        I am writing in regards to the above W-2 form from <<Company Name>> and it is not correct. <<Company Name>> needs to correct it and send the replacement to the IRS so that it will be credited and I refunded, the amounts erroneously and illegally taken from my remuneration.

                         

                        I, <<NAME>>, am a Citizen of the United States of America, in that I was naturalized in the State of (*****), (*****) County, on (*****). My present home residence is as specifically stated above, within the United States of America and not abroad as defined and delineated within the Internal Revenue Code.

                         

                        <<Company Name>> is not aware of, and I hope it does not ignore, the provisions of 26 U.S.C. § 3401(a), as I state that my address shown above is my legal address, is not abroad and thus not outside of the United States of America under the internal revenue laws, and therefore the remuneration paid to me by <<Company Name>> does not constitute "Wages" as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 3401(a), and cannot be legally withheld from me under any federal income tax law including § 3402.

                         

                        The remuneration paid by <<Company Name>> is excluded from gross income under § 911 of the Internal Revenue Code, entitled "CITIZENS OR RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES LIVING ABROAD", and is therefore not defined as "Wages" as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 3401(a)(8)(A)(i):


                        § 3401. Definitions

                        Wages

                        For purposes of this chapter, the term "wages" means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid--

                        (8)(A) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof)-- (i) performed by a citizen of the United States if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income under section 911;

                         

                        Since my remuneration is excluded from gross income under § 911, it is therefore not subject to withholding under 26 U.S.C. § 3402.

                        In light of the admission by the Secretary of the Treasury that the only income of U.S. Citizens stated as not exempt, is income included in gross income under § 911 as set forth in 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii):


                        (iii) Income that is not considered tax exempt.

                        The following items are not considered to be exempt, eliminated, or
                        excluded income
                        and, thus, may have expenses, losses, or other deductions
                        allocated and apportioned to them:

                        (A) In the case of a foreign taxpayer (including a foreign sales corporation (FSC)) computing its effectively connected income, gross income (whether domestic or foreign source) which is not effectively connected to the conduct of a
                        United States trade or business;

                        (B) In computing the combined taxable income of a DISC or FSC and its related supplier, the gross income of a DICS or a FSC;

                        (C) For all purposes under subchapter N of the Code, including the computation of combined taxable income of a possessions corporation and its affiliates under section 936(h), the gross income of a possessions corporation for which a credit is allowed under section 936(a); and

                        (D) Foreign earned income as defined in section 911 and the regulations thereunder (however, the rules of section 1.911-6 do not require the allocation and apportionment of certain deductions, including home mortgage interest, to foreign earned income for purposes of determining the deductions disallowed under section 911(d)(6)).

                         

                        Since the above items are NOT exempt, eliminated, or excluded from gross income, they are to be included in gross income. Since my remuneration paid by <<Company Name>> is not in the above list, it is therefore exempt, eliminated or excluded from gross income.

                        The remuneration paid to me cannot be legally withheld pursuant to § 3402, as it does not legally constitute "wages" under § 3401(a), and it does not legally constitute "gross income" pursuant to the regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Treasury and the specifically cited § 911, identifying the only time U.S. Citizens have income from U.S. sources.

                        <<Company Name’s>> contention with the W-2, which has not been filed under penalty of perjury, is that I have received "wages" to be included in "gross income". From the above, you can see this is false, and now it is shown that the W-2 is mere hearsay. It is time for <<Company Name>> and all other U.S. Corporations to read the law and stop following hearsay advice of accountants, lawyers, and the IRS.

                        <<Company Name>>is a corporation founded in a State of the Union, and not within any federal territory or abroad. I am a U.S. Citizen, living and working in a state of the Union, and not within any federal territory or abroad. My remuneration cannot be construed as foreign earned income, unless I claim a foreign tax home pursuant to § 911. Therefore, none of the remuneration paid to me by <<Company Name>>is includible in "gross income" according to the Laws and Regulations of the United States.

                        It is imperative that <<Company Name>>send the corrected W-2 which show ZERO as the amount of "Wages", "Social security wages", "Medicare Wages" and "State wages" paid to me for the year 1993, and the amounts that were withheld remaining the same.

