Really NCDOT?

[ckruzer]

WTF you talin' bout Willis?
Almost all states require proof of residency in order to title and/or register in that state.
You sure as hell can't walk into a MD DMV w/ just an NC driver's license and get MD tags.

Yes, there ware ways around it by using other addresses etc, but by the letter of the law that's not legal.

No not loopholes. And perfectly legal. You are thinking as an individual and not as a person

 

[UTfball68]

when something is wrong, you dont just learn to swallow better

income taxation is illegal. this is why the IRS (which is not a US department or agency, is a third party company just like IBM, which is a bookkeeping company on behalf of the Federal Reserve, another third party company that is not a US agency or department) has its own dictionary. tax court is a entirely different court than the US courts. The legal definition of "income tax" is not a tax on income, it is a "excise tax". income is: Revenue - Expenditure = Income. If you extend your labor to rake a yard, and you and the owner agree your labor for the task is worth $20, what is the income? Where is the profit? You loaned your labor and because he can not give your labor back to you, a value is establish for the worht of your labor and it is returned to you in Equal Value. This is how taxation can still occurr when an actual "income tax" makes zero logical or legal sense. It is an excise tax. Which is liken to paying a toll to cross a new bridge. These are built by private parties and we pay a toll for use.

Each tax form has a tax classificaiton. Tax class 2 is "Income Tax" and the forms your company files is in this category. Your W4, your W2, your 1040.... Guess what class that is? Tax Class 5. "Gift and Estates Tax Class". What gift are you giving? You are giving a Tribute for your authorized activity on Pharaoh's land/commerce.

This ENTIRE country seized and millions of native americans were slaughtered so we could leave the status quo of the king and his paying tributes because we live on the kings land. You live on my land, therefore pay a tribute. You sold your bread within the safety of my land, so pay a tribute on the sale. the principles founding this country have been adulterated and everyone is oblivious it seems watching the boobtube with their hand in the cheetoh bowl?


The land is supposed to be owned by Americans, and elected representatives to help manage everything. So for land that is yours in equity, and the land that you legally purchase... why the F are you paying "property taxes"??? You pay taxes on property because you are not the true owner. You are the ryot-tenure and you are paying rent on land to the CEO of the land that you are supposed to own...

Your elected officials live like kings and queens... it has become a club exhibiting the very characteristics that were abandoned to form this country.

This legal plunder you want to stay local? You should do more research how these monies are actually spent.

I'm really not going to get in to this, but as a financial professional that's put in his time with the Big 4, I'm well versed on tax code. But like I said, don't like it, move some place better or appeal it through the proper channels (which addresses the swallowing harder). Personally, my time is worth more than the couple hundred bucks that would be saved circumventing the system on 5 vehicles. Those are just my feelings on the question you asked.

 

[ckruzer]

i know all the things. i have nothing left to learn.

 

[UTfball68]

^^^Couldn't be farther from the truth, I love learning...what I don't like is some self-righteous form of entitlement. Your problem is easily enough solved...name one state or country that does tax code to your liking, and go there.

 

[XJsavage]

I really do need to buy myself a pneumatic back patter.

^^ No self entitlement here. Move along, move along.

 

[ckruzer]

^^^Couldn't be farther from the truth, I love learning...what I don't like is some self-righteous form of entitlement. Your problem is easily enough solved...name one state or country that does tax code to your liking, and go there.

None of them ever will. The whole world is Egypt.

Ive only attempted to speak factually, truthfully and sincerely. Entitled to what? Havent asked for anything. Self-righteous? How have i held myself to be superior to anyone? How have i held myself to have better morals? Because I speak strongly? Passionately? Fervently for issue I believe has extreme severity??

I am talking of a problem that there is no solution to. Therefore, when possible, make better choices for yourself when it comes to paying Tribute. What I am speaking against is the inaccurate idea paying exorbitant Tributes are a "good thing" and lets keep it "local".

The *fact* is that if you are an American, you should have a big issue with the tax situation. The *fact* is that keeping the legal plunder "local" is not as beneficial as one might think.

Hosea 4:6 my people perish from lack of knowledge.

