Success with the Taxman

Please post any successful outcomes here for all to see.

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby Freeman Stephen » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:25 am

ferryheplanet is back up. TMRC?
User avatar
Freeman Stephen
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1374
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:07 am

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby MrFrodo » Fri Feb 22, 2013 6:07 pm

The Monarchs Revenue Collectors
You see what happens Larry? You see what happens when you fuck a stranger in the ass?
MrFrodo
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby openedeyes » Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:30 pm

I think I have discovered a rather interesting jewel of information, which the tax-man let show while his or her guard was down.

As many of you know I have been having my own battle with them for sometime (I have not been reporting it because frankly it has been boring and not terribly interesting. It has been a matter of: they push me, I push them and although they agreed to drop their demands I have, nevertheless, continued to push for a declaration that no law exists that gives them the right to plunder our money, beit earnings, savings, pensions etc. I never expected them to concede and they never have. However, I have also pressed the concept of the legal fiction v the tangible flesh and blood individual and they again have refused to take the bait, that is until now.

I have recently received a copy of a report from the tax-man to the Adjudicator explaining the situation as they see it and laying out their case. Of course although references are made to Parliamentary statutes no mention is made of any law, well how could it? However, this is a fairly lengthy report and I think whoever was writing it must have lost concentration while writing as one of the paragraphs, which is concerned with my Trade Marking my name states:

“….it would not remove Mr Straw from the picture he would continue to exists as a flesh and blood human as well as a ‘legal fiction’ and be required to pay his tax.”

Is the writer acknowledging the reality of the legal fiction? Is s/he accepting the concept of the intangible entity? And as s/he is writing a professional report on behalf of HMRC is s/he acknowledging that this is the view of HMRC and as such they are aware of the difference between Jack Straw and JACK STRAW?
"There is no such thing as Country; there is the beautiful Earth with high and low points.
Our brothers and sisters fill the high points and water fills the low" (eam 1968)
User avatar
openedeyes
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:33 pm
Location: 'Paying it forward' in Scouseville

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby Dreadlock » Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:43 pm

Yup you caught them. Definitely an admission.

And he is right. Even if you separate yourself from the fiction successfully you are still liable as a human if you consent to statute. You consent by accepting the use of title with your name. So Mr Straw is just as liable for tax as MR STRAW. You must simply be acting as Straw to avoid taxation.

Definition of Title from Bouvier's 1914:
Title, Personal Relations. A distinctive appellation denoting the rank to which the individual belongs in society. See Rank ; Nobility.

Definition of Title from Bouvier's 1856:
TITLE, persons. Titles are distinctions by which a person is known.

Hence by accepting title you are acting as a person. Furthermore you are accepting the assumption that you are acting within their society and the rules of their society are statutes. Statutes apply to persons.

A trick I've come across by government and their agents is, upon my refusing to accept correspondence addressed to MR STRAWMAN, they revert to Mr Strawman hoping I will fall for the trick and accept the title.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby openedeyes » Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:40 pm

But whenever I correspond with the revenue I adopt a to-the-point, never volunteering information completely detached manner and I never acknowledge being Jack Straw. I will refer to some unnamed individual such as: 'the writer says' or 'it could be argued' etc. Whenever I mention specifics I use JACK STRAW in the third person. For example: 'The legal fiction JACK STRAW has never agreed to contract to...", or something similar.

In a general case if an individual falls for the trick you mention, okay. But it still seems to me that the enemy have slipped up and are accepting the concept of a STRAWMAN.

On the other hand, if as in my case, I have never given cause to suggest I am my STRAWMAN and have been at pains to keep the two parties separate, surely the admission I have managed to elicit (and in writing) means not only do they accept the concept of the STAWMAN, but that they know I am not he - although they say I am, but would have no basis for that assertion. And might possibly have as yet not even recognised their blunder.

I close all of my letters with Jack: of the Straw family.
"There is no such thing as Country; there is the beautiful Earth with high and low points.
Our brothers and sisters fill the high points and water fills the low" (eam 1968)
User avatar
openedeyes
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:33 pm
Location: 'Paying it forward' in Scouseville

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby Dreadlock » Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:31 pm

As I said, they've definitely admitted that the strawman is not the man.

