Home -- Site Map -- Search

 

More Victories For The Rule Of Law- Page Twenty-Five

Tens of thousands of readers of 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' have taken control of their own resources, in accordance with, and respect for, the law. The likely total amount reclaimed by these good Americans so far is upward of several billion dollars.

 

A few of these good American men and women-- such as those honored below-- are generous enough to send me the evidence of their victories in upholding the law, for the edification and inspiration of everyone. At the moment those shared refund checks, closing notices, and so forth total:

 

 

Linda Starbird

 

 

Click here to enjoy Linda's 2003 Colorado victory

 

 

N. M.

 

 


 

Anon

 

 


 

Jon Rourke

 

 

 


 

S & S

 

 

 

Click here to enjoy S and S's 2008 Arizona victory.

 


 

Randy & Kathryn Pentico

 

 

(2007)

 

Click here to enjoy Randy and Kathryn's 2004 and 2005 Iowa victories; and here to enjoy their 2006 Iowa and Federal victories.  Their 2007 federal victory can be seen further down this page.  Click here to enjoy their 2008 Iowa victory!

 


 

Randy _

 

 


 

Greg Moll

 

Even after timely filing his educated federal return for 2005, Greg was treated to an effort to get him to reverse himself:

 

 

Greg, confident in his knowledge of the law, wasn't taken in.  He fired back with a copy of his filed return (with 1099 rebuttal) and a letter spelling out the pertinent facts and ensuring that nothing was being misunderstood:

 

1. [My] 1040EZ Tax Return for the tax period 2005 was received by the IRS on April 18, 2006. The return was filed pursuant U.S.C. Title 26, and meets the requirements of a return as follows:

 

2. [My] 1040EZ Tax Return for the Tax period 2005 was filed under penalty of perjury. Therefore, the return meets the requirements of being signed under penalty of perjury See, e.g., Williams v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 136 (2000).

 

3. Filing a proper, truthful and accurate return is the means provided by law for the definitive affirmation, or correction, of allegations about having engaged in an "income" taxable activity. Filing a 1040EZ tax return along with corrected 1099s and 4852 forms is a means of rebutting or refuting any presumption of tax liability that may have been incorrectly asserted. 

"And be it further enacted,... that any party , in his or her own behalf, ...shall be permitted to declare, under oath or affirmation, the form and manner of which shall be prescribed by the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue,... ... the amount of his or her annual income ... liable to be assessed,... and the same so declared shall be received as the sum upon which duties are to be assessed and collected," Revenue act of 1862, Sec. 93.

4. There is sufficient data on [my] return to calculate a tax liability. Any third party payers who may have issued information returns via Forms W-2, W-2P, 1099, 1099-S, etc., for [me], showing taxable income, have done so in error as a matter of law. [I am] and was not engaged in any "taxable activity", i.e., involved in a trade or business in the United States at any time during 2005, and had no income that was effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business that would make [me] liable for taxable income for the tax period ending 2005.

 

September 11, 2007

 

The conclusion of this little pretense of a dispute arrived promptly (at least, as the IRS measures such things):

 

 


 

Marc and Kelly Clampitt

 

 

Unfortunately, in 2004 and prior to learning about CtC, Marc-- who had been working for himself, had no "information returns" created about him and nothing withheld, and had consequently had filed no returns-- was misled by IRS misrepresentations and thuggishness into filing returns for 1998 through 2003 on which he declared his earnings in those years to be "income".  Consequently, this amount withheld during 2006 has been treated as a credit against liabilities thus established.  Amended returns for the older years have since been filed, but haven't yet borne fruit.

 


 

Bill and Debra Carpenter

 

 


 

Dave and Tina _

 

Went from this:

 

 

...to this:

 

 

...by way of this.

 

Enjoy Dave's 2006 federal victory here.

 


 

Dennis Kazmierczak

 

 

Enjoy Dennis's 2004 New York victory here.

 


 

Randy and Kathryn Pentico

 

 

Randy and Kathryn's 2007 Iowa victory can be seen above.  Their 2004 and 2005 Iowa victories can be seen here; and their 2006 federal and Iowa victories can be enjoyed here.

 


 

Rod Schmidt

 

 


 

Jere _

 

 

Jere forgot to include the amounts withheld under the FICA provisions in his "federal income tax withheld" total, and so only claimed and received this tiny fraction of what was withheld overall (this being what was withheld under chapter 24 provisions for only a few days before that withholding ended for the remainder of the year).  He says he is filing an amended return to correct this error.

 


 

Tony Bowles

 

(This is a compilation of two pages)

 

Click here to see Tony and his wife Bonnie's 2005 victory.

 


 

More Victories- Page 24

 

More Victories- Page 26

 

Click here to return to the Bulletin Board

 

Victory Highlights

 


 

Even in the face of the requirements of the law, the junkyard dog is still trying to play its losing hand in a few cases-- particularly where amended returns, in which the filer necessarily disputes his or her own previous testimony, are concerned.  Significantly, not once in any of these efforts to discourage or stonewall a proper filing does the government actually challenge or dispute the accuracy of what is revealed in 'Cracking the Code-...'

 

Click here for more...

 


 

Despite the fact that those whose victories are on display here did nothing but insist that the law be applied as it is written, they did so in the face of fearful threats and cunning disinformation from the beneficiaries of corruption.  Their actions took great courage and commitment, and I salute them all.  

 

“God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.”

-Daniel Webster

 

NOTE: Whether any given individual is entitled to a refund depends on a number of different factors, and no one should presume that they are so entitled simply because they see that others are.  Each person should educate himself or herself about the particulars of the law, and make his or her own determination in this regard.

 

To get on the Lost Horizons mailing list, send an email to SubscribeMe 'at' losthorizons.com with your name in the message field.

 

See what readers have to say about 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America'

The First Complete "Income" Tax-Related Refund (Social Security, Medicare And All) Ever Received

An "Income" Tax Subject Site Map

A Few Words About Tax "Reform"

Click Here to Crack the Code

NOTE: The documents displayed on this and any linked pages, and any associated comments, are posted with the permission and cooperation of the upstanding Americans with whom they are concerned. 

When a return is posted in connection with any refund or other responsive document, it is complete-- that is, what is posted is EVERYTHING filed as a return in connection with that refund or document, unless otherwise indicated.