PROOF YOUR IQD TRADE IS NOT TAXABLE

OPINION PIECE BY "DARKSTAR" OF DINAR VETS - 12/21/09

There is a persistent insistence on this forum about the eventual exchange of IQD for large amounts of FRNs as being a taxable activity. Let's look at what the IRS and Congress have to say about it.

First, you must know that there is one thing and one thing only that is taxed under Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code, and that is any "gains, profits, or income" derived from ANY source in the course of public office in the "United States." Put another way -- the ONLY activity taxed under Subtitle A is "gains, profits or income" in the course of a "trade or business." There is NOTHING else under Subtitle A that is taxed. Sure, remuneration for labor or capital gain is taxed, but you have to remember to keep the language in its proper context. These things are taxed ONLY in the course of a "trade or business." NOTHING ELSE! Period! (Dissenters welcome -- provide proof)

26 USC 7701(a)(26) defines "trade or business" as follows:

Quote:
The term "trade or business" includes the performance of the functions of a public office.

"Includes?" Everyone knows what that means....or....maybe not.

26 USC 7701(c) defines the term "includes" as follows:

Quote:
The terms “includes” and “including” when used in a definition contained in this title shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined.

Geee! Is there anyone out there in dinar land that is wondering why Congress would create such a confusing and convoluted definition that must be followed exclusive to the standard canons of statutory construction? There is a standard treatment in law of the term "include," but we have here IRS legal terms of art .... "includes" and "including." Is anyone suspicious as to why? Come on!! Wake up!!!

So we see, the term "includes" is a term of enlargement. But that enlargement ONLY extends to other things within the meaning of "public office" so defined. In essence, the term "trade or business" ONLY includes the excise taxable ACTIVITY of public office in the "United States" and related "positions" and "employments." The measure of activity is in-turn taxed by the "gains, profits, and income" affiliated with THAT activity. Since anyone engaged in such "United States" activity is taxed on their $$$ earned in the course of that activity -- it is easily misunderstood that anyone earning $$$ must therefore also be subject to the tax. READ THAT LAST PART AGAIN, IT SHOULD ESCAPE NO ONE. Do you think your misunderstanding of this is an unfortunate "accident?" (The term "United States" in this instance refers to the Federal Government. But that is a topic for another thread.)

Now, let's examine exactly what the Internal Revenue Code says about information returns obtained at "source," as in "whatever source derived." I'll hi-lite the narrowly defined legal terms so you know what it is really saying.

26 USC 6041 states:

Quote:
(a) Payments of $600 or more
All persons engaged in a trade or business and making payment in the course of such trade or business to another person, of rent, salaries, wages, premiums, annuities, compensations, remunerations, emoluments, or other fixed or determinable gains, profits, and income (other than payments to which section 6042 (a)(1), 6044 (a)(1), 6047 (e), 6049 (a), or 6050N (a) applies, and other than payments with respect to which a statement is required under the authority of section 6042 (a)(2), 6044 (a)(2), or 6045), of $600 or more in any taxable year, or, in the case of such payments made by the United States, the officers or employees of the United States having information as to such payments and required to make returns in regard thereto by the regulations hereinafter provided for, shall render a true and accurate return to the Secretary, under such regulations and in such form and manner and to such extent as may be prescribed by the Secretary, setting forth the amount of such gains, profits, and income, and the name and address of the recipient of such payment.

Most of this language is a holdover from the original Revenue Act of 1862, including the reporting threshold of $600, which for any of you who have a basic knowledge of tax history will immediately recognize.

Now this is the ONLY provision in Subtitle A which dictates when and why information returns, such as 1099s are to be issued. Are there any challengers to this out there in dinar land? Please provide the legal language if you disagree.

Now, this language is very clear as to what is reportable, and what is not. I keep reading posts from ill-informed, "patriotic" Americans on this forum who think it their duty to provide the IMF with a percentage of their God-given bounty (provided that IQD RV bounty occureth – don’t hold your breath). Since when? Do you all understand the provisions and limitations on Direct Taxes and capitations are still in force in our Constitution? Do you realize the Federal Income Tax is an Indirect Tax levied on "gains, profits, and incomes" derived from the EXCISE TAXABLE ACTIVITY of making money in association with the "United States" (government)? This would also include bringing the government into the mix by VOLUNTARILY submitting a W-4 [see 26 USC 3402(p)(3)] Do you realize that if you are not in a "public office" or other related "position" or "employment" with the "United States" that such a tax against your IQD would be an un-apportioned direct tax and capitation? Do you realize that they have camouflaged the legal terms associated with this excise taxable ACTIVITY to appear as broadly understood words that people understand as part of their every day lexicon? ALL of the items that are taxed under the Federal Income Tax, whether it be from labor, capital investment, rents, etc, etc ...... are ONLY taxed on the "officers" of the "United States," and of course those who SWEAR under penalty of perjury on their tax returns that they are.....regardless if they naively do so or not!

If, for example, the trade of stocks, or other financial instruments are taxable in a broad way such as many on this forum believe, then they would be taxable for all people. Remember, in an earlier post where I mentioned that Citizens of any of the 50 Union states are "foreign" and thus "alien" to the Federal Legal venue. If they also do not "reside" in Federal Territory, they are legally categorized as "nonresident." Thus, an American domiciled and living (there is a difference) in a Union state is a "nonresident alien." Let's look at what Publication 519, "Tax Guide for Aliens" says about such financial investments (pg 18):

Now this is only provided to show you that there ARE instances when these things are NOT taxable. For those of you who are ill-informed about these things, I provide you these insights as a means to "wake you up," and implore you to do your own due diligence.

I encourage healthy skepticism and debate. No mindless, sheep banter. Turn off the TV and think for yourselves. You have been lied to by the establishment, and your brainwashing is nearly complete. The truth will not contradict itself. I have provided you plain, black and white evidence with explanation. You are benefiting from years of qualified and expert legal background. But again, maybe I'm a hack who has no idea what I'm talking about. You can't believe anything from anyone, much less an internet forum. So think for yourselves. But I speak the truth. He who has eyes to see let him see. He who has ears to hear let him hear.

Quote:
When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.
Donald James (1931-2008)