 

[UTfball68]

1) entitled by believing you do not have to pay your share of taxes as an NC resident. Whether it's fair in your eyes or not, all NC residents are subject to it.
2) self-righteous because you think you're above paying the taxes everyone else is subject to.
3) I 100% get what you're saying, taxes are bad, I don't like the structure either. When you figure out a way to abolish taxes or find a suitable replacement, I'll be 100% in support...otherwise it's just bitching for the sake of bitching about something that's not going anywhere, as you pointed out.

 

[Ron]

Uhh your definition of income is...wrong.

You just used profit and income interchangeably. They are not.
Income = Revenue Not profit.

There is a legal ground to argue your point if you are arguing against double taxation on a corporation, there is not if you are arguing personal income.

I thought you had stated here you were a Juris Doctor in the past. AM I mistaken?
Because clearly publicly giving unsolicited and inaccurate advice on the basis of established legal precedent is highly frowned upon.

By the way
IRS isnt a government agency...

Some argue that the IRS is not an agency of the United States but rather a private corporation, because it was not created by positive law (i.e., an act of Congress) and that, therefore, the IRS does not have the authority to enforce the Internal Revenue Code.

The Law: Constitutional and statutory authority establishes that the IRS is an agency of the United States. Indeed, the Supreme Court has stated, “[T]he Internal Revenue Service is organized to carry out the broad responsibilities of the Secretary of the Treasury under § 7801(a) of the 1954 Code for the administration and enforcement of the internal revenue laws.” Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 534 (1971).

Pursuant to section 7801, the Secretary of the Treasury has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce such laws. Based upon this legislative grant, the IRS was created. Thus, the IRS is a body established by “positive law” because it was created through a congressionally mandated power. Moreover, section 7803(a) explicitly provides that there shall be a Commissioner of Internal Revenue who shall administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.

The IRS warned taxpayers of the consequences of attempting to pursue a claim on these grounds in Notice 2010-33, 2010-17 I.R.B. 609.

Relevant Case Law:

United States v. Fern, 696 F.2d 1269, 1273 (11th Cir. 1983) – the 11th Circuit declared, “Clearly, the Internal Revenue Service is a ‘department or agency’ of the United States.”

United States v. Provost, 109 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2012-1706 (E.D. Cal. 2012) – the court rejected the taxpayer’s arguments and stated that the United States is “a sovereign, not a corporation,” the IRS is a government agency, and that arguments to the contrary are “wholly frivolous.”

Salman v. Dept. of Treasury, 899 F.Supp. 471, 472 (D. Nev. 1995) – the court described Salman’s contention that the IRS is not a government agency of the United States as “wholly frivolous” and dismissed his claim with prejudice.

Nevius v. Tomlinson, 113 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2014-1872 (W.D. Miss. 2014) – the court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, rejecting Nevius’s claim that the IRS is a private corporation, rather than a government agency.

Edwards v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-169, 84 T.C.M. (CCH) 24 (2002) – the court dismissed the argument that the IRS is not an agency of the United States Department of Treasury as “tax protester gibberish” and stated that “t's bad enough when ignorant and gullible or disingenuous taxpayers utter tax protester gibberish. It's much more disturbing when a member of the bar offers tax protester gibberish as a substitute for legal argument.”

 

[ckruzer]

Uhh your definition of income is...wrong.


You just used profit and income interchangeably. They are not.

Income = Revenue Not profit.

revenue can also mean gross, total. my apologies for being loose. income is what is left over. if you extend your labor for X and receive in return Y worth X, there is no profit. if there is no profit, there is no income.


“There is a clear distinction between ‘profit’ and ‘wages’ and compensation for labor cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law. The word ‘profit’, as ordinarily used, means the gain made upon any business or investment - a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor.” Oliver v. Hastead, 86 S.E. Rep. 2d 859


“Income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment and the Revenue Act, means ‘gain’… and in such connection ‘Gain’ means profit… proceeding from property, severed from capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, received, or drawn by the taxpayer, for his separate use, benefit and disposal… Income is not a wage or compensation for any type of labor.” Stapler v US, 21 F Supp 737 AT 739


“…Congress has taxed income, not compensation” Connor v US, 303 F. Supp., 1187 ’69


“Income, contrary to popular belief, is not a wage, salary, fee, first-time commission, or compensation for any kind of labor, unless consented to by contract.” US vs Ballard 536 F. 2d 400, 404 (8th CIr. 1976)


“The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce…” Title 15 USC 17


I got a hundred more…

I pay all the taxes I am supposed to. I do not protest. I do not fight. I am 100% against the SC movement and disagree with the active validity of state citizenship. I sojourn, seek truth, live in best way I can, and seek to obey my Creator daily (even tho i fail). Thats it.

