As of 2017, the IRS is sending FRIVOLOUS FILING NOTICES to those submitting tax returns that claim lawful money demand reductions. See https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2016reports/201640069fr.pdf
Is reporting a negative amount on the "Other Income" Line 21 "frivolous", if it is reporting the total amount of United States notes (USNs) received as income during the tax period per 12 USC 411 lawful money demands?
Remember, Federal Reserve notes are a dual-purpose currency.
See Treasury.gov article entitled: What are Federal Reserve notes and how are they different from United States notes?
All during the year we are legitimately presumed to be receiving liability instruments called Federal Reserve notes (FRNs), the default currency in the United States, as income.
But if we have non-hearsay evidence of demanding lawful money asset instruments called United States notes (USNs) for all transactions during the year, then that is a totally different kind of income.
Note that these instruments have completely different effects economically, just as they do on a typical accounting ledger balance sheet.
FRNs are debt instruments, private credit of the Federal Reserve and obligations of the United States.
USNs are asset instruments, and are not taxable, as they are the public money instruments of the United States government to perform its functions. See M'CULLOCH v. STATE, 17 U.S. 316 (1819).
So how would we report the asset-instrument based "income" on a 1040 Form, as opposed to the presumed liability-based income?
Would not Line 21 entitled "Other Income" be the best line to use to report this other asset-based income?
And would it not have to be a NEGATIVE number in order to show that it was USN asset-based income, as opposed to FRN liability-based income?
And would not this NEGATIVE number be in accord with the LAW codified in 12 USC 411, by effecting the "redemption" of those presumed FRN-based POSITIVE numbers?
Notice that to redeem/discharge a debt (negative), an asset (positive) is needed.
Isn't -(-1000) = +1000?
A NEGATIVE of a NEGATIVE = POSITIVE.
A NEGATIVE of a LIABILITY is an ASSET.
Therefore must not a negative FRN amount be used on Line 21 to redeem/discharge the presumed FRN amounts received as income, to be in accord with 12 USC 411 and Public Law 73-10 (Public Policy)?
Isn't our USN-demanded Income truly "Other Income" that was received during the tax period?
Would it not be wrong to not report this "Other Income"?
Isn't the number NEGATIVE only because it must be negative in order to reflect an ASSET instead of a LIABILITY amount.
And isn't a NEGATIVE amount needed to redeem the presumed FRNs used during that tax period in accord with 12 USC 411 and Public Law 73-10 (Public Policy)?
But this is only theory. It must someday be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction!
As far as is known and published, this issue concerning the application of 12 USC 411 in our tax system has not been adjudicated in a court of law.
We could petition the President for an Executive Order to enforce 12 USC 411.
Until then, we must do what is necessary to survive under the threat, duress, and coercion of penalties.
NOTE: These pages are for educational purposes only, and are not meant or to be construed as legal advice.