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

Re: Fw: [tips_and_tricks] Legal Fictions

Expand Messages
  • Carrol
    Wow - that s just like saying Because I said so . If it is all a crock, why is there this provision in the IRM regarding the 1040 form: IRM 9.4.4.2.1.3
    Message 1 of 16 , Apr 2, 2005
      Wow - that's just like saying "Because I said so".

      If it is all a crock, why is there this provision in the
      IRM regarding the 1040 form:

      "IRM 9.4.4.2.1.3 (01-30-2001)
      The Individual Master File
      2..  The returns filed include Income Tax Forms 1040, 1040A, 1040NR, 1040C,
      1040SS, 1040PR, and Estimated Tax Returns 1040ES.  Each taxpayer account
      has an entity module and one or more tax modules.  The entity module contains data
      which describes the taxpayer as an entity and which applies to all records
      of the taxpayer."

      So according to this paragraph, the following statement becomes fact:
      The 1040 form is for use by an entity.

      I have never received any correspondence from the IRS addressed to my proper name.
      It has always been all captial letters.  According to this provision in the IRM,
      they are addressing an entity.  Do you have proof otherwise???

      Carrol


      John Wilde wrote:
      No.  It's a crock.

      g'day
      John Wilde

      Greg Knapp wrote:
      Is their any truth to this concern that if a person is named in ALL CAPS, that person is now a corporation, and the real human being is some kind of trustee of the ALL CAPS ENTITY NAMED?



    • John Wilde
      Yes there is a social security trust. There is just no trust fund. What is being held in the trust is something in the neighborhood of 20 trillion in notes
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 2, 2005
        Yes there is a social security trust. There is just no trust fund.
        What is being held in the trust is something in the neighborhood of 20
        trillion in notes executed in the name of the United States. These
        notes are used to generate more FRNS and put them into circulation to
        fund what are known as OBE's (Off Budget Enterprises). The trust was
        created by Chapter 666 of the 1939 Statutes-at-Large (Vol 53 of the
        Statutes-at-Large). In addition to holding the notes, what happens is
        one hundred percent of the FICA withholding each month is automatically
        appropriated and dumped into the trust and paid out to the current
        beneficiaries.

        Congress only created the Trust after the Social Security Act
        survived the constitutional challenges. Had it created the trust and
        earmarked the withholding when Social Security was first adopted, it
        would have been declared unconstitutional just like the first Railroad
        Retirement Act.

        Prior to the creation of the Trust in 1939 Congress had to
        appropriate the monies to be paid to the beneficiaries each and every
        month. Once the Trust was created, the appropriation was done
        automatically without any further act of Congress. Of course this means
        that the withheld amounts are now being earmarked again, which renders
        the FICA withholding unconstitutional, but no one has challenged it
        since the change in the law in 1939.

        g'day
        John Wilde

        Dave Miner wrote:

        >Nick --
        >
        >Excellent and detailed reply. Only problem is you never addressed the ALL
        >CAPs issue, and you are wrong about the trust. There is no SS trust, and
        >never has been.
        >
        >
      • Nick
        ... the ALL ... Sure I did Dave, it was at the bottom of the post if you read it. Your Part of the trust is the part in ALL CAPS not you the human. You are a
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 2, 2005
          --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Miner" <dminer@f...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Nick --
          >
          > Excellent and detailed reply. Only problem is you never addressed
          the ALL
          > CAPs issue,

          Sure I did Dave, it was at the bottom of the post if you read it.
          Your "Part of" the trust is the part in ALL CAPS not you the human.
          You are a seperate entity from the trust yet you are held under 7203
          to file and pay as a fiduciary of the trust under sections 671-677 of
          the code.

          >and you are wrong about the trust. There is no SS trust, and
          > never has been. Lots of politicians use the words because they are
          trying
          > to reassure We The People. But the original Act specifically
          stated that SS
          > was a plain and simple tax with a plain and simple welfare benefit,
          and that
          > the SS revenues went straight into the General Fund of the
          Congress.