I thought you had stated here you were a Juris Doctor in the past. AM I mistaken?

Because clearly publicly giving unsolicited and inaccurate advice on the basis of established legal precedent is highly frowned upon.

i have given zero advice. i have merely stated a fact and in no way have i stated an option that is a fact *should* be exercised by others, but merely that it is an option at law. i got out after seeing the anal seep, wrote a book, and then lived my life.

Some argue that the IRS is not an agency of the United States but rather a private corporation, because it was not created by positive law (i.e., an act of Congress) and that, therefore, the IRS does not have the authority to enforce the Internal Revenue Code.


The Law: Constitutional and statutory authority establishes that the IRS is an agency of the United States. Indeed, the Supreme Court has stated, “[T]he Internal Revenue Service is organized to carry out the broad responsibilities of the Secretary of the Treasury under § 7801(a) of the 1954 Code for the administration and enforcement of the internal revenue laws.” Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 534 (1971).

Wikipedia? The bold part is opinion. The actual law you quoted does not inherently directly or indirectly say the IRS is a government agency, merely authority.


I have attached a document for your attention. From the US attorneys office that I have acquired. This is the US Attorney’s office saying this and I have scanned it for you so you can see the stamp. Pay attention to page 2 item number 4. “Denies that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States Government but admits that the United States of America would be a proper party to this action…”

The IRS warned taxpayers of the consequences of attempting to pursue a claim on these grounds in Notice 2010-33, 2010-17 I.R.B. 609.

No one! has attempted to pursue a claim or has advocated pursuing a claim. God and his infinite wisdom told us what to do when we find ourselves enslaved: Slaves, obey your masters, for honor to your master shows honor to your Creator (Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Peter…)[must be taken in context. you don't disobey your Creator if your master ask you to do something you're not supposed to…]


It has been merely vaguely lightly barely suggested that when AT LAW a better option is available, it would be perhaps wise and advantageous to take advantage where one is legally allowed to do so.

United States v. Fern, 696 F.2d 1269, 1273 (11th Cir. 1983) – the 11th Circuit declared, “Clearly, the Internal Revenue Service is a ‘department or agency’ of the United States.”

Yes because this clearly informs where in the court proceedings this is quoted form, the surrounding text and provides a definitive statement of positive fact that is not blatantly apparent with a negative pregnant.

United States v. Provost, 109 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2012-1706 (E.D. Cal. 2012) – the court rejected the taxpayer’s arguments and stated that the United States is “a sovereign, not a corporation,” the IRS is a government agency, and that arguments to the contrary are “wholly frivolous.”

hahahah. so the US is a sovereign and the IRS is a sovereign??? this is a new one. Again where in the case? Who is speaking? Where clarifications indicated after that? Lets say correct… thats even worse. Do you know the definition of a sovereign?

Salman v. Dept. of Treasury, 899 F.Supp. 471, 472 (D. Nev. 1995) – the court described Salman’s contention that the IRS is not a government agency of the United States as “wholly frivolous” and dismissed his claim with prejudice.

Nevius v. Tomlinson, 113 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2014-1872 (W.D. Miss. 2014) – the court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, rejecting Nevius’s claim that the IRS is a private corporation, rather than a government agency.

state level. not a quote. summary statement by whom? I can argue the sky is blue and still have my case thrown out because I argued poorly. Doesn't mean the sky isn't blue. “Mr. Doe claimed the sky was blue, and the court did not recognize Mr. Doe’s claims”. Does NOT mean the claims were invalid…

Edwards v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-169, 84 T.C.M. (CCH) 24 (2002) – the court dismissed the argument that the IRS is not an agency of the United States Department of Treasury as “tax protester gibberish” and stated that “t's bad enough when ignorant and gullible or disingenuous taxpayers utter tax protester gibberish. It's much more disturbing when a member of the bar offers tax protester gibberish as a substitute for legal argument.”

same thing.


