Are you engaged in a trade or business?
If so, do you KNOW what the legal definition of a "trade or business" is in the law?
You can find it in the tax code at 26 USC 7701(a)(26):
The term “trade or business” includes the performance of the functions of a public office.
There is NO OTHER definition of this term anywhere in the tax code.
FYI.
They don't, I didn't. Claiming exempt is a step that keeps a little of the money flow. But then what does tend to happen is your workplace blabs to the IRS that you earned "taxable income". That means you either step in to ensure the facts are correct or you let the IRS accumulate evidence while you do nothing. You're on the right path.
Y'all keep using Legal Words, but have no idea what they mean....
""Income"", what is it in the IRS Codes??
""Wages"", What is it in the IRS Codes??
""Resident"", what is it in the IRS Codes??
Etc., etc., etc., all day long.....
Yeah, I read all of that shit way back in the early 80s, and have tried to apply it regularly, all the time....
Oh, I wouldn't be on this thread if I didn't know what they meant. That's the point.
"Income" is not defined in the IRS code, only hinted by a list of subcategories.
"Wages" is defined as a subcategory of income.
"Resident" is a fun rabbit trail but less important. The central part of the scheme is to get people to believe they're liable when they're not. The "resident" side of matters is merely ordinary due diligence so that, even if a Frenchman gets paid francs by a Frenchman, if they want to call it American income they have a route, so it's not central to the scheme.
The research in the 1980s was incomplete. Since then we've had time to complete the needed research. You're doing fine, don't stop.
The jist I got out of it back then, is that they think WE are all Gamblers, and are Gambling, in a type of Casino....
It actually aligns with any insurance you might get.....
Ins:: You're not a good Driver, I'll buy you a New Car, IF you place a bet with me, and have the Accident I know you'll soon have....
Individual:: I AM a good driver, and you'll see, I'll make that Wager, and I'll never have an accident, You will NOT buy me a New Car, so TAKE MY MONEY.....
Bets are made, accident waiting to happen, if your number comes up, you get a new car....
Yes, insurance is gambling, but the IRS is a different kind of "house always wins". They act as if every time anyone gives us money in any way, even if we dropped it and they picked it up, it's a potential taxable transaction, because that's the way the tax system is designed to make them think. Every receipt is equal to a gambling profit; just see the Supreme Court case called Groetzinger for a peek at the rabbit hole. The answer is of course that we structure our lives so that everything we do with Washington funny money is expressed not to be a taxable transaction.
I should have added that the questions were rhetorical, sorry.
I’m sure my job already blabbed, they had to wait for adp to tell them what to do, plus they left some “mandatory” taxes in. Gonna have to issue a notice to them Monday.
Also the irs doesn’t have hands or feet. They’re not accumulating evidence. :)
Note, sending money to the IRS is not blabbing because the transmittal doesn't report what the money consisted of. Telling the IRS you filed exempt is not blabbing.
If you mean you are now considered "exempt" from "federal withholding" but not from "Social Security and Medicare withholding", yeah that's a harder one. When I called the IRS to complain about this same thing back when I was a teenager, the agent's answer was that I could always revoke my citizenship or declare poverty (becoming Amish/Mennonite is also good).
"Issuing a notice" is unlikely to prevent SS withholding. If you have good relations with the owner, you might seek conversion to contract work that doesn't withhold at all. If it's slave labor it'll be very hard to find a person who has latitude to decide.
But the withholding is not the nexus of liability. For that you need evidence, which is why agents collect it.
Very insightful.
I doubt a new contract would be on the table. And I believe that would only be necessary if I use the IRS definitions of employee. I’m an idiot to their codes.
I believe an alternative to revoking your citizenship is to simply choose not to exercise it. If you don’t feel like exercise your right leg, you don’t have to, no one’s going to make you exercise it. Sure, I’m a citizen, I’m an uncle, I’m a cousin, but I’m a man first and foremost. You have to separate the man from the person.
According to Peter Hendrickson “Cracking the code” social security and Medicare are income taxes and since I don’t have “income” I have “earnings” those taxes do not apply to me. I expect them to either update my withholding or I’ll asking for a reason why not in writing.
I was considering filling out a form 4029 but then I’d be asking them for permission but decided to take Karl Lentz approach on their forms. Simply put I don’t speak legalese, and there’s no law that requires me to.
If you have any counterpoints I’d love to hear them, this is all a learning experience for me and I’m sure someone else reading may benefit.
Anyone in a modern-traditional job is told to fill out a W-4; its purpose is not to establish definitions but merely to establish the flow of money to the IRS through withholding. If you fill out W-4 as exempt, you might not get federal withholding because that income tax is irregular and zero might be the right amount to withhold; but they still withhold that SS/Med (always 7.65%) because W-4 does not exempt from withholding from that income tax because it's flat. Only contract employees or invoice relationships avoid SS/Med withholding because it is assumed the contractor or invoicer is handling any withholding separately; but most modern-traditional jobs don't offer the contract option.
"Citizenship" is not so relevant, because whether you exercise it or not, they don't care, they think they've got you on the form that purports to establish liability. Homework: what form is most commonly used for a payer to state under penalty of perjury that it has paid you an amount of money and defined that money to be a category of income, creating a legal presumption that remains unless rebutted by corrective evidence? I've peeked at Hendrickson's book and I think he comes around to the right answer. I'll need to check out his website.
So the actual job you have is to ensure that any reports that swear to the IRS that you earned income, when it was not income, must be corrected. That process is the real issue.
There's the secondary process called getting along with your workplace and earning a living. The 4029 route is real but I don't know anyone who's done it without actually joining one of the approved social-protection churches (Amish, Mennonite, Anabaptist, etc.). Even if you told your boss in your best Jake Blues deadpan that you've decided to become a Mennonite, he might still refuse to stop withholding until you actually signed the form and proved you have limited connection to one of the few approved churches (many apply but can't prove the narrow criteria that give them the exemption).
The fact is that most modern-traditional jobs, especially if you've not questioned the arrangement for awhile, don't have many tools available to stop SS/Med withholding. Only if you know the owner and that person can think independently and make calculated decisions would you have a good chance. That's the person whom you'd want to convince that you'd be better off as a contractor who will invoice labor charges weekly, and that your earnings would move from payroll to expenses. (If they really are aware to it, they'll realize that shifting you to contractor also saves them the additional 7.65% of your earnings that constitutes their share of the SS/Med tax, besides putting the responsibility for your share on you and not them.)
So if none of these routes work then being a responsible head of household means determining whether you should stay in what is effective slave labor or whether you should market yourself as a contractor or online worker. Many contractors are misclassified as "trade or business", but that's not so important because the stopping of the flow of money to the beast has been accomplished and you can correct any mistakes later.
But if you want to stay at the job and it's unlikely they'll listen, you can still have the moral victory that you've given them fair warning of your position; that's also important later if anyone asks you what steps you took to notify your workplace of your position. Essential: tell them why the money you received is not "income", as you've implied here. I remember Lentz too, and his free stuff is helpful for concepts, but more important is the IRC itself. Expecting consequences is less important (is actually unimportant). First remedy path for overwithheld tax is always to prove the tax was overwithheld through channels.