                        You now see that the remuneration paid to me by <<Company Name>>cannot be construed as "wages" as defined in § 3121(a) or § 3401(a). Therefore, <<Company Name>>has no liability to withhold taxes under § 3403, and has been withholding my property without any authority of law. Due to this, <<Company Name>>has the opportunity and Administrative remedy to obtain the return of my money to me by correction of the W-2 and 941 return for the year that I had worked for it.

                        By admission of <<Company Name>> on the W-2, which I have shown to contain hearsay false statements, the amounts withheld from me must be returned to me. The corrected W-2 and 941 Form will provide the means for <<Company Name>>to provide me my money that it erroneously sent to the IRS.

                        Should <<Company Name>> doubt this, I have materials regarding a company which applied this argument and reasoning to 3 years worth of its information returns, to the amount of 2.3 Million dollars. That is a count of about 100 W-2 and over 400 1099 Forms were changed to claim no "gross income" or "items" thereof were paid for any of the years in question.

                        You will see the company is a multi-million dollar business, but what you cannot see is that this individual has held a General Accounting Degree for over 30 years, and therefore has known the IRS system to be the same as everyone else has. Nevertheless, due to corporate bureaucratic failures he found himself in a situation where sheepish compliance was no longer a viable option.

                        In this process he proved that the standard operating procedure of corporations to comply with IRS reporting requirements were not necessary, as the argument that he presented proves U.S. Corporations paying U.S. Citizens living in the U.S. are not earning "gross income" as defined by law.

                        I expect to be provided one of the following within twenty (20) days of receipt of this letter:

                        evidence from <<Company Name>>that it has filed the appropriate documentation with the appropriate IRS office, and thus it is refunding the money withheld from me immediately; or;

                        notification that it refuses to follow these laws as written, and provides me with notification of the actual laws that it is complying with as the former laws cited from Chapter 24 of the IRC are substantiated by the said employer refund material to entitle me to all of my money; or;

                        in order to assure that <<Company Name>> is not made party to any future federal litigation, I seek a signed affidavit, from the responsible official with <<Company Name>> who is responsible for the W-2 forms, explaining that the company is not following any law, is not willing to comply with the law in relationship to U.S. Citizens and residents as proved by acceptable to the IRS in the stated employer refund material, is following no law, because it is under fear, duress, and coercion of the IRS, and that duress is the sole reason for its actions.

                         

                         

                        Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

                         

                        ______________________

                        <<Name>>

                         

                        cc: Department of the Treasury

                        Internal Revenue Service

                        <<district>> Service Center

                        Attn: Chief <<Name>>

                        Attn: IRS District Director

                        <<address>>

                        <<city, state, zip>>

                         

                         

                         

                         

                      • Richard Johnson
                        Hi all On Thursday 04 December 2003 18:12, Rob wrote: Ok guys, I’ll be sending this to my “employer” for the past year and the coming one, let me
                        Message 11 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                          Hi all

                          On Thursday 04 December 2003 18:12, Rob wrote:
                          " Ok guys, I’ll be sending this to my “employer” for the past year and the
                          " coming one, let me know what you think and if I need any corrections?

                          I wish you the best Rob. Please let us know how it goes.

                          A few years back, I sent a similar letter to several "employer"s demaning
                          changes to W-2's. Of three letters, only one was answered. The other two
                          were ignored. (Guess whose side the IRS took on those.) The third was
                          answered by a company attorney who siad basically, "Your argument is
                          onconvincing, and so we will continue to do what the IRS tells us to."

                          Eventually, after being screwed around by the three-letter goons long enough
                          for their hidden assessments to default, I wound up paing their tribute.

                          Another time, I had an employer write back telling me that even though I was
                          a Citizen and not liable for withholding on subtitle A taxes, I was still
                          liable for subtitle C taxes. I never figured out how to deal with that
                          one, instead leaving the job for a different one.

                          I'm sure that Marsha and Mon Tag and a few othes have some good thoughts on
                          this; what really works and what doesn't.

                          Again, good l**k. Here are some specific thoughts.


                          " I am writing in regards to the above W-2 form from <<Company Name>> and
                          " it is not correct. <<Company Name>> needs to correct it and send the
                          " replacement to the IRS so that it will be credited and I refunded, the
                          " amounts erroneously and illegally taken from my remuneration.

                          Do you want to handle the cancellation of your W-4 at this time or in a
                          separate letter?


