It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

IRS to "STEAL" almost 1/2 of 10 million dollar gold coin found on couples own land!

page: 7
67
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   

VictorVonDoom
If it were me, I would be whining and complaining because they are taking half of what I found and they haven't done a damn thing for it.


Neither have the folks that found the loot. And it were "The People" (as in "We, The People") whom decided that it was allright that anything found on US soil (or on that particular States soil..) would be taxed so the find may benefit all of The People instead of just the lucky bastards that found it. I can't, for the live of me, find anything wrong with that, sorry. It's not that the elderly couple worked for it, they just got lucky and found something that was probably earned by hardworking folks that lived in that State before. So, it's only just that part of it goes back to the community that earned it.

Freaking greedy bastards, complaining and whining about the "loss", while simply stealing half of the loot from The People. Bah.




posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   

ForteanOrg
Freaking greedy bastards, complaining and whining about the "loss", while simply stealing half of the loot from The People. Bah.


By the time someone becomes old enough to form opinions about things like fairness, greed and money they have assimilated bits from a multitude of other sources whether they are aware of it or not.

I noticed your location. You may not be familiar with a remark that (then) President Clinton made about the gov't surplus. He was at the mic at some public event and was asked why, if the surpluses were going to be as big and long lasting as he predicted, the tax payers couldn't have a little of their own money back. I have to paraphrase his response from memory, but this is close to a direct quote.

"We could do that, but how do we know you'd spend it right?"

See, that kind of mindset is where you and I apparently diverge. As a child I always thought our dad was a bit harsh by declaring that all Democrats were nothing but "tax and spend" once you stripped away the pretty words and outright deception. I'll still vote for a Democrat that has a background that I can support, but the years have shown me that Dad wasn't completely wrong.

In modern day America, any dollar you send to Washington should be just like the dollar you spend on a lottery ticket, take it for granted that it's just "gone". You may get part of it back in some form of goods or service but, then again, you might win the lottery, too.

You have no way of knowing how the couple that found those coins would spend the money. They very well may have donated large percentages to churches, hospitals, charities or started a foundation or scholarship. As it is, about half of it is going to disappear into that black hole called the gov't...

Bah, indeed!



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 


So, would it be correct to say that your position is that government owns everything in the country, and the people should be grateful for whatever the government allows the people to keep?



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Crakeur
 


i dont know why im bothering to do this because i still don't see any proof this story EXISTS or is RELEVANT.

You linked a page burried under a deep pile of of many terms of what income means.

TERMS of several DEFINABLE source of "Income" but the IRS can only have jurisdiction over its domain. Its own FEDERAL domain.

Taxable income is the sweet spot what is it? Vomit

(a) In general Except as provided in subsection (b), for purposes of this subtitle, the term "taxable income" means gross income minus the deductions allowed by this chapter (other than the standard deduction).


ie See.Gross income huge list. isnt it.. starting to wonder why this shat is written this way why you're going to be zig zagging around so some retard on the internet like me has to hold your hand through the maze?

What word do they use to tax you on your 1040? Wages? Salaries? tips?

and on the gross income list theres no mention of wages but compensation for services and... oddly enough the word itself being defines is in the definition of gross income as gross income from a "business".

Let's focus on those.. lets focus on wages .

Oh.. well look at that. it gave us another -term- Employee! and Lookit that! defined right there no more links.. thank you USC.
in a nutshell

(a) Wages
For purposes of this chapter, the term "wages" means
all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public
official) for services performed by an employee for his
employer,...
c) Employee
For purposes of this chapter, the term
"employee" includes an officer, employee, or
elected official of the United States, a State, or
any political subdivision thereof, or the District of
Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of
any one or more of the foregoing. The term
"employee " also includes an officer of a
corporation. [A "United States Corporation", defined in
Sec. 207 of the Public Salary Tax Act as, "a corporate
agency or instrumentality, is one (a) a majority of the
stock of which is owned by or on behalf of the United
States, or (b) the power to appoint or select a majority
of the board of directors of which is exercisable by or on
behalf of the United States," However, we are
instructed by the IRS in Pub. 15A that such officers are
only to be considered "employees" if they are paid as a
consequence of their positions.]
(d) Employer
For purposes of this chapter, the term "employer"
means the person for whom an individual performs or
performed any service, of whatever nature, as the
employee of such person...


Terms are literally for how they are defined. You don't even have to get you your dictionary because all the words they use within the statute are defined within the statute.

Look up DRAFT. would your sister register? no cause draft is only defined for MALE "citizens" reaching the age of 18.

You people think the irs can pick and choose what they want to take from you like some sort of slave master or god.

But they are a bureaucracy that monitors and makes records for one of the most megalomaniacal devices upon this earth. the US GOVT! They've had time (since the civil war) to bury their own laws and definitions into these statutory mazes. The nature of the IRS is to tax Excise or certain "privileged" activities. Such as working for the federal government. Working federal land and properties.