          Dave, do not mix money of account not in a trust with no trust
          whatsoever. Consider this...

          Title 42
          § 401. Trust Funds

          (a) Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund There is
          hereby created on the books of the Treasury of the United States a
          trust fund to be known as the "Federal Old-Age and Survivors
          Insurance Trust Fund".

          And here is a 2002 report of the trust fund by the trustees. Here you
          will find who the trustees of the SS trust are...

          www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR00/tr00.pdf


          > But you are absolutely correct about the presumptions. And everyone
          > entitled to receive SS benefits is presumed to be a federal employee
          > entitled to be taxed by the so-called income tax. Unless that
          presumption
          > is rebutted.
          >
          > The problem about rebutting is the IRS Reconstruction Act of 1998.
          Before
          > that Act, rebutting was a fairly simple matter of documenting a
          bunch of
          > court cases and legal references.

          Dave, it is not a matter of what or who the Government says you are,
          it is the documentation that people send in about you. What is sent
          in about you are W-2s and 1099s. These are the specific items that
          say you work for a FEDERAL WAGE. These presumptions have to be
          rebutted and this is where to cut everything off at the knees.

          This is why I am giving credit where credit is due. You need to read
          cracking the code by Pete Hendrikson at www.losthorizons.com. Since
          you get information about you from other people that is false
          information about you, you need to be able to refute these
          presumptions on forms supplied by the IRS for this purpose.
        • John Wilde
          I don t have to explain myself. I have done it time and time and time and time and time and time, etc. again. Go into the archives of this list and the
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 2, 2005
            I don't have to explain myself.  I have done it time and time and time and time and time and time, etc. again.  Go into the archives of this list and the Liberty Tree List, and the legality of the income tax list and the legality of the driver's license list.  I am done explaining why this is a crock.

                However, if you want to go on arguing this useless piece of crap.  Go right ahead, I am not going to stop you.  Then when the gummint comes to you and starts stealing your stuff don't come crying to me.

                If you wish to learn practical means to deal with the IRS then come talk.  Until then.  I have nothing more to say on the matter.  I am going to start treating this list the same way I have begun treating all of the other lists.  You don't exist.

                FWIW, I see nothing in your citation of the manual that mentions anything about your name being in ALL CAPS as being the means for describing you as an entity.  It just says your information will be in an entity module.  It doesn't mean you ARE AN ARTICFICIAL ENTITY.  Guess what? As a man or a woman, you are also an entity - a living entity.  What are you guys going to start doing when these agencies and courts start using upper and lower case as the district courts are beginning to do?  Arizona's US District Court have required all pleadings be in upper an lower case for almost 5 years.  All you have to do is object and the court will issue a simple order to comply with local rule 1.9.  Has nothing to do with whether you are treated as an ARTIFICIAL entity or not.

                What a crock.  Game over.

            g'day
            John Wilde

            Carrol wrote:
            Wow - that's just like saying "Because I said so".

            If it is all a crock, why is there this provision in the
            IRM regarding the 1040 form:

            "IRM 9.4.4.2.1.3 (01-30-2001)
            The Individual Master File
            2..  The returns filed include Income Tax Forms 1040, 1040A, 1040NR, 1040C,
            1040SS, 1040PR, and Estimated Tax Returns 1040ES.  Each taxpayer account
            has an entity module and one or more tax modules.  The entity module contains data
            which describes the taxpayer as an entity and which applies to all records
            of the taxpayer."

          • Dave Miner
            Nick -- You said: Dave, it is not a matter of what or who the Government says you are, it is the documentation that people send in about you. What is sent in
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 2, 2005

              Nick --

              You said:
              "Dave, it is not a matter of what or who the Government says you are, it is the documentation that people send in about you. What is sent in about you are W-2s and 1099s. These are the specific items that say you work for a FEDERAL WAGE. These presumptions have to be rebutted and this is where to cut everything off at the knees."