                          " <<Company Name>> is not aware of, and I hope it does not ignore, the
                          " provisions of 26 U.S.C. § 3401(a), as I state that my address shown
                          " above is my legal address, is not abroad and thus not outside of the
                          " United States of America under the internal revenue laws, and therefore
                          " the remuneration paid to me by <<Company Name>> does not constitute
                          " "Wages" as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 3401(a), and cannot be legally
                          " withheld from me under any federal income tax law including § 3402.

                          Additional points: Is company X an authorized withholding agent for the
                          department ot treasury? Can they produce a copy of their certificate? (I
                          think that's 7701, but don't hold me to it.) If they are authorized, then
                          they must surely follow the rules. If they are not authorized, then they
                          are stealing.


                          " § 3401. Definitions
                          " Wages
                          " For purposes of this chapter, the term "wages" means ....

                          Nicely done. Will you also include the definition of "employer" as the US
                          gov't?


                          " <<Company Name’s>> contention with the W-2, which has not been filed
                          " under penalty of perjury, is that I have received "wages" to be included
                          " in "gross income". From the above, you can see this is false, and now it
                          " is shown that the W-2 is mere hearsay. It is time for <<Company Name>>
                          " and all other U.S. Corporations to read the law and stop following
                          " hearsay advice of accountants, lawyers, and the IRS.

                          Is this relevant or needed in your opening salvo? Might it be better to
                          wait until they say "no"?


                          " It is imperative that <<Company Name>>send the corrected W-2 which show
                          " ZERO as the amount of "Wages", "Social security wages", "Medicare Wages"
                          " and "State wages" paid to me for the year 1993, and the amounts that
                          " were withheld remaining the same.

                          If they are novices, they won't believe that zero for title A means zero for
                          title C as well.


                          " By admission of <<Company Name>> on the W-2, which I have shown to
                          " contain hearsay false statements, the amounts withheld from me must be
                          " returned to me. The corrected W-2 and 941 Form will provide the means
                          " for <<Company Name>>to provide me my money that it erroneously sent to
                          " the IRS.

                          To show that it's hearsay, you should get them to admit that none of them
                          there has any first-hand knowledge of your status, only what you have told
                          them. For them to believe you initially, and then claim they can't believe
                          you later is absurd.


                          " Should <<Company Name>> doubt this, I have materials regarding a company
                          " which applied this argument and reasoning to 3 years worth of its
                          " information returns, to the amount of 2.3 Million dollars. That is a
                          " count of about 100 W-2 and over 400 1099 Forms were changed to claim no
                          " "gross income" or "items" thereof were paid for any of the years in
                          " question.
                          " You will see the company is a multi-million dollar business, but what
                          " you cannot see is that this individual has held a General Accounting
                          " Degree for over 30 years, and therefore has known the IRS system to be
                          " the same as everyone else has. Nevertheless, due to corporate
                          " bureaucratic failures he found himself in a situation where sheepish
                          " compliance was no longer a viable option.
                          " In this process he proved that the standard operating procedure of
                          " corporations to comply with IRS reporting requirements were not
                          " necessary, as the argument that he presented proves U.S. Corporations
                          " paying U.S. Citizens living in the U.S. are not earning "gross income"
                          " as defined by law.

                          That's interesting. Could you point us at that info. (In case I ever want
                          ot use it.)

                          " I expect to be provided one of the following within twenty (20) days of
                          " receipt of this letter:

                          Calendar days or business days?

                          " in order to assure that <<Company Name>> is not made party to any future
                          " federal litigation, I seek a signed affidavit,

                          Remove everrything ni this sentece before "a signed affadavit ... ". Don't
                          ever even get close to threatening to sue if there's a chance you won't.
                          They'll hurt you later. Just demant the affadavit as al alternative.

                          Jut out of curiosity, what's your plan if they provide the affidavit saying
                          they are under duress of the IRS?
                          --
                          Richard Johnson richard@...
                          " Taxes are commonly a calamity for the people and a nightmare for the
                          " government. For the former they are always excessive; for the latter
                          " they are never enough, never too much." -Juan de Mariana (1535-1624)
                        • j kocourek
                          Consider including plenty of adult diapers. Your actions will mark you as a PROBLEM WORKER, cause your company to be scrutinized by a government agency, cause
                          Message 12 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                            Consider including plenty of adult diapers.