THATS ALSO why they tax your "BRIBES" and other illegal material because their bribes to the federal govt. and they want their piece too.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Yes, because the irs are goldiggers. like my ex-wide



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:21 AM
link   

CornShucker
By the time someone becomes old enough to form opinions about things like fairness, greed and money they have assimilated bits from a multitude of other sources whether they are aware of it or not.


That's a generic rule, we learn by observation and indoctrination.


See, that kind of mindset is where you and I apparently diverge. As a child I always thought our dad was a bit harsh by declaring that all Democrats were nothing but "tax and spend" once you stripped away the pretty words and outright deception. I'll still vote for a Democrat that has a background that I can support, but the years have shown me that Dad wasn't completely wrong.


I agree, he wasn't completely wrong - but there is nothing wrong with "tax and spend". Please note the "spend" part: millions of Americans have jobs because there IS a Government. Think about the hundreds of thousands that work in or for the military, think of the folks that run the NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI, State police etcetera. Think about teachers, judges and other civil servants. So, yes, "tax and spend", that's how it should be! IMHO the problem is not "tax and spend" - it is "tax, lend and spend". If Governments would simply not create debts anymore but simply managed to spend just the taxes and nothing more, that would be fine.


You have no way of knowing how the couple that found those coins would spend the money. They very well may have donated large percentages to churches, hospitals, charities or started a foundation or scholarship. As it is, about half of it is going to disappear into that black hole called the gov't...


i don't care how they might spend money as it was nor is not theirs in the first place. They found somebody elses money and now claim it for themselves. Luckily they won't be allowed to get away with that - even if the owner can't be found anymore, by your own laws half of it is still legally owned by The People, represented by the IRS. I think that's fair. The finders should consider themselves lucky to be allowed to keep at least half of somebody elses hard-earned money.

As I said before: greedy bastards.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   
If you are all upset about the government taking 47%, how are you going to feel when whatever bank, that absorbed the bank that was robbed 150 years ago, gets a look at the coins, and starts working the courts to get 100% of it back.

M



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Laykilla

Uh, nope -- there big mistake was saying that they found it, rather than saying it was passed down through the family. Then the IRS couldn't use an antiquated law to steal 47%. They would have converted the coin to cash, deposited the cash in their bank, and would of had to pay the "Income" tax on it. Which is still probably around 20%, but is much better than 47.


another nice try. but i don't know how bad it would turn out for you. so you say "it was in an old cabinet or something and you just found it". first off you would have to pay the "inheritance tax" on it. then there is the issue of a will, they just might question it on that, you could possibly get away with it if you were the only heir to someone. but unless they died within the year, want to bet you get stuck with some sort of fines for not paying it immediately? if there are multiple heirs then if you have a greedy SOB in the family i'm sure they would try to get in on the action since i would think (and so would they), that it should have been equally divided amongst all the heirs, (unless of course the will was set up that everyone else had set amounts and you everything else). and at that point tie the coins up for years possibly and then possibly having it divided out amongst all the heirs.

on top of that anyone want to bet that they check their "records", and find that the person you got it from never paid taxes on it. and pull something like taking tax off for them as well as possible fines for it not being paid.

also bear in mind that if they ever find out that you found it, and did not "inherit" it you would have a nice stay at club fed.

personally i think if you "found" something like this, it is only fair that you do pay some tax on it, but more like 20%

the best idea i have seen is the "treasure diving". one thing, if you are going to film the "find" as evidence, make dammed sure that you also film ALL your previous dives. otherwise if they "smell rat" and ask to see footage of other dives you are probably screwed, as it would then look like it was fake. and make dammed sure you ARE IN INTERNATIONAL waters and there are no wrecks close by that might hit you with the "salvage laws" as mentioned earlier.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Aleister
reply to post by wulff
 


So in America if you find something on your own land the IRS owns about half of it? What happens when they give the IRS their half, then sell the other half - will they have to pay taxes on the money they make for selling their half?
Gawwwwd I hate to say it; but its better than nothing. The IRS is the ultimate evil entity that rob's the middle class as well as the working class that makes "Minimum Wage". One can barely survive working a 40 hour job at "Minimum wage". I know a family of four that lives in an Airstream trailer on a friends property for no charge. They both work at a fast food restaurant 40 hours a piece. One works the day shift and the other at a different restaurant on the night shift. The kids go to school every day, they have to rely on government assistance to help feed the family. I am truly happy that those people found the motherlode of treasure, but I would slowly sell coins as I needed them. Sorry for the rant, a bit off topic, but I wanted to say it.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by wulff
 



...they counted up the face value and it came out to slightly under $27,000. ...