              It is very much an issue of what the govt says I am.  Whatever these forms state and whatever these people claim (knowingly or unknowingly) is nothing more than hearsay unless and until I confirm them as fact by filing a Form 1040 and declaring them to be fact. 

              Various persons (corporate and otherwise) send the IRS W-2s or 1099s concerning me every year.  But the IRS never even bothers me about them, much less attempts to collect taxes from me.  What others say about me or my money has no basis in fact if my Individual Master File has me listed as a non-taxpayer not required to file returns.

              Yours in financial freedom,

              Dave Miner
              www.IRx-Solutions.com


               

            • Dave Miner
              Carroll -- Every return has an Entity Section. It matches the Entity Section in the Individual Master File. The Entity Section of the IMF establishes who and
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 2, 2005
                Carroll --
                 
                Every return has an Entity Section.  It matches the Entity Section in the Individual Master File.  The Entity Section of the IMF establishes who and what the "taxpayer" is.  There is also a Module Section and a Transaction Section in the IMF.  Does this mean that the "taxpayer" is a module?  Or a transaction?
                 
                You said: "So according to this paragraph, the following statement becomes fact:
                The 1040 form is for use by an entity.
                "
                 
                This is indeed a true statement.  But it does not necessarily follow that your understanding of the word "entity" is accurate.
                 
                Yours in financial freedom,
                 
                Dave Miner
                 
                 


                From: Carrol [mailto:seafish@...]
                Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 1:50 PM
                To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: Fw: [tips_and_tricks] Legal Fictions

                Wow - that's just like saying "Because I said so".

                If it is all a crock, why is there this provision in the
                IRM regarding the 1040 form:

                "IRM 9.4.4.2.1.3 (01-30-2001)
                The Individual Master File
                2..  The returns filed include Income Tax Forms 1040, 1040A, 1040NR, 1040C,
                1040SS, 1040PR, and Estimated Tax Returns 1040ES.  Each taxpayer account
                has an entity module and one or more tax modules.  The entity module contains data
                which describes the taxpayer as an entity and which applies to all records
                of the taxpayer."

                So according to this paragraph, the following statement becomes fact:
                The 1040 form is for use by an entity.

                I have never received any correspondence from the IRS addressed to my proper name.
                It has always been all captial letters.  According to this provision in the IRM,
                they are addressing an entity.  Do you have proof otherwise???

                Carrol


                John Wilde wrote:
                No.  It's a crock.

                g'day
                John Wilde

                Greg Knapp wrote:
                Is their any truth to this concern that if a person is named in ALL CAPS, that person is now a corporation, and the real human being is some kind of trustee of the ALL CAPS ENTITY NAMED?



              • Carrol
                an Entity is a legal fiction. It is not a man, nor is it a woman. It exists in fiction only - An it . If that is not true, please enlighten me. Carrol
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
                  an Entity is a legal fiction.
                  It is not a man, nor is it a woman.  It exists
                  in fiction only - An "it".

                  If that is not true, please enlighten me.
                  Carrol


                  Dave Miner wrote:
                   
                  You said: "So according to this paragraph, the following statement becomes fact:
                  The 1040 form is for use by an entity.
                  "
                   
                  This is indeed a true statement.  But it does not necessarily follow that your understanding of the word "entity" is accurate.
                   

                • Frog Farmer
                  ... This is from wordiq.com: An entity is something that has a distinct, separate existence, though it need not be a material existence. In particular,
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
                    On Apr 3, 2005, at 4:40 PM, Carrol wrote:

                    > an Entity is a legal fiction.
                    > It is not a man, nor is it a woman.  It exists
                    > in fiction only - An "it".
                    >
                    > If that is not true, please enlighten me.
                    > Carrol
                    >

                    This is from wordiq.com:

                    An entity is something that has a distinct, separate existence, though
                    it need not be a material existence. In particular, abstractions and
                    legal fictions are usually regarded as entities. In general, there is
                    also no presumption that an entity is animate.