                            Your actions will mark you as a PROBLEM WORKER, cause your company
                            to be scrutinized by a government agency, cause your company more
                            work, go AGAINST EVERYTHING their CPA's and lawyers were taught
                            about income taxes (both are paid big money for advice and actually
                            know squat about income taxes).

                            In your "threatning" and "insulting" letter, you will effectively
                            tell the management that they are STUPID, violating the workers
                            civil rights, stealing form their workers, conducting conversion of
                            their worker's property and they have thrown away lots of company
                            funds to comply with IRS demands. You will effectively tell the
                            payroll department they are stealing from worker's payroll, don't
                            know their jobs and should be fired.

                            To top it off, as most businesses go, they do not want the attention
                            any government agency and whether or not their books are perfect
                            they FEAR IRS retribution.

                            Expect company to dump you at the first opportunity using any other
                            reason except the withholding. Additionally, you will be
                            blacklisted from working at that company EVER AGAIN!



                            Unless, you run the company, keep a low profile. Give them an
                            exempt form W-4 or one with 9 exemptions. Forget what you lost from
                            past withholding. They won't bother you as long as they are "fat
                            dumb and happy". This is one of the times that being right and
                            telling the truth will get you SCREWED.


                            George






                            --------------------
                            Eurotel Data Nonstop - neomezený přístup na internet za 649,- (s DPH 681,45) Kč měsíčně! http://user.centrum.cz/redir.php?url=http://www.eurotel.cz/site/cz/servicesAndTariffs/specialOffer.html?list=34995
                          • John
                            This is the one I wrote - its short and sweet - John Date: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: [employer] Payroll Department Address...... From: [Your Name] Address & SS #
                            Message 13 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                              This is the one I wrote - its short and sweet -
                              John

                              Date: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

                              To:
                              [employer]
                              Payroll Department
                              Address......

                              From:
                              [Your Name]
                              Address & SS #

                              Re: Error on W2 Form

                              Dear Sir or Madam:

                              I have worked for [Employer] for about 2.5 years now and
                              have gotten two W-2's that have had errors on them for each of the
                              last two tax years. The error centers around box number 1 on the W-
                              2. Wages in the tax structure of the United States is a defined
                              legal term that has several meanings depending on which type
                              of "wage" tax the government is referring to.
                              Wages in boxes 3 and 5 of the W-2 are defined in 26 U.S.C. §
                              3121 and it's corresponding regulations in the Code of Federal
                              Regulations. These Social Security and Medicare wages are paid and
                              deducted from payments of wages as defined at § 3121 under the
                              authority of § 3101. The regulations specify the maximum Social
                              Security payment each year. The regulations also indicate that
                              there is no maximum on Medicare. [employer] or its payroll
                              contractor is not making any errors in the Medicare or Social
                              Security computation. However, there are certain exemptions for the
                              Wages as defined in box 1 of the W-2, depending on your citizenship
                              and where the money was earned.
                              Box 1 wages on the W-2 are defined by 26 U.S.C. § 3401.
                              This definition of "wages" describes the types of payments that are
                              to be included in box 1 part of the W-2. Because the United States
                              government taxes many different people under many different
                              circumstances the tax laws are quite complicated. This is just
                              another example of the complicity of these laws. A persons place of
                              birth does have a bearing on their tax liability in this country.
                              This statement is supported by the exemption from the definition
                              of "wages" for a citizen of the United States for payments received
                              while working for a non-governmental company in this country.
                              Please see the attached copy of the definition of wages. Also
                              notice the many exemptions that apply to definition of wages under §
                              3401. One of these exceptions is the basis for this letter. If you
                              will give the exception at 26 U.S.C. § 3401 (a)(8)(A)(i) a good read
                              you will see that -
                              "Sec. 3401. - Definitions
                              (a) Wages
                              For purposes of this chapter, the term ''wages'' means all
                              remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for
                              services performed by an employee for his employer, including the
                              cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any
                              medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include
                              remuneration paid -

                              (8)(A)(i) for services for an employer (other than the United States
                              or any agency thereof) - performed by a citizen of the United States
                              if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is
                              reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from
                              gross income under section 911;"

