Home | News | Site Map | Search | Contact

More Victories For The Rule Of Law- Page Fifty-Eight


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:



Brian Harriss

Brian has won a complete victory with Georgia over his 2016 withholdings:

 ...and did so with an inspiringly hard-eyed approach to the whole situation that many will find to be very educational. This tale begins with Brian's application for a filing extension with the state, on which he explains that he needs time to address fraud on the part of the creators of a W-2 which his filing will be obliged to rebut.

In due course, Brian followed up with a letter to the company which had created the erroneous W-2 about him and sent it to Georgia, on which it alleged that Brian had been paid for the conduct of taxable activities. In his letter Brian demanded to know the basis for that characterization of those payments. (This letter was purely pro forma; Brian had asked these same questions before and had gotten nothing but an increasingly frosty silence with each inquiry.)

At the same time he sent his pro forma letter, Brian submitted his return to Georgia demanding back everything that had been improperly withheld by that erroneous W-2 creator. Brian also sent a formal notice to the Georgia DOR explaining the fraud. See the notice here, and Brian's return here.

Georgia understood. On November 6, it issued its agreement with Brian's claim, right to the penny.

Gregory & Fabiola K.

Gregory & Fabiola share a complete refund of everything withheld from them during 2016-- all of which was Social security and Medicare tax withholdings-- and an admission by the federal government, dated today (December 4, 2017), that they received $0 "income" and owed $0 tax on their considerable earnings last year.

Here is Gregory & Fabiola's filing. And here is the United States admission that as little as it is, every penny that had been withheld from Gregory & Fabiola was an overpayment (because there was no tax due) and their complete refund (even though only in the form of a credit against an IRS-claimed balance-owing for 2009):

BTW, Gregory estimates that had his filing been done by an "ignorance tax" victim, it would have ended up not as a $14 refund, but as at least a $10,000 payment, instead. Further, an outgo that small would only have been achieved after achingly-long hours of poring over paperwork, obscure tax code sections and rules, and all the rest of the huge expenditure of lost time and energy still unnecessarily-suffered by far too many Americans (instead of the hour or so involved in preparing this simple, educated return package).

Kristiane M. 

Here is the filing that produced this victory for the rule of law-- small in monetary value, but immeasurably valuable in other, much more important ways.

 Scott and Christin Phelps

Here is the filing that secured this uplifting Oklahoma victory.

Scott and Christin Phelps

This federal victory is one of those especially-compelling ones...

Here is the filing.

The first response to this educated refund claim by everyone's favorite alphabet agency was a pretense that Scott's documentation of withheld amounts wasn't good enough (even though it was done with the IRS's own forms, and even though the agency had corroborating evidence from the company that did the withholding). Hey, worth a shot, right (for folks with no self-respect and an increasing sense of desperation over the last 15 years)?

A concise but polite response was quickly fired off.

The agency's answer was to float a (pre-dated) "just go away" offer of refunding without further resistance everything that had been withheld under the nominal label of "federal income tax" ($3,720.60), while proposing to keep-- with no grounds for doing so whatever-- everything withheld under the "income" surtax labels of Social Security and Medicare (totaling $4787.45-- the lion's share of the withheld amounts):

At the same time, though, the nature of the ploy forced the agency to document its lack of a basis for keeping the FICA withholdings:

As seen, everyone is in agreement that Scott and Christin had no "income" during 2016. Thus, the IRS has no grounds for keeping Scott's FICA withholdings any more than it has for keeping the amounts it is admitting he has coming back to him (all as explained in more detail in a similar case discussed here).

The entry in the document above regarding amounts withheld is simply false, and can be known to be by the simple fact that FICA surtaxes are withheld on a first dollar basis. Thus, if Chapter 24 withholding has taken place, as is admitted here, then Chapter 21 FICA withholding has also taken place.

Our intrepid Mr. Phelps accepted the mission and fired off a stern response (since lost in the file cabinet somewhere, but its content can be readily imagined).

The agency responded first with a stall "we need more time" notice, as it struggled to figure out what to do now that it had stepped into the mud without the benefit of valid grounds.

Then came an almost comical pretense of explanation for the previous proposed "settlement".

The heart of this little gem is this:

Now the about-to-explode robot is claiming that it is operating on the assertion that Phelps had "wages", in direct contradiction of its May proposal! But wait, there's more!

At the same time this LTR474C arrives, the deposit of everything withheld from Scott except the FICA surtaxes-- just as proposed in May and on the basis of the agency's acknowledgement that no "wages" were received-- is made into his bank account, plus interest!

Are we having fun yet? Are we getting the message, yet?