                    An entity could be viewed as a set containing subsets. This set itself
                    is among other sets. In philosophy, these sets are said to be abstract
                    objects as they do not refer to anything animate. The distinctive
                    propriety of an entity rationally yields the existence of the
                    relativily distinct entities.

                    The word 'entity' is often useful when one wants to refer to something
                    that could be a human being, a non-human animal, a non-thinking
                    life-form such as a plant or fungus, or a lifeless object; for
                    instance, one could say that any entity that enters a black hole would
                    be transported, in many pieces, to another dimension.

                    Sometimes, the word 'entity' is used in a general sense of a being,
                    whether or not the referent has material existence; e.g. God is often
                    referred to as an 'Entity' with no corporeal form.

                    In law, an entity is something capable of bearing legal rights and
                    obligations. It generally means "legal entity" or "artificial person"
                    but also includes "natural person".
                  • Dave Miner
                    Carrol -- Don t know if it is true or not. Never heard of any definition in law. But I do know that entity is used by a lot of legal and govt types to mean
                    Message 9 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
                      Carrol --
                       
                      Don't know if it is true or not.  Never heard of any definition in law.  But I do know that entity is used by a lot of legal and govt types to mean anything that can function and do actions. 
                       
                      My Webster's defines it as:
                       
                      1. a: being, existence; esp. independent, separate, or self-contained existence; b. the existence of a thing as contrasted with its attributes;
                      2. something that has separate and distinct existence and objective or conceptual reality
                       
                      I know the IRS uses entity to designate an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust, or anything else that can file forms or pay taxes.  Within those categories, or entities, is the separation between taxpayer and non-taxpayer.  The IRS has me listed in the Entity Section of the IMF as an individual not required to file returns.  Or at least it did, when it had an IMF on me.
                       
                      Yours in financial freedom,
                       
                      Dave Miner
                       
                       


                      From: Carrol [mailto:seafish@...]
                      Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 7:41 PM
                      To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: Fw: [tips_and_tricks] Legal Fictions

                      an Entity is a legal fiction.
                      It is not a man, nor is it a woman.  It exists
                      in fiction only - An "it".

                      If that is not true, please enlighten me.
                      Carrol
                    • Michael Pf
                      This should fly some fur: entity: something that has a real existence - do YOU have a real existence? something that exists as a distinct, independent, or
                      Message 10 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                        This should fly some fur:
                         
                        entity: something that has a real existence - do YOU have a real existence?
                                  something that exists as a distinct, independent, or self-contained unit - are YOU distinct, independent and/or self-contained?
                         
                        Maybe YOU are an entity.  But are an entity that needs to file a 1040?   Ahhhhhhh - THAT is the real question, and the source of our troubles with the IRS.  They have convinced their computers that you ARE.  And, under the terms of the IRS Restructuring Act, the onus is now upon YOU to prove that you are NOT.

                        Carrol <seafish@...> wrote:
                        an Entity is a legal fiction.
                        It is not a man, nor is it a woman.  It exists
                        in fiction only - An "it".

                        If that is not true, please enlighten me.
                        Carrol


                        Dave Miner wrote:
                         
                        You said: "So according to this paragraph, the following statement becomes fact:
                        The 1040 form is for use by an entity.
                        "
                         
                        This is indeed a true statement.  But it does not necessarily follow that your understanding of the word "entity" is accurate.
                         



                        Michael
                        Laguna Niguel, CA
                      • John Wilde
                        He (or she) who claims the affirmative has the burden of proof. g day John Wilde
                        Message 11 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                          He (or she) who claims the affirmative has the burden
                          of proof.

                          g'day
                          John Wilde

                          Carrol wrote:

                          > an Entity is a legal fiction.
                          > It is not a man, nor is it a woman. It exists
                          > in fiction only - An "it".
                          >
                          > If that is not true, please enlighten me.
                          > Carrol
                          >
                          >
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.