                              As you can see from this exception to the definition of the
                              term "wages", payments that could reasonably be expected to be
                              excluded from gross income under section 911 would not be included
                              in the computation of wages in block 1 on the W-2, if you are a
                              citizen of the UnitedStates. If you are not aware what Section 911
                              governs in the tax laws of the United States this statement would
                              mean nothing. Well I looked up section 911 and determined that
                              section 911 is the controlling laws governing foreign earned
                              income. As an employee of [Employer] working and living in [State]
                              I do not feel that I would be subject to any foreign earned income
                              tax rules for working and getting paid in [State] by an [State]
                              Corporation. I also feel that [Employer] should be "reasonable to
                              believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income
                              under section 911." Because of this exception in the tax laws I am
                              entitled to have my citizenship recognized by [Employer] along with
                              the advantages that the citizenship affords.
                              I know that [Employer] would not intentionally discriminate against
                              me because of my national origin. None of the money paid to me by
                              [Employer] would qualify as gross income under section 911.
                              Therefore, under the current circumstances surrounding the money
                              paid to me by [Employer], the amount that should be entered into
                              block one on the W-2 should be "0". [Employer] is required under
                              the tax laws to report to the Federal Government in a way that
                              complies with the law as they are written.
                              [Employer] established that I was a citizen of the United
                              States before I went to work. Therefore, I am entitled to the
                              rights and privileges of every citizen of the United States. When
                              [employer] reports that I have received payments that have been
                              summed up in block one of the W-2, [Employer] creates a presumption
                              on the part of the Federal Government that I have received foreign
                              earned wages. This presumption creates a hardship on me that I
                              should not have to deal with.
                              I realize that all payroll folks use the pamphlets published
                              by the IRS to guide them in the preparation of the different payroll
                              reporting forms. These pamphlets are not the law passed by the
                              United States Congress and the IRS will readily admit that. The IRS
                              pamphlets do not reflect the detail of the statutes and regulations
                              and this exception to my particular circumstances is clearly
                              reflected in the statute. I will include a cut and pasted
                              reproduction of the statute passed by Congress but I suggest that
                              you have your legal department check the cite for accuracy.
                              The tax laws are written in a manner that makes them nearly
                              impossible for the layman to understand. If you convert the
                              discriptive phrases in the statute to a sentance that you can
                              understand the law would be much easier to understand. With this in
                              mind the statute I am bringing to your attention would go more or
                              less like this.

                              If you're a citizen of the United States and the money your paid for
                              working cannot be included in a foreign earned income tax return
                              then the payments do not qualify as wages under 26 U.S.C. 3401.

                              If after you read the information supplied here and the
                              statutes that govern this particular situation and you do not agree
                              with me, please supply me with the statutes or regulations that
                              would overrule my legal position or your legal basis for refusing my
                              request.

                              Thank you in advance,
                              [Sign Here]






                              --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <supra94tt@c...> wrote:
                              > Ok guys, I'll be sending this to my "employer" for the past year
                              and the
                              > coming one, let me know what you think and if I need any
                              corrections?
                              > You may use/change it for your own needs, Rob NJ. Here it is :
                            • Margot A DeArman
                              Greetings Rob, etal, Nice little self rebutted ambiguous contrary document... will not accomplish the job it is intended for, but will alert the employer and
                              Message 14 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                                Greetings Rob, etal,

                                Nice little self rebutted ambiguous contrary document... will not
                                accomplish the job
                                it is intended for, but will alert the employer and the IRS that you do
                                not know
                                and understand what you are doing! Too may entrapping terms like capital
                                C
                                "Citizen", the term "of", the use of "State of", instead of Ohio state or
                                whatever.
                                "Resident" is another one, and we will not even get into the "domestic
                                address"
                                And so on! I did this same stuff in the early 80's and it caused more
                                trouble that
                                you can imagine. Finally found a IRS "Catalog of Forms, Letters &
                                Notices" in
                                the GPO listings and ordered it! It lists all the forms, letter and
                                notices the IRS
                                uses and sends out and who can send them and what they are used for!
                                I have 2 different copies and I think they quit printing it about the
                                time they
                                passed the Taxpayer Bill of Rights.

                                [Bear's Note: I sell that off my web page www.irs-armory.com: http://www.freedivorceforms.net/standringorder.php
                                It is $39.00]

                                As for filing documents on your employer...
                                Why not use their Form? The one specifically design to tell the IRS and
                                your
                                employer that you are in law "foreign" to the "United States" as defined
                                in
                                26 USC 7701.