 



Well... there you go.... they have an OUT ....which is the couple announced a 'Windfall' of some ~$27,000, in USA minted coins
so the Tax should be 47% on the $27K or about $ 12,700.00

Not 47% of the numismatic value or the rarity or the increased intristic value of the Gold..

NO they only have to pay the tax/fee based on the minted denomiation value of the coin
... dollar multiples or parts of a dollar totaling around $27K...

sorry UNcle SAM...the find was a" Windfall" on their property.... not a "Treasure" discoverd on public land or on the seafloor

edit on st31139369027901112014 by StUdio because: (no reason given)



I will not give all the answers here, but if the Anonymous couple wants to get any of my credible advice/options, join ATS & message me
edit on st31139369126901272014 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by wulff
 


If they had to do it all over again, I bet it would be done differently. To sell of the coins is a mistake as they have an increasing neumistic value as well as a monetary value which will outperform fiat money.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   

ForteanOrg
-- snip --
As I said before: greedy bastards.


Thanks for a reasonable and cordial reply. You and I agree on some things and on some others, not so much. That's ok with me. We can't all agree on everything. We The People didn't come up with the majority of what has been decreed by the IRS, but you are right about the necessity of needing to spend in order to have a society.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Democrats need the money to fund unions.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ForteanOrg
 


People like you are exactly whats wrong with this planet.

The belief that government has a right to what everyone has.

You call these people greedy??? Seriously??

I'm guessing you are in your late teens, maybe early 20's, and are more of a taker than a producer.

The government already takes exponentially more than they deserve, and like a crackhead they always want more and more.

Giving money to be spent irresponsibly is never a good idea.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 01:35 PM
link   
The IRS, and by relation, the U.S. government is the biggest threat to the American people today.

Land of the free? What a freaking joke. These people shouldnt have to fork over a dime for their find.



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mysterioustranger
 


Exactly my question, there is already a precedent set for this, now the thing is, did they know about it ? if so they were stupid for announcing it to the world, I am not even sure if there was a way they could have avoided this situation though, melt it down ? foreign exchange ? Swiss account ? hmm I dunno, but anyhow, too bad, the most fair exchange for anyone finding gold should be cash, the government prints money every day, backed by absolutely nothing tangible or fungible only a promise.

edit on 1-3-2014 by phinubian because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by phinubian
 

For me? It'd be like winning the lotto. Im pretty sure I'd wait awhile ...a good while if I could...before telling everyone I did. I'd have to think it through and all the possible consequences...



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 12:02 AM
link   

mysterioustranger
reply to post by wulff
 

Ok...Ill ask it. Do they own the MINERAL rights to the land BELOW ground?

There are lots of cases where you can put a house, barn, treehouse, store...whatever on land you buy to own....but the GOVERNMENT owns the mineral rights below ground. Happens all the time.

One can go buy land around a National Forest and build a cottage on your new "land"...but the government can own they ground below what youve built.

Its a common occurence.


Oh, well that's ok then. Carry on people, this happens all the time.




posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by wulff
 


I don't know about the US, but up here if you are digging for minerals of which gold is(even in coin form) you need a permit, or anything you manage to pull out belongs to the country and you are in fact steeling that mineral from the country.

Now, also up here you need a permit to dig for historical artifacts, if you find it on the surface, in a stream, river or creek, where you can take the objects with out the assistance of machinery you can keep them, but once you start actually digging you're in a grey area, that is pretty much in the favor of the government.

As well, it's the USA, that's just how it works for you all. It sucks, and it's one of the many things I really don't agree with in your country you get taxed on earnings, winnings, "treasure" and gifts. If it has a value your country taxes it... it's absurd.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 01:42 AM
link   

mysterioustranger
Ok...Ill ask it. Do they own the MINERAL rights to the land BELOW ground?

There are lots of cases where you can put a house, barn, treehouse, store...whatever on land you buy to own....but the GOVERNMENT owns the mineral rights below ground. Happens all the time.

One can go buy land around a National Forest and build a cottage on your new "land"...but the government can own they ground below what youve built.

Its a common occurence.



You make it sound like it is ok and these people should be okay with this happening. At least it is what it looks like you are implying.

It is true what you are saying, since progressive democrats, and later on progressives in power decided for a long time has been to slowly strip Americans of all their RIGHTS. Including the right to private property.

If you think you OWN that house, or land because you have paid off it's value, you've got a big surprise coming your way. Stop paying "taxes" on that property and see what the "progressive government" does...

Whether you like it or not, if you are not able to pay the "taxes" on that property you paid off the government will take such property off your hands. Heck, there are many similar "loopholes" created by progressives, and the rich elite to make sure that few Americans ever get "lucky" enough to make it rich... There are enough laws that if "you don't play by their rules and don't belong to their club" is most probable that you won't make it at all.



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join