However they operate under assumption and their assumptions stand until explicitly rebutted.

They assume you are operating as the trustee of the strawman and they assume you accept the use of title. You must explicitly rebut both of these assumptions.

They know that JACK STRAW has never agreed to anything because fictions have no ability to agree - only people acting on behalf of the fiction can agree to things and it is quite possible for JACK STRAW, as a trust, to have a huge number of representatives acting in different capacities within the trust that is JACK STRAW. Similarly, corporations can have thousands of employees/representatives.

Your JACK STRAW belongs to you. It is your property. You are both the grantor and the sole beneficiary, the state is the trustee. Instead of using the form, 'The legal fiction JACK STRAW has never agreed to contract to..."
try, "I have never, as either the grantor or sole beneficiary of JACK STRAW, agreed to contract to...". Do you see the difference? You are letting them know that you know exactly what is going on.

Similarly closing your letters "Jack: of the Straw family" leaves you wide open to them assuming the capacity in which you are acting is that of trustee. The worst possible capacity to be acting in. Your name means nothing, the capacity or role that you are playing means EVERYTHING.

However if you were to close as, "Jack, grantor and sole beneficiary of JACK STRAW", you are now telling them exactly who you are and most importantly the capacity in which you are acting - leaving them NO room to assume you are acting in another capacity.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby Rongo121 » Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:26 pm

Well put Dreadlock, brilliant mate. :clap:
Rongo121
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:51 pm
Location: Stoke on Trent

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby openedeyes » Mon Jul 29, 2013 1:12 pm

I see what you're saying and there seems to be a logic to it and I thank you for taking the time. However, it does appear to fly in the face of other views of how to distance one's self from the legal fiction; the advice in Veronica's book for example.
"There is no such thing as Country; there is the beautiful Earth with high and low points.
Our brothers and sisters fill the high points and water fills the low" (eam 1968)
User avatar
openedeyes
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:33 pm
Location: 'Paying it forward' in Scouseville

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby Dreadlock » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:55 pm

The fiction is just a tool. People can distance themselves from it and not use it, or they learn to use it. Both approaches are valid.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: Success with the Taxman

Postby openedeyes » Sun Aug 04, 2013 1:52 am

Dreadlock, I took on board what you said re strawman and I've been doing a bit of other reading and watching Dean Clifford's videos, which are okay, but can be a little confusing due to sound quality with people throwing in questions and him losing his train of thought.

Anyhow, over the last 12-months I copied letters and instruments to the tax Adjudicator by recorded delivery, as the revenue claimed they never received the first. Anyhow, although the tax dropped their claim for alleged back tax and gave me some compensation and then gave me a tax rebate and now want to give me more money, the Adjudicator has asked them to send a report and has asked me to comment on that report - I think this is because I am billing the tax hundreds of thousands of pounds. And I put the revenue on notice and demanded they do a number of things as follows:

Do not make unsubstantiated claims against my name, they are not authorised to issue securities in my name, stop taking tax from my pension and refund all taken, create for me a document I can produce saying I'm a none tax payer, I didn't contract with them and have no intentions of so doing, that the legal fiction is intangible with no arms and wit and so could not contract and anybody claiming such is guilty of fraud, all property belonging to strawman, legal fiction whatever is mine, I do not work for the Crown unless I bill them and then I want paying as in my current huge bill.

I now have this business of Legal title the (Crown) v equity title (ME) of my name and was wondering how to proceed.
Should I tell them I own the equity title of the legal fiction, and therefore, I can charge them for all the letter I have answered - as I have been working for the CROWN?

I've certainly hit a nerve and I'm having so much fun watching them squirm I am up for trying anything with them.
"There is no such thing as Country; there is the beautiful Earth with high and low points.
Our brothers and sisters fill the high points and water fills the low" (eam 1968)
User avatar
openedeyes
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:33 pm
Location: 'Paying it forward' in Scouseville

PreviousNext

Return to Success Stories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron