PROOF your IQD Trade is NOT taxable

[huffysback]

Make your Day...could you please PM me on who you talked to, because every tax lawyer I've talked to says I have to pay capital gains...

I would really appreciate a PM from you.

Thanks.

Debbie

[skelllley]

i wanna say, my tax attorney told me i don't have to pay cap gains on my exchange, however:..........if i'm stupid enough to file them, i'm stupid enough to pay them........

[machcobra]

Would be nice to not have to pay tax on the Dinar, living in the States.

[chuksan]

I believe that there is no tax on currency exchange, unless there is a profit of more than 200 usd.

[lookingforloot]

I believe that there is no tax on currency exchange, unless there is a profit of more than 200 usd.

That is correct as far as it goes. There is no tax on gain of less that $200 for personal exchanges. It is hard to see how you will fall under this threshold if the RV actually happens

[lookingforloot]

I believe that there is no tax on currency exchange, unless there is a profit of more than 200 usd.

I see several posts that say they have talked to tax attorneys and are told that there is no tax on the exchange. I am afraid that some people are talking about just attorneys--not tax attorneys. Both tax and law are very broad subjects and most attorneys know little to nothing about taxes--just like most accountants know little to nothing about non tax law. CPAs love to get clients where attorneys have prepared their taxes in the past because they know there will be a good fee in amending the last three years that the attorney has screwed up. That being said, a good tax attorney that is both a CPA and attorney and practices tax law is a real asset and I highly recommend that one be consulted. I see that you are in Mississippi--what part? I may be able to give you the name of a good tax attorney.

Logically, this is an investment and, as such, would be taxed as a capital gain transaction. However, it seems like there are a lot of investors out there that have held their dinar for the long term holding period. If the government can figure a way to get a higher rate of tax (particularly now with all of the spending and the dinar holders will be some of those "evil rich people" after the RV), they will. A law could easily be passed that is specific to the cash in of this and it could be made retroactive.

Personally, I am not going to get excited about it until after the RV happens. I will cash in and set aside about 40-50% for federal and state tax and wait to see what happens.

[teamcicalese]

Thanks that will help alot

[bigbucks]

Sounds like a sure ticket to the Federal Pen.

[infernoxd45]

I'd just pay it and not worry about it.. I'll have enough that it won't make or break me... hopefully

[Hermang]

This is a reply to the Publication 525 page 33 about cash exchange of over $200 dollars.

Why did your CPA determine that the rate was due to the fact you owned it longer than 1 year. The paragraph seems to imply that the only determination is that the amount of difference is over $200.

[Wayles]

Thanks for the viewpoint

[Mesha]

Being a former IRS employee, I can tell you from personal 1st hand observation, that they do not care how you make your money, even if it's illegal, they want their cut. Period.

[Hermang]

not against their cut but just trying to determine if capital gains only regardless of more or less a year. someone else said that I needed to look further at definitions of capital gains. Just trying to learn a bit about the tax consequences.

[Storm Trooper]

Good article thank you

[zoomzoom]

And this is a country of the free? Seems like we are not. What a shame!

[Barbann]

I would like to know if there has been any success against the IRS when they pursue legal action concerning non-payment of taxes pertaining to currency exchange? I appreciate your knowledge in this matter.

Check out Lost Horizons and Cracking the Code by Pete Hendrikson. Many accounts of those who have basically gotten all their tax money back and are not paying taxes any longer because they have educated themselves on how the tax code is really written. That said, the IRS is still pursuing Pete in court because he has had the audacity to write the book and teach others what he knows.

Over the years many or ours laws have gotten convoluted because no one tries to maintain original intent.

Also check out the rule of law with Randy Kelton. This guy will seriously educate you on how far the justice system has gotten out fo hand by doing what they want and not following the law themselves.

Once you start reading all of this you are in for a serious paradigm shift.

[brianc]

good info thanks

[GODSENT]

Darkstar thanks for this informing post,I too had been told this and found it hard to believe,didn't want to make money and turn around,not pay taxes,have the BIG BOYS come after me and take all that I haven't spent(lol),cause you see I've got big plans for this investment and don't want to go wrong in not doing whats right,so I'm looking further into this. Thanks again.

[JerryC]

Darkstar..good post but if your tax attorney will sign something saying he is responsible for any tax mistakes that would be good, but I have had dealings with the IRS and even if you win..you still seem to lose. Don't want to debate with you just sharing a small part of the nightmare I had.

I will take my chances and pay what I have to when RV is done. Thanks for sharing .

[quickchange]

There is a persistent insistence on this forum about the eventual exchange of IQD for large amounts of FRNs as being a taxable activity. Let's look at what the IRS and Congress have to say about it.

First, you must know that there is one thing and one thing only that is taxed under Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code, and that is any "gains, profits, or income" derived from ANY source in the course of public office in the "United States." Put another way -- the ONLY activity taxed under Subtitle A is "gains, profits or income" in the course of a "trade or business." There is NOTHING else under Subtitle A that is taxed. Sure, remuneration for labor or capital gain is taxed, but you have to remember to keep the language in its proper context. These things are taxed ONLY in the course of a "trade or business." NOTHING ELSE! Period! (Dissenters welcome -- provide proof)

26 USC 7701(a)(26) defines "trade or business" as follows:

"Includes?" Everyone knows what that means....or....maybe not.

26 USC 7701© defines the term "includes" as follows:

Geee! Is there anyone out there in dinar land that is wondering why Congress would create such a confusing and convoluted definition that must be followed exclusive to the standard canons of statutory construction? There is a standard treatment in law of the term "include," but we have here IRS legal terms of art .... "includes" and "including." Is anyone suspicious as to why? Come on!! Wake up!!!

So we see, the term "includes" is a term of enlargement. But that enlargement ONLY extends to other things within the meaning of "public office" so defined. In essence, the term "trade or business" ONLY includes the excise taxable ACTIVITY of public office in the "United States" and related "positions" and "employments." The measure of activity is in-turn taxed by the "gains, profits, and income" affiliated with THAT activity. Since anyone engaged in such "United States" activity is taxed on their $$$ earned in the course of that activity -- it is easily misunderstood that anyone earning $$$ must therefore also be subject to the tax. READ THAT LAST PART AGAIN, IT SHOULD ESCAPE NO ONE. Do you think your misunderstanding of this is an unfortunate "accident?" (The term "United States" in this instance refers to the Federal Government. But that is a topic for another thread.)

Now, let's examine exactly what the Internal Revenue Code says about information returns obtained at "source," as in "whatever source derived." I'll hi-lite the narrowly defined legal terms so you know what it is really saying.

26 USC 6041 states:

Most of this language is a holdover from the original Revenue Act of 1862, including the reporting threshold of $600, which for any of you who have a basic knowledge of tax history will immediately recognize.

Now this is the ONLY provision in Subtitle A which dictates when and why information returns, such as 1099s are to be issued. Are there any challengers to this out there in dinar land? Please provide the legal language if you disagree.

Now, this language is very clear as to what is reportable, and what is not. I keep reading posts from ill-informed, "patriotic" Americans on this forum who think it their duty to provide the IMF with a percentage of their God-given bounty (provided that IQD RV bounty occureth