Chills on Planet Merrill (Steven Kosin)

[Pottapaug1938]

Over on Planet Merrill, a member who, a short time ago, proudly announced that he had just made his first "redeeming lawful money" tax return, has just gotten a letter from the IRS warning him that he is in danger of getting a $5000 frivpen. The responses from David Merrill et al. are classic Merrillian lunacy; so check them out if you are in need of some schadenfreude.

[wserra]

The guy's name is Steven Kosin, and I'm embarrassed to admit that he's a fellow New Yorker. He says things like, "Work harder America, millions on welfare need new lingerie" and "Day number 3, the federal Government is shutdown, the sun has risen and it's going to be a beautiful day".

A few years ago, he ran for Suffolk County (eastern Long Island) Sheriff. He was knocked off the ballot - something frequently abused in New York, IPOF, but I don't know the details in his case. In any event, picture him trying again: "This guy who wants to be Sheriff, ladies and gentlemen, writes 'Nunc pro Dork Pizza Pizza' on the back of his paycheck and thinks it means that, unlike you, he doesn't have to pay taxes."

Note that the letter came from Ogden. We're not going to hear about the outcome to this one.

[Lambkin]

What a clown.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xao49k ... ver-s_news

[Pottapaug1938]

Boy, THIS will work....

Dear Sir or Madam;


The letter postdated April 7, 2014 (copy included with this letter) stating that I have filed a frivolous Tax Return confuses me. I have been making demand for redeemed lawful money most of the tax year 2013 and therefore should be getting nearly a full refund or a full refund of all withholdings. Additionally I have examined the citations you have included in your letter and there is no connection with the process of redeeming lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 that I have been and still are doing as evidenced by the copies of the checks that were included with my refund. I have included 3 of them with this letter as examples. To save money on postage I have not resent all of them. If the agents acting for the IRS need me to resend all of them I can and will upon request.

Please explain exactly where on the Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4 (included with this letter) you find the Remedy I am using or something similar that applies to my filing and respond BEFORE charging me a $5,000 Frivolous Penalty because I cannot find any connection with the process of redeeming Lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 or demand for lawful money reduction on Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4.

On the letter that was sent to me it states "review the enclosed Publication 2105 (Why do I have to pay taxes)". Publication 2105 was not included in the letter but I went on irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p2105.pdf and found what I believe to be the one that was supposed to be sent to me and included it with this letter. Is the included publication 2105 the one the letter I received from the IRS Post dated April 7th 2014 the Publication 2105 it was referring to? If it was the correct publication I was unable to find any reference to the process of redeeming lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 or demand for lawful money reduction.

If I am mistaken please tell me what section(s) apply to my return in your response so that I may understand for this as well as future fillings. If after further review the 1040 I filed is found by the IRS to be correct as I have determined it to be, please respond in kind and I will await the check in the mail. If not please answer my questions and we can work to a speedy resolution.

Warm Regards,
John Q. Doe

[The Observer]

I would not be surprised if David disowns anyone sending the above letter; after all, this letter does not meet the usual steps in David's wacky redemption theory. David does everything in his power to steer his followers into just filing meaningless paperwork at a court "evidence repository" and worthless UCC filings. In his book, this is all is needed besides actively stamping "redeemed for lawful money" on currency. David concludes that because this is what he has done, and has never had to pay taxes, it must work.

And it would work for his followers - if they shared the same economic profile as David does. If you have happen to be umemployed, living in your parent's home, getting cash payments from your marks, you too could be just as successful as David is in keeping the government off his back about taxes. In other words, David's "method" works. But any "method" works, whether you have a personal "clerk" at the courthouse maintaining your "repository" or if you put your underwear on your head inside out. As long as you are considered judgement proof, (a polite term for flat broke and no prospects of that changing), the government is not going to spend time chasing you.

However, those people who have some ability or measure to pay are going to find sending letters like the above only the first step in increasing their tax debt and involvement with the government. And they will be shocked to find that the government is taking their "lawfully redeemed" FRNs and everything else that isn't nailed down with enucmbrances to resolve that tax liability.

And this is why David does not encourage these people to openly confront the government. The longer that he can keep them operating under the radar, the longer the myth will continue about his silly "redemption" theories. Otherwise, the minute his victims run into trouble, David will throw them under the bus, denounce them for not following his instructions precisely, and throw them out of his forum.

[Pottapaug1938]

This was David's last word on the subject, posted before the above letter:

Suitors with an evidence repository have had success by adding to the Clerk Instruction (Refusal for Cause):



I have examined the citations you have included in your letter and there is no connection with the process of redeeming lawful money that I am doing.

But that is with a Libel of Review for an evidence repository and properly refusing for cause the FrivPen warning letter.

May I suggest:

Your letter postdated April 5, 2014 stating that I have filed a frivolous Tax Return confuses me. I have been making demand for redeemed lawful money most of the tax year 2013 and therefore should be getting nearly a full refund of all withholdings. Additionally I have examined the citations you have included in your letter and there is no connection with the process of redeeming lawful money that I am doing. Please explain exactly where on the Memorandum of 40 Frivolous Arguments you find the Remedy I am using and respond immediately BEFORE charging me a $5,000 Frivolous Penalty.

[notorial dissent]

The letter itself should be good for and grounds for a frivpen as well.

Which is par for the course on planet la la la.

[fortinbras]

Please will someone provide the link to 'Planet Merrill' where this letter can be found??