I have also attached for you a piece of an actual IRS document from their internal manuals showing the actual tax classification and the associated forms of tax class 5. later i went on to actually be able to acquire their entire manual via foia, however they did end up deleting a few chapters and not allowing me to see. Either way... begs answers to many many questions...


I have also attached a document received by a client. If you know anything about positive law vs special law, it is quite revealing. Helps to better understand how “income tax” is a really a “excise tax” ( a toll ), when so much evidence amounts that a "gains" tax on labor is not legal… but where a special law "excise tax" is very legal


I have folder after folder after folder. Document upon document. I have even managed to get ahold of a copy of the original incorporation document for the IRS.



Gotta get back to work now[/QUOTE]

 

[RatLabGuy]

By the way
IRS isnt a government agency...

Some argue that the IRS is not an agency of the United States but rather a private corporation, because it was not created by positive law (i.e., an act of Congress) and that, therefore, the IRS does not have the authority to enforce the Internal Revenue Code.

The Law: Constitutional and statutory authority establishes that the IRS is an agency of the United States. Indeed, the Supreme Court has stated, “[T]he Internal Revenue Service is organized to carry out the broad responsibilities of the Secretary of the Treasury under § 7801(a) of the 1954 Code for the administration and enforcement of the internal revenue laws.” Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 534 (1971).

Pursuant to section 7801, the Secretary of the Treasury has full authority to administer and enforce the internal revenue laws and has the power to create an agency to enforce such laws. Based upon this legislative grant, the IRS was created. Thus, the IRS is a body established by “positive law” because it was created through a congressionally mandated power. Moreover, section 7803(a) explicitly provides that there shall be a Commissioner of Internal Revenue who shall administer and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws.

The IRS warned taxpayers of the consequences of attempting to pursue a claim on these grounds in Notice 2010-33, 2010-17 I.R.B. 609.

Relevant Case Law:

United States v. Fern, 696 F.2d 1269, 1273 (11th Cir. 1983) – the 11th Circuit declared, “Clearly, the Internal Revenue Service is a ‘department or agency’ of the United States.”

United States v. Provost, 109 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2012-1706 (E.D. Cal. 2012) – the court rejected the taxpayer’s arguments and stated that the United States is “a sovereign, not a corporation,” the IRS is a government agency, and that arguments to the contrary are “wholly frivolous.”

Salman v. Dept. of Treasury, 899 F.Supp. 471, 472 (D. Nev. 1995) – the court described Salman’s contention that the IRS is not a government agency of the United States as “wholly frivolous” and dismissed his claim with prejudice.

Nevius v. Tomlinson, 113 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2014-1872 (W.D. Miss. 2014) – the court granted summary judgment in favor of the government, rejecting Nevius’s claim that the IRS is a private corporation, rather than a government agency.

Edwards v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-169, 84 T.C.M. (CCH) 24 (2002) – the court dismissed the argument that the IRS is not an agency of the United States Department of Treasury as “tax protester gibberish” and stated that “t's bad enough when ignorant and gullible or disingenuous taxpayers utter tax protester gibberish. It's much more disturbing when a member of the bar offers tax protester gibberish as a substitute for legal argument.”

Not to mention the *minor little detail* that IRS agents are in fact government employees, who take an oath of office just like all other Fed employees, are governed under the GSA, etc. Not sure how that could possibly make them a "third party company".
That's a lot of big game talk but it goes in contrary to a lot of practical evidence.

 

[RatLabGuy]

You can live in whatever state you want and have your vehicle titled/registered in whatever state you want

WTF you talin' bout Willis?
Almost all states require proof of residency in order to title and/or register in that state.
You sure as hell can't walk into a MD DMV w/ just an NC driver's license and get MD tags.

Yes, there ware ways around it by using other addresses etc, but by the letter of the law that's not legal.

No not loopholes. And perfectly legal. You are thinking as an individual and not as a person

For the sake of the overall intent of this thread and getting back on track, could you please explain your statement - how one can do this legally?

