The Lost Horizons Forum

A meeting place for the CtC-empowered.
It is currently Wed Feb 26, 2020 2:29 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The News, 7-1-19
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:13 am 

Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:49 am
Posts: 63
The July 1, 2019 Lost Horizons Newsletter Mid-Edition Update
...where real knowledge intersects with real Americans!
Middletown, Moonbeam!! August 3rd!
Be there for the next CtC Seminar, in New York's beautiful Hudson Valley!!
Click here for more information

By the way, I want to emphasize the importance of RSVPing if you wish to attend the seminar!!!
The Twelfth Annual Declaration Day Party is THIS SATURDAY, July 6. Get your RSVPs in!!

Three Cognitive Groundings and Food for Further Thought
...US v. USA; the frivolous "person"; and geese teaching ganders how to turn the worm.

Explaining "the United States"

EVER HAD TROUBLE GETTING SOMEONE TO UNDERSTAND the limits on what is known as the United States in certain contexts? Here's a helpful tip: Use the presidential "pardon" power as your cognitive touchstone.



On The "Person" Subject To 6702 Penalties

A DETAILED DISCUSSION ON THE "PERSON" limitations imposed at 26 U.S.C. § 6671(b) in regard to "frivolous return" penalties has been posted for a number of years here. And fascinating limits they are, especially in the manner in which those limits synchronize so harmoniously and and in a mutually-supporting, mutually-illuminating fashion with the specifications of 26 U.S.C. § 6020(b)!



Turnabout Is Fair Play

I'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH MANY of the filings made by the "United States" in faux-legal attacks upon me over the years since CtC was first published. In doing so I have been reminded of a contrivance regularly used by the bad guys from which those of us in the good guys column could learn a useful lesson.

The attacks I'm studying have all been intended to accomplish the suppression of CtC by one means or another, as chronicled and discussed here. All of them, of course, are distinguished by their reliance on falsehoods and frauds (as in the example discussed and documented here) since the folks responsible have no truths available to support their purposes.

Over the years I have seen other filings by the same kennel of attack dogs in cases involving other folks. Though not as acute in rabidity as those directed at me (and later at Doreen when the suppression effort got really desperate and abandoned even a pretense of legitimacy), the objects of these other filings have also been at odds with the facts and the law, and so also relied on craft and spin and lies.



Other Voices:
'Bret Stephens, Warmonger'
by Andrew J. Bacevich

An excellent commentary on the mendacious efforts by some to shine the American people into support for another illegal and costly military aggression.

Important words by Bacevich, and with an equally important afterword.



Plus, Illuminating Anniversaries For This Week!

 Post subject: Re: The News, 7-1-19
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:48 pm 

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:15 pm
Posts: 31
(b) Person defined

The term “person”, as used in this subchapter, includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.


So a person is duty-bound to produce returns. In other words, as part of their job they must produce returns (it's not an option).

As it relates to us nontaxpayers, we are not under a duty, nor are we required to produce returns; rather, we choose on our own accord to file an educated return to correct the false IRs that have been filed against us.

It's not only that we (CtC warriors) are not an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, it's ALSO that those persons are under a duty (required in their job description) to file a return, where no such duty is required by CtC Warrior John Doe, private-citizen?

CtC warriors file educated returns on their own free will and not by a required duty.

Do I have this correct?

Since this is all based on the word 'required' I'm trying to grasp who is 'required' (only "required" returns are capable of drawing the "frivolous return" penalty) to file a return. It's just those 'persons' as defined above as they under a 'duty' to perform the act?

Then we get into the word 'duty / duty-bound' and that seems to be part of a job description; that those 'persons' have a duty or are mandated to perform the act of producing returns, i.e. they have to produce returns as part of their job.

Is this correct?

I think I answered my question:

"Duty" under § 6671(b) has a much more focused meaning than the generalized duty of all taxpayers to pay taxes and is expressly limited to the duty that attaches to the position an employee holds within the corporation. United States v. Burger, 717 F. Supp. 245 (1989)

Feel free to comment if needed, thx Pete!

I'm adding this as I gather more info for those following...

Return requirements are varied, but among them is that anyone receiving more than the exemption amount of "income" within any given year is required to make and submit a return. It is thus seen that any 1040 or 1040X which does not prompt a 6020(b) return is being thereby agreed to have either not reached these "income" thresholds, or to not qualify as false, fraudulent or frivolous.

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group