[Fmotlgroupie]

I wondered where this crazy planet was too and after some searching here it is http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthre ... wful-Money

[Lambkin]

I wondered where this crazy planet was too and after some searching here it is http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthre ... wful-Money

Thank you. This was my favorite bit:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthre ... #post12290

I went to the county clerks office they said that the affidavit was un-recordable, since it had nothing to do with a court-case or a real-estate transaction but suggested that I put it in the miscellaneous file at the court records office and they would file it there so I did, this is what I got. They took it stamped it received and said that it was in the miscellaneous file and if I wanted a certified copy of it I would just need to provide them with the date it was put into miscellaneous but they also stamped 2 other originals for me that I kept.

Well played, clerk, well played.

[Pottapaug1938]

I wondered where this crazy planet was too and after some searching here it is http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthre ... wful-Money

Thank you. This was my favorite bit:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthre ... #post12290

I went to the county clerks office they said that the affidavit was un-recordable, since it had nothing to do with a court-case or a real-estate transaction but suggested that I put it in the miscellaneous file at the court records office and they would file it there so I did, this is what I got. They took it stamped it received and said that it was in the miscellaneous file and if I wanted a certified copy of it I would just need to provide them with the date it was put into miscellaneous but they also stamped 2 other originals for me that I kept.

Well played, clerk, well played.

You are talking, of course, about the "evidence repository" so beloved of David and his acolytes.

[LPC]

Please explain exactly where on the Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4 (included with this letter) you find the Remedy I am using or something similar that applies to my filing and respond BEFORE charging me a $5,000 Frivolous Penalty because I cannot find any connection with the process of redeeming Lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 or demand for lawful money reduction on Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4.

Notice 2008-14 is published at 2008-4 IRB 310 and does contain the following frivolous position:

(12) Federal Reserve Notes are not taxable income when paid to a taxpayer because they are not gold or silver and may not be redeemed for gold or silver.

It doesn't use the phrase "redeeming lawful money," but it is about money and talks about redemption, so I'm pretty sure it's close enough, because I don't think that the IRS is required to publish a description of every possible variation on every possible idiocy.

See also, Revenue Ruling 2004-31, 2004-12 I.R.B. 617, which describes a number of different frivolous "removal arguments":

In other variations, individuals argue that Federal Reserve notes, or “paper money,” are not legal tender and that the Government has been wrongfully using taxpayers and their labor as security for the Government’s obligations.

Courts repeatedly have rejected removal arguments and other similar arguments as frivolous and have penalized taxpayers who make these types of arguments. See, e.g., ... United States v. Condo, 741 F.2d 238, 239 (9th Cir. 1984) (affirming criminal conviction for tax fraud and rejecting as “frivolous” the argument that Federal Reserve Notes are not valid currency, cannot be taxed, and are merely “debts”); United States v. Rickman, 638 F.2d 182, 184 (10th Cir. 1980) (affirming criminal conviction for willfully failing to file a return and rejecting the taxpayer’s argument that “the Federal Reserve Notes in which he was paid were not lawful money within the meaning of Art.1, § 8, United States Constitution”).

Rickman is also cited in "The Truth about Frivolous Tax Arguments."

So I think that any kind of "lawful money" argument is rightfully treated as frivolous.

[operabuff]

The letter itself should be good for and grounds for a frivpen as well.

Which is par for the course on planet la la la.

The letter can't incur a separate frivpen because it is neither a return nor one of the "specified submissions" that can be subject to the penalty.

I'm sure that given time the "taxpayer" here will manage to qualify for more penalties, though.

[fortinbras]

Merrill seems determined to be the Pied Piper leading people into deep trouble with the IRS.

He's spent time in lock-up, both in jail and in the psych ward, and he seems determined that as many people as possible should share that experience.

[wserra]

I cannot find any connection with the process of redeeming Lawful money per USC Title 12 §411 or demand for lawful money reduction on Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2008-4.

I don't think that the IRS is required to publish a description of every possible variation on every possible idiocy.

Yeah, that's the complete answer to this really dumb "argument".

For example: I am about to market my amazingly original new idea for beating the IRS. I call it the "Moon Method". Request a CDPH. When before the examiner, turn your back on him/her and drop trou. You will have previously written "Kiss Here" on your butt with a black Sharpie. Since 2008-4 doesn't label the Moon Method frivolous, it must work.

Van Peltian "logic".

[notorial dissent]

The fact that fellow Planet Merrill denizens don't have a clue as to what the term "lawful money" does or doesn't mean to begin with, explains a lot about why the believe his BS.

[Pottapaug1938]

Add to that the fact that Dear David knows about the Rickman and other related decisions, the holdings of which all contradict some of his most cherished beliefs, and yet manages to mine them for quotes which he twists into support for his lunacy, and you have a person who other people follow at the risk of great peril to themselves.

[Gregg]

.

For example: I am about to market my amazingly original new idea for beating the IRS. I call it the "Moon Method". Request a CDPH. When before the examiner, turn your back on him/her and drop trou. You will have previously written "Kiss Here" on your butt with a black Sharpie. Since 2008-4 doesn't label the Moon Method frivolous, it must work.

Van Peltian "logic".

It's a RED marker, and it has to be at a 44 degree angle across BOTH cheeks. There is some debate about how many letters end up on which side...

[grixit]

And if it doesn't work at first, try a different variant, otherwise known as a re-buttal.

[rogfulton]

And if it doesn't work at first, try a different variant, otherwise known as a re-buttal.

keyboard warning please!