 

[ckruzer]

Not to mention the *minor little detail* that IRS agents are in fact government employees, who take an oath of office just like all other Fed employees, are governed under the GSA, etc. Not sure how that could possibly make them a "third party company".
That's a lot of big game talk but it goes in contrary to a lot of practical evidence.

you may want to check into that. all gov agencies have pay grades. thats one direction.

For the sake of the overall intent of this thread and getting back on track, could you please explain your statement - how one can do this legally?

sorry. thought i did. very common in the corporate world. very common in the privacy world and asset protection world. you can form a company and establish a legal nexus in the state you want to, and then an agent (no matter where they are from and where they live) of that company can title and register the vehicle. you have to go the commercial side of the DMV. Usually only one clerk and no line...

 

[RatLabGuy]

you may want to check into that. all gov agencies have pay grades. thats one direction.

Sorry, not sure what you're implying here.
Yes, I did check into that. I have family and friends who are Fed employees who work and/or have worked for the IRS.
Yes there are pay grades, and of course all agencies in the government have people at different grades working within them, but technically they (the grades) are defined by and regulated by the GSA. There are Fed employees, ho are at different pay grades, working at the IRS.
What am I missing?

sorry. thought i did. very common in the corporate world. very common in the privacy world and asset protection world. you can form a company and establish a legal nexus in the state you want to, and then an agent (no matter where they are from and where they live) of that company can title and register the vehicle. you have to go the commercial side of the DMV. Usually only one clerk and no line...

But to form the company in the state you want to be in, you have to have a presence in that state...? Isn't that right? I can't just live in MD and form a company in NC and not ever be in NC?

But even if I'm wrong - and thanks for the tidbit - that seems pretty inefficient just to title a car. Setting up a company isn't free.

 

[ckruzer]

Sorry, not sure what you're implying here.
Yes, I did check into that. I have family and friends who are Fed employees who work and/or have worked for the IRS.
Yes there are pay grades, and of course all agencies in the government have people at different grades working within them, but technically they (the grades) are defined by and regulated by the GSA. There are Fed employees, ho are at different pay grades, working at the IRS.
What am I missing?

But to form the company in the state you want to be in, you have to have a presence in that state...? Isn't that right? I can't just live in MD and form a company in NC and not ever be in NC?

But even if I'm wrong - and thanks for the tidbit - that seems pretty inefficient just to title a car. Setting up a company isn't free.

No you don't have to live there to form a company there. You don't have to have an address there either. No grey areas. You can fill out a form and give them address on your DL and there would be no issue.

A firm who does it regularly would be able to point you a state that would cost under $100 and with no recurring annual fees. And other than the fee for the help by the firm there wouldnt be any other fees.

The cost to establish the nexus is very nominal. Overall. Much cheaper. And it is a legal option that is done everyday

Regarding the employees. It is my understanding speaking to people not at the bottom of the totem pole, that while federally paid individuals do work there they are not ALL are gov employees.

 

[RatLabGuy]

No you don't have to live there to form a company there. You don't have to have an address there either. No grey areas. You can fill out a form and give them address on your DL and there would be no issue.

A firm who does it regularly would be able to point you a state that would cost under $100 and with no recurring annual fees. And other than the fee for the help by the firm there wouldnt be any other fees.

The cost to establish the nexus is very nominal. Overall. Much cheaper. And it is a legal option that is done everyday

Regarding the employees. It is my understanding speaking to people not at the bottom of the totem pole, that while federally paid individuals do work there they are not ALL are gov employees.

Thanks for the clarification.
re: IRS - sure, they have contractors who work with (not for, that would make them employees) them, so what? All federal agencies do. Those are just people doing some job that is deemed more efficiently done by a private company than by a Fed employee. That doesn't mean the IRS itself isn't an agency or that the people who work for the IRS aren't Fed employees. It's just like any situation in, say, construction where you have subcontractors.
I don't know what the Civilian-to-Contractor ratio is there but I can find out. I assure you, all the department heads and anybody in management, and most field agents are a Fed.

 

[paradisePWoffrd]

WTF you talin' bout Willis?
Almost all states require proof of residency in order to title and/or register in that state.
You sure as hell can't walk into a MD DMV w/ just an NC driver's license and get MD tags.

Yes, there ware ways around it by using other addresses etc, but by the letter of the law that's not legal.

Interestingly enough, NC allows you to register a vehicle without being a resident.