                                That form is the Form W-8 Certificate of Foreign Status. What??? The
                                employer
                                will not accept your claim of being foreign to DC? Call the IRS and tell
                                them
                                that the employer will not honor their Form. Or just tell the employer
                                you
                                will be filing a complaint with the IRS for their failure to honor an IRS
                                Form.

                                Problem over.... except when you file a Form 1040 at the end of the
                                year...
                                The proper Form would be the 1040NR for "nonresident". See, they left you
                                a way out, but you just have to find the proper Forms.

                                Doe volente,
                                James DeArman

                                On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 03:12:23 +0100 "Rob" <supra94tt@...> writes:
                                Ok guys, I’ll be sending this to my “employer” for the past year and the
                                coming one, let me know what you think and if I need any corrections? You
                                may use/change it for your own needs, Rob NJ. Here it is :
                                <<NAME/ Address/ City/ State/ ZIP>>
                              • Margot A DeArman
                                Greetings, Serious BAD Advice here: ... A Form W-4 is for Citizens of the United States . Exempt or not it is NOT the proper Form. Use a Form W-8
                                Message 15 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                                  Greetings,
                                   
                                  Serious BAD Advice here:
                                  On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 18:29:03 +0100 "j kocourek" <jkoc@...> writes:
                                  >
                                  Give them an exempt form W-4 or one with 9 exemptions
                                  > Forget what you lost from
                                  > past withholding.  They won't
                                  bother you as long as they are "fat
                                  > dumb and happy".  This is one
                                  of the times that being right and
                                  > telling the truth will get you
                                  SCREWED.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  A Form W-4 is for "Citizens of the United States". Exempt or not it is
                                  NOT the proper Form.  Use a Form W-8 "Certificate of foreign Status"
                                  and do it according to its instructions. Then you can complain to the IRS
                                  that the company will not honor their Forms... and watch the scrambling!
                                  And you can go back 3 years.

                                  Deo volente,
                                  James DeArman
                                • Nick
                                  Pardon my little communique, but, I did this route back in 1994. The IRS was rather pleased to take my W-8 but told my employer to extract 30 percent
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                                    Pardon my little communique, but, I did this route back in 1994. The
                                    IRS was rather pleased to take my W-8 but told my employer to
                                    extract 30 percent withholding for being a non resident alien.

                                    The problem you have is that your realtionship with your SS# MAKES
                                    you a "Citizen of the United States" and therefore the W-4 IS the
                                    proper form to use. However, it might behoove you to use an inlieu W-
                                    4 that does not have your SS# on it beforehand claiming your proper
                                    statuts.

                                    I would contact We the people and get one. My concern is that they
                                    butchered that document. Go to the original people that made that
                                    document and get it. Ask Chancellor at Zeroincomefilers for the
                                    original of that.




                                    --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Margot A DeArman
                                    <lookin2c@j...> wrote:

                                    > A Form W-4 is for "Citizens of the United States". Exempt or not
                                    it is
                                    > NOT the proper Form. Use a Form W-8 "Certificate of foreign
                                    Status"
                                    > and do it according to its instructions. Then you can complain to
                                    the IRS
                                    > that the company will not honor their Forms... and watch the
                                    scrambling!
                                    > And you can go back 3 years.
                                    >
                                    > Deo volente,
                                    > James DeArman
                                  • Steve
                                    I have to disagree with what George wrote below. In my humble opinion, it is the employers (for most of us) that are the real problem to an effective tax
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Dec 5, 2003
                                      I have to disagree with what George wrote below. In my humble opinion, it is the employers (for most of us) that are the real problem to an effective tax revolt. This is where they have us by the gonads.

                                      I work for a large 15000 employee corporation. I talked personally to the manager of payroll, and I am able to 'read between the lines' of what he told me. Here is it in summary.

                                      "Turn in a W4 with over 10 exemptions or claiming exempt status and they will report this to the IRS within 3 months. Also, someone with the company will come and 'consult' with you to verify if your high exemptions or your exempt status is 'accurate'. If not accurate, they will consider you a 'tax evader'. He didn't directly say what would happen after that, but he said 'please don't do this, it will only cause you problems'. He did claim that the company would be fiduciarily liable if you got caught and jailed and couldn't pay the taxes, then the company would have to.'

