Home | News | Site Map | Search | Contact

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


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:



George and Debi Papp

Here is the filing that produced this admission and refund.


John Brennan

...and here is John's claim.

Richard A.

Richard's return can be seen here.

Dean Malone

Click here to see the return which produced this victory-in-progress, in which the United States has acknowledged that Dean had no "wages" or other "income", but lies about how much had been withheld and is therefore owed back to him. See Dean's return for the correct number, and see this redacted W-2-- a copy of which was sent to the United States by the company that did the withholding-- for corroboration. Based on its bizarre falsehood about the amount withheld, the US is pretending it has a right to keep around $3K of Dean's money.

Unlike other such victories-in-progress, there appears to be no rhyme or reason to the selection of how much of Dean's money to which the feds are trying to cling. (Usually in this kind of effort the venal feds try to hang on to everything withheld as the FICA surtaxes which would have applied if the victim's earnings had actually qualified as "wages" under the tax law definitions. This isn't done for any legitimate reason, of course, but simply in the hope people will be unaware that if one had no "wages" subject to the normal tax, then one had no "wages" subject to the surtaxes.)

It is true that Dean listed the FICA withholdings in inappropriate places on his return (see here and here). But even that offers no rationale or pretext for the feds trying to stiff him, and particularly not for an amount which equals neither the Social security tax withheld, nor the Medicare tax withheld, nor both combined. The amount the feds are trying to keep appears to have been just made up out of thin air.

Also interesting here is that even while attempting their petty theft, the feds dutifully added the interest owed to Dean on the amount they DID return to him, having taken more than 45 days to issue even that partial refund.

Tony Carrion

Here are the docs Tony filed to compel the United States to abandon the "ignorance tax" scheme in his case and abide by the law as written.

James A.

This complete victory, plus interest, was secured by this filing, after a brief interlude while this identity challenge was dealt with.

George in Virginia

Here are the docs George filed to secure this victory of the rule of law.

David Montane

Here are the testimony and claim that secured David's victory.

Andrew Deal

Andrew's filing can be seen here.

Richard Bristol

Richard got put to a little trouble securing this victory. Richard submitted a very standard CtC-educated filing/claim, but to begin with, Utah balked and challenged Richard to prove his identity and asked him to verify the amounts he reported as withheld.

Richard complied with the demanded ("required", as the state put it) proof of identity procedure. But Richard also went ahead and satisfied the mere request for additional support for the withholdings reported on his TC-40W and 4852, perhaps just for the intellectual satisfaction gotten from constructing and submitting the careful and powerful disclaimer he attached the the W-2 he provided for this purpose. See that statement here.

EMILY IN NEW YORK shares her federal victory for 2016, recovering everything withheld from her as both normal income tax and the FICA surtaxes during that year. Here are Emily's filed rebuttals, declarations and refund claim.

Here, too, is a scan of the ID challenge Emily had to deal with before getting her complete refund, with interest for the delay; and here is Emily's refund check:

DAVID CUSTER shares his Missouri counterpart to his earlier federal refund for 2016. David's claim against Missouri is notable for the state having at first balked.

Twenty days after David's standing-my-ground response was mailed he received his notice that the state was standing down, and his check:

ED FROM PENNSYLVANIA shares a refund of a local mis-application of the tax:

VINCENT AND SHELLY T. share their quirky notice of their latest victory for the rule of law:

 I say quirky because this notice declares only a victory-in-progress. Vincent and Shelly's claim was for the full amount listed in this notice ($17,026). The IRS acknowledges that the couple received no "wages" or "income" under any other name (and refunds the normal tax accordingly), but is still taking a shot at keeping the FICA surtaxes collected from them, even though those also only arise upon the receipt of "wages" everyone agrees were not received...

Terry and Alisa

Here are the docs filed to generate this complete refund. 

Eric D.

Here is Eric's federal filing (Eric mistakenly failed to include the FICA income surtax withholdings in his refund claim, as will be seen, and is acting to rectify that with an amendment). Here is Eric's MA filing.


Here is Matthew's filing that produced this victory for the rule of law.

Vincent and Shelly T.

Here is the claim filed by Vincent and Shelly, and the obnoxious balking by the state in its effort to evade the law and browbeat or fool Vincent and Shelly into standing down before finally admitting the truth. The state should have known better. Vincent and Shelly are veteran CtC warriors with multiple federal and state victories posted

The alleged balance owed to the feds to which Vincent and Shelly's latest complete refund was diverted is itself a subject of dispute, and will doubtless soon end up as yet another victory post for these good folks.

Glenn T.

Glenn shares his October 26, 2017 federal victory for 2015, overcoming a cheap, very belated IRS effort to "change" his return and intimidate him into backing down and resuming his copper-top pod. Here's the uplifting story:

Glenn filed his federal 1040 for 2015 back in February of 2016, showing no "income" and nothing withheld. See it here.

On May 30 of 2017, some brownie-pointer at the IRS fired off a CP2000 proposing that Glenn agree that his earnings for 2015 really had qualified as tax-relevant "income", and proposing a tax due for the year of $1,432.00 (w/interest to date):

Here is the proposal with the specific IRS "income" allegations, made on the second page.

Glenn promptly fired off a simple, clear "Sorry, Charlie..." A month later, the flummoxed IRS opportunist sent a stall letter. Two months after that, the white flag got waved:

Vincent & Shelly T.

This story starts with Vincent & Shelly's April 17, 2016 CtC-educated NJ-1040 for 2015, begun with a very clear statement of what is included, and why, and claiming a complete refund of the $2780.00 withheld during 2015 and put into escrow with New Jersey (plus a $50 property tax credit). See that filing here.

New Jersey, however, chose to be hard of hearing:

Vincent & Shelly stood firm, making a prompt, straightforward response, followed by another after politely waiting several months with nothing but crickets from the NJDOR. See those responses here.

New Jersey finally replied, but just with more of the same balky nonsense.

Again, Vincent & Shelly-- notably less patient this time-- responded plainly and clearly.

And... again the NJDOR balked.

This time Vincent & Shelly addressed the state's sustained balkiness with a New Jersey 1040X, containing the same information as their original return, other than acknowledging the partial refund from the original return, and accompanied this time by carefully-explained and modified representations of W-2s created by the withholding payers who had sent their property to the state. See that response here.

Finally the state got the message, refunding Vincent & Shelly's money in full (but denying them the $50 property tax credit they had claimed, which probably had been mistakenly claimed considering that no credit can be taken against no tax owed...):

Yes, this ended up as a off-set rather than a check, but it's a full refund ending up on Vincent & Shelly's side of the balance sheet, nonetheless.


More Victories- Page 56


More Victories- Page 58


Click here to return to the Bulletin Board



Even in the face of the requirements of the law, the junkyard dog still tries to play its losing hand occasionally. Ironically, it is these sporadic spasms of resistance that offer the most telling evidence of the truth about the tax...


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.