Scott fired off an immediate response, but the robot remained in hiding for seven months, until finally issuing this gem, which contains this fascinating, left-hand acknowledgement:

NEEDLESS TO SAY, the assertion made here is both frivolous and absurd.

First of all, it is not the agency's business or authority to make such confirmations. If the agency actually has reason to believe, and wants to assert, that Scott-- who works for a private-sector automotive equipment manufacturer-- received federal, taxable receipts (rather than receipts which were misidentified as "wages", as Scott declared by way of his Form 4852), it can (and must) produce a return of its own contrary to Scott and Christin's and/or assert a "deficiency", with "confirmations" determined by an adversarial legal proceeding.

Secondly, the agency has already confirmed that Scott's receipts were private, no-federal and non-taxable, and has admitted this, on paper, repeatedly. It has expressly agreed that the Phelps' had no income in 2016, and no "wages", saying the former explicitly and the latter implicitly, by returning everything withheld from Scott under the Chapter 24 "wage" withholding protocols.

In fact, the new notice itself says that Scott had no "wages" against which the FICA withholdings the agency proposes to keep can be validated, by again asserting that the complete refund of Chapter 24 withholdings already made is proper and correct! (This admission, btw, imposes a legal requirement on the agency to return the FICA withholdings to Scott and Christin, with no latitude for "confirmational" coyness.)

But the acknowledgment made by way of the absurd dodge is a thing of beauty!

No pretense about there being no such thing as non-taxable receipts. Just a pretense about the agency having the authority to keep FICA withholdings unless they can "confirm" that they were withheld from non-taxable receipts.

More on this in due course, I'm sure.

Jack D.

Here is the filing.

Kristiane M.

Here is THAT filing.

Mike Johnston.

Mike filed a conventional, educated federal tax return for 2016. But he had forgotten to address the (then new) obnoxious Obamacare addition to the filing chore. Soon after Mike's filing was made, the IRS sent a polite-enough reminder about the Obamacare issue.

Mike promptly replied, also politely, and with the requested form enclosed. All should have been good-to-go...

But, no. The next thing Mike got from the agency was an "adjusted refund notice" and a check-- both proposing, without explanation, the return of only what was withheld from him as nominal Chapter 24 federal income tax, with the agency keeping the Chapter 21 FICA surtaxes AND the Obamacare ding:

Mike fired off a very pointed and indisputable response.

The agency's reply, issued after a month and a half of cogitating, is a marvel of nonsense. Here's the "money" line:

It's almost as if these tax agency folks had never read 26 U.S.C. § 3503:

26 U.S. Code § 3503 - Erroneous payments

Any tax paid under chapter 21 or 22 by a taxpayer with respect to any period with respect to which he is not liable to tax under such chapter shall be credited against the tax, if any, imposed by such other chapter upon the taxpayer, and the balance, if any, shall be refunded.

Certainly, they're hoping Mike hasn't read it...


Here is the filed 1040X, and here is the quick and simple correction of the record and complete refund:

Mike Johnston

Mike's refund claim of everything withheld and given over to New Mexico in 2016 as "income" tax was promptly and fully honored, without fuss:

Derek Cushman

Derek (whose excellent video on CtC has helped introduce many people to this community) shares a fine victory with the feds, securing, on February 9, 2018, the return of everything withheld from him and given into Uncle Sam's keeping during 2016:

 Notably, all but $180 of this refund consists of FICA surtax withholdings, as can be seen in Derek's filing here.

FICA withholdings are the kind never refunded to anyone in history before CtC revealed their true nature and the government's legal obligations. They're also a kind the IRS still sporadically tries to pretend are un-reclaimable, in the apparent hope that we're all incapable of logical reasoning and reading the law.

In fact, Derek's filing was initially greeted with a ridiculous stumbling-block effort by the IRS over the amounts being reclaimed. But the well-educated and articulate Mr. Cushman slapped that pretense down quickly and decisively, with his complete refund then following without further fuss.


Matthew H.

Matthew received a "Welcome, 2018"! victory in enforcing the tax laws with the feds on February 9:

This victory issued without any fuss, and guess what? The refund is nothing but FICA withholdings, as can be seen from Matthew's filing.

Shaun Davis

Shaun Davis shares a victory in securing the return of everything withheld from him by the feds during 2015 by way of an amended return-- a two-part victory completed on February 19, 2018:

...after being begun on February 12:

Together, these two refunds amount to the total of Shaun's claim, which was made on this 1040X correcting an "ignorance tax" return submitted prior to Shaun having become CtC-educated. There was no fussing about Shaun's claim, but interestingly, his acknowledged 2015 "overpayment" was diverted to an alleged balance due for 2014-- a year for which Shaun also filed an amended return, but one which has not yet been processed. See this notice and this notice.


More Victories- Page 57


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.


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.