                                      I got the distinct impression that if a person filed a W4 of this type, their days at the company would be numbered, and the reason for termination would have NOTHING to do with taxes. Plus my state is an 'at will' employment state.

                                      What will I have gained if I lose my job? It is called cutting off my nose to spite my face, and THAT is where the IRS has us by the balls.

                                      Steve
                                      <George wrote: Unless, you run the company, keep a low profile. Give them an
                                      exempt form W-4 or one with 9 exemptions. Forget what you lost from
                                      past withholding. They won't bother you as long as they are "fat
                                      dumb and happy".>
                                    • Dave Miner
                                      Steve -- You have made an important point, and one that some on this board seem to not be aware of. To complete a Form W-4 with a large amount of exemptions
                                      Message 18 of 21 , Dec 6, 2003
                                        Steve --
                                         
                                        You have made an important point, and one that some on this board seem to not be aware of.
                                         
                                        To complete a Form W-4 with a large amount of "exemptions" is fraudulent.  The Employer is required by the IRC to ship these fraudulent Forms W-4 to a specific office (I forget, but it seems to me it is the Philadelphia office).  The IRS has the option of charging you a $500 penalty for submitting a fraudulent Form with an intent to evade paying taxes.    The IRS has trained employers (perhaps correctly) to see a fraudulent Form W-4 as an illegal activity to evade paying taxes, and has implied (definitely wrongly) that the employer could get into trouble if they have more than one of these "criminals" working for them.
                                         
                                        So a Form W-4 with 9 or 99 exemptions will only get you into trouble, and may get you fired.
                                         
                                        On the other hand, an "exempt" Form W-4 is an entirely different issue.  The IRS will often challenge these exempt Forms W-4 somewhere between 3 and 6 months after receiving them from your employer.  Most of my clients have escaped IRS attention in this, and it seems that after 6 months the IRS doesn't do anything.  However, within the 3-6 month timeframe, the IRS will often charge you the same $500 penalty and tell your employer to deduct maximum amounts from your paycheck.  Then you have a long process of education to help your employer understand that it is breaking the law to ignore your exempt Form W-4 and follow the IRS instructions.  And, as has been pointed out by some here, putting the employer in a postion of obeying the IRS or obeying the employee often results in the employee becoming unemployed.
                                         
                                        Still, as some have pointed out here, signing ANY IRS form declares you to be a taxpayer (subject to the so-called income tax laws).  You cannot claim to be a non-taxpayer (not subject to the so-called income tax laws) and then complete and sign taxpayer forms.  This dichotomy carries with it certain jurisdiction problems, and a difficult battle.  It is a winnable battle, but it will be difficult.
                                         
                                        Alternative strategies are so unknown to employers that you must hold several hours of training classes in order to educate your employer to the point that you can exercise these alternatives without getting fired.
                                         
                                        The bottom line is simple -- it costs to exercise your rights.  Who was it that said, "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong?"
                                         
                                        There is no risk-free means to resist the IRS.
                                         
                                        Yours in freedom,
                                         
                                        ----- Original Message -----
                                        From: Steve
                                        Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 11:09 PM
                                        Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] One way to handle your employer...W-2 rebuttal

                                        I work for a large 15000 employee corporation.  I talked personally to the manager of payroll, and I am able to 'read between the lines' of what he told me.  Here is it in summary.

                                        "Turn in a W4 with over 10 exemptions or claiming exempt status and they will report this to the IRS within 3 months.  Also, someone with the company will come and 'consult' with you to verify if your high exemptions or your exempt status is 'accurate'.  If not accurate, they will consider you a 'tax evader'.  He didn't directly say what would happen after that, but he said 'please don't do this, it will only cause you problems'.  He did claim that the company would be fiduciarily liable if you got caught and jailed and couldn't pay the taxes, then the company would have to.'
                                      • Alan Bacon (sui Juris)
                                        No one cares what the law is any more. Might makes right! Here is an Asseveration of Status (W-8) but it, too, gets you nowhere! Asseveration of Status
                                        Message 19 of 21 , Dec 7, 2003
                                          No one cares what the "law" is any more. Might makes right!
                                          Here is an Asseveration of Status (W-8) but it, too, gets you nowhere!

