It's Both TP AND an MLM!

[wserra]

For some time, I've been contributing to the MLM forum here, which I know some of you assiduously avoid. I see multiple similarities between organizations like WTP and MLMs. They both depend on lies and scams, too often offering illusory hope to people in serious need. The outright profiteers run both types of scam, and gain at the expense of people who don't know better. And, of course, it's fun shooting at them.

So it was only a matter of time until we had an MLM for TPs. Check out cashoutco-op.com. They make the usual promises about untold wealth:

America's Most Powerful Money Secrets
Great Earnings Potential
financial freedom and building a business with lasting potential and lucrative financial rewards
With this system, you can become as successful as you want

and so on. The have the usual intentionally convoluted "Compensation Plan", which they tout as "one of the most dynamic and generous in the network marketing industry" and "pure fun, extremely exciting and much more rewarding than any other program on the Internet". So far it's pretty standard MLM stuff - even somewhat restrained, for that carnival-barker "industry".

What they sell isn't standard - the link to Tommy Cryer's videos is pretty much a giveaway. They sell "educational services", you see - a veritable laundry list of discredited TP "arguments". Only "federal privilege" is taxed, the United States doesn't include the States, the 16th Amendment was never ratified, the IRS has no authority to demand withholding from or levy on private-sector wages, and on and on. For $350 they will also "audit" (whatever that means) your 1040EZ. Such a deal.

It appears to be a straight-out pyramid scheme, since the only "product" actually sold is new memberships. Of course, with a greater or lesser degree of disguise, that's a way of life with MLMs. This one wears very little by way of disguise.

[Joey Smith]

It's been done before: Global Prosperity was an MLM scheme based on selling Pure Trusts.

[wserra]

Global Prosperity was an MLM scheme based on selling Pure Trusts.

True.

Now, there's an organization to emulate.

[LPC]

Yes, TPs and MLMs go together naturally.

As does plagarism. For example, compare http://www.cashoutco-op.com/words_used_to_fool.pdf with http://www.losthorizons.com/tax/faq.htm#Frivolous

cashoutco-op is a division of Flying Frog Inc., which is a North Carolina corporation formed by Berkeley S. Burgess Jr. (who is also the CEO), Dwight L. Johnson, David T. Bennett, Michele D. Burgess, and Richard W. Zobel Jr.

I searched PACER for Berkeley Burgess, and found only a 2002 bankruptcy filing (which was dismissed because he failed to make any payments into the Chapter 13 plan). The pleadings showed more than $900,000 in secured debt, and no tax debts.

[wserra]

Actually, Burgess' petition showed a $20,000 tax debt owed to Durham County, and that his house was in foreclosure. The bankruptcy trustee told the Court that s/he had contacted Burgess to make the required plan contributions, and that Burgess failed to respond. Hence the dismissal.

You'd trust this guy's "business opportunity", right? Typical of MLMs.

[John J. Bulten]

While you're at it, could you also look up "Twenty8ight Incorporated", Berkeley's domain registrant corp?

The email address "nvp@" in combination with the Compensation Plan would seem to identify him or someone as having been accorded the "National Vice President" tier therein described.

We can always hope he drops the non-CtC stuff and goes straight.

ADD: losthorizons.com/Forum3/topic.asp?topic_id=1844

[wserra]

While you're at it, could you also look up "Twenty8ight Incorporated", Berkeley's domain registrant corp?

Sure. Looks like it's just Burgess.

COMPANY INFORMATION

Name: TWENTY8IGHT INCORPORATED
Address: 100 GATTIS SUITE 301
CHAPEL HILL, NC 27517


FILING INFORMATION

Identification Number: 0750578 -BUS
Filing Date: 11/02/2004
State of Incorporation: NORTH CAROLINA
Date Incorporated: 11/02/2004
Duration: PERPETUAL
Status: ACTIVE
Corporation Type: PROFIT
Business Type: CORPORATION
Address Type: MAILING

Where Filed: SECRETARY OF STATE/CORPORATIONS DIVISION
300 N SALISBURY ST, LEGIS OFF BLDG
RALEIGH, NC 27603


REGISTERED AGENT INFORMATION

Name: BURGESS, BERKELEY S.
Address: 100 GATTIS SUITE 301
CHAPEL HILL, NC 27517


AMENDMENT INFORMATION

Amendments: 03/27/2006 MISCELLANEOUS ANNUAL REPORT-DOCUMENT ID: 200608603205
08/19/2005 MISCELLANEOUS ANNUAL REPORT-DOCUMENT ID: 200517100649
11/02/2004 MISCELLANEOUS ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION-DOCUMENT ID: C20043070012


STOCK INFORMATION

Common Stock:
Dollar Value:
Authorized Shares: 20,000,000
Par Value: $0
Convertible: NO

The email address "nvp@" in combination with the Compensation Plan would seem to identify him or someone as having been accorded the "National Vice President" tier therein described.

Which, along with a Metrocard, will doubtless get him on the subway.

We can always hope he drops the non-CtC stuff and goes straight.

Straight to jail.

Which leads me to a question for you, John. When your particular brand of snake oil first lands somebody in jail - or costs someone a home - what are you going to do? I know, I know, you don't think that will happen - but just humor me for a moment, and assume that it does. What will you do?

[John J. Bulten]

Wesley, when upholding the law next lands someone in jail, or costs someone a home, I can only continue to uphold the law. But these particular consequences from this particular brand of oil are not new. Exemplars range far and near throughout history. William Penn, in Old Bailey Courthouse, notably summed up my reaction nicely on September 3, 1670:

"Shew me, and the people, the law"!

[Imalawman]

This morning a thought occurred to me, John. But first, could you explain again, how the definition of employee in IRC 3401 specifically removes wages from being taxable under compensation for services in IRC 61?

My thought was this, recently the government enacted a minimum wage increase (and has had the minimum wage for years); this "wage" increase affects both public and private sector wages. Seeing as how congress continues to interpret the term "wage" as referring to the private sector, doesn't this fly in the face of your thesis that congress really didn't mean private sector wages when using the term "wage" in the IRC? Could you show any instances outside of the IRC where the government has EVER interpreted "wages" or "employee" as being limited solely to the public sector?

[wserra]

Wesley, when upholding the law next lands someone in jail, or costs someone a home, I can only continue to uphold the law.

Can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs, eh, John? I can just picture you telling that to one of those poor schmucks that listens to you - in the visiting room through plexiglass on the telephone, or with him on the pay phone at the homeless shelter. Imagine his relief.

And you still don't get the picture: when (not if) Hendrickson's - Mr. Burns to your Smithers - injunction is affirmed by the Sixth Circuit, and cert denied by SCOTUS, that is by definition the law. Bleat all you want. It won't matter.

William Penn, in Old Bailey Courthouse, notably summed up my reaction nicely on September 3, 1670:

"Shew me, and the people, the law"!

Comparing yourself to William Penn now? Who's next, George Washington?

In any event, do you read what you post? You quote from Penn at his trial for simply speaking in front of Grace Church, then the largest Quaker meetinghouse in London. (I don't know if it is in your link, but the fact was that he couldn't speak inside it, since the authorities had padlocked it.) Penn insisted that he was violating no law by simply speaking (apparently no one could testify what he said), and the jury in fact acquitted him.

As for you and Hendrickson, on the other hand - well, do you recognize these words: "The refunds or credits described above were erroneous within the meaning of IRC § 7405(b). Defendants were not entitled to refunds of federal income taxes for 2003 because their federal income tax liability for that year – $6,061.00 – exceeded the amount of the federal income taxes withheld from Defendant Peter Hendrickson’s wages by his employer ($5,620.02), which constituted the only tax payments made by Defendants in 2003."

There exists a term of art for those words, John: "the law". And, unless it's reversed, it will continue to be "the law". So now you've been "shown" "the law". Don't bother to thank me.

[wserra]

With all the posting here concerning the LoserHeads forum, I just took my first look at it in a while. I've been following (and, from time to time, posting about) the various Hendrickson litigation debacles, but I always felt that playing with my kids was a better use of time than reading the nitwits there, even while on vacation.

But I can't help but notice that the estimable John J Bulten listed this thread (in a thread there entitled "Trolls") under "Quatloos threads (that) deal directly with LH as if they have nothing better to do". Uh, John, I think you read Quatloos threads about as carefully as you read the tax laws. I started this thread on a subject that had nothing to do with LH, and you interjected with a post that referred to "non-CtC stuff". Don't you have anything better to do?

As long as we're on the subject, though, John, you disappeared rather than answering my question: Assuming that the injunction against Hendrickson is affirmed in the Sixth Circuit, and the Supreme Court denies cert, will you then recognize it as "the law"?

[Kimokeo]

I'm curious about the use of the term 'uphold' when stating to 'uphold the law'.

On most websites, the site puts forth information, but it is stated to be educational and the reader is recommended to research the law, too, and make their own final conclusions.

Lawyers, on the other hand, actually provide their final conclusions. The reader is still capable of researching the law, but that's why they paid the lawyer.

I suggest using the term "uphold my interpretation". That's is more accurate. I find the original statement bordering with legal advice since it is spoken with a sense of validity - which is ain't.