                                          Asseveration of Status
                                          (Substitute W-8 Form)

                                          1. I am of lawful age and I am competent to make this Asseveration of
                                          Status.

                                          2. I am a non-immigrant, non-naturalized, non-resident alien, non-
                                          taxpayer, natural born free American, Sovereign man and an inhabitant
                                          of a geographical area in a State of the American Union known as the
                                          Texas Republic.

                                          3. I am an American and nonresident alien with respect to the "United
                                          States" *(ie, the District of Columbia, Guam, American Samoa, Virgin
                                          Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, etc.) with no income
                                          effectively connected with a trade or business (26 USC 7701(a) (26))
                                          within the "United States" (government).

                                          4. I have never knowingly, willingly, voluntarily and intentionally
                                          inhabited the state of the forum (Forum Contractus in Latin).

                                          5. I have never been involved in any taxable "trade or business"
                                          activity under 27 Code of Federal Regulations pursuant to commerce in
                                          Alcohol, Tobacco Products and Firearms, State or Federal.

                                          6. That this Asseveration of Status is to be used in lieu of Form W-
                                          8, specifically;

                                          "Use Form W-8 or a substitute form containing a substantially
                                          similar statement to tell the payor . . . that you are a nonresident
                                          alien individual, foreign entity, or exempt foreign person not
                                          subject to certain U.S. information return, reporting or back-up
                                          withholding rules."

                                          * Volume 20: Corpus Juris Secundum PP 1785:
                                          "The United States Government is a foreign corporation with respect
                                          to a State."

                                          Sincerely;

                                          www.taxtruth4u.com has other information and recommends a company
                                          that only takes 7% to administer the paperwork. EXEMPT in block 7
                                          only works when you have SS and MC taken out (10.51%) . . . so, one
                                          way or another, someone ELSE get some of your "compensation for
                                          labor".

                                          At one point I found out the definition OF "compensation for labor" @
                                          26CFR9.22b-1; "Compensation for labor is a direct item of income not
                                          taxable by the federal Government." But, do a search on the internet
                                          and you get "Reserved" for that cite (?)

                                          Crime Pays !!!
                                        • j kocourek
                                          Dave, I know of no IRC section(s) which require anyone to send a W-4 to the IRS for review or apporval. I have seen such demand in the Circular E publication
                                          Message 20 of 21 , Dec 10, 2003
                                            Dave,

                                            I know of no IRC section(s) which require anyone to send a W-4 to the IRS for review or apporval. I have seen such demand in the Circular E publication and in that demand they want a copy of all exempt W-4s and ones with 10 or more exemptions.

                                            If I am wrong, please correct me.


                                            ______________________________________________________________
                                            > Od: "Dave Miner" <dminer@...>
                                            > Komu: <tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com>
                                            > CC:
                                            > Datum: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 13:45:09 -0500
                                            > Předmět: Re: [tips_and_tricks] One way to handle your employer...W-2 rebuttal
                                            >
                                            > Steve --
                                            >
                                            > You have made an important point, and one that some on this board seem to not be aware of.
                                            >
                                            > To complete a Form W-4 with a large amount of "exemptions" is fraudulent. The Employer is required by the IRC to ship these fraudulent Forms W-4 to a specific office (I forget, but it seems to me it is the Philadelphia office).

                                            ------- Snipped -----------

                                            --------------------
                                            Dejte svému starému telefonu kopačky! SIEMENS C62 od 1977 Kč www.oskar.cz http://user.centrum.cz/redir.php?url=http://www.oskarmobil.cz/handsets/hs_view1.php3?nob=1&lang=cz&hs_id=75&ii=1
                                          • Dave Miner
                                            j -- The same section of the IRC (Section 3402) that required exempt Forms W-4 to be sent to the IRS also requires the employer to forward to it any Forms W-4
                                            Message 21 of 21 , Dec 10, 2003
                                              j --

                                              The same section of the IRC (Section 3402) that required exempt Forms W-4 to
                                              be sent to the IRS also requires the employer to forward to it any Forms W-4
                                              that the employer has reason to believe might be "questionable." The
                                              subsection for the exempt form is 3402(n), but I forget the subsection off
                                              the top of my head for the questionable form. The employer does not sent
                                              the typical Form W-4 to the IRS, only questionable ones and exempt ones.

                                              I would look up the subsection for you but I am fighting a Windows XP worm
                                              problem right now.

                                              Yours in Freedom,

                                              Dave Miner
                                              www.FreedomSite.net
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.