I would like to not pay into Social Security anymore.  I currently am
a V.P. (Independant Contractor) of a Mortgage Company and a General
Partner in a Trading business.  My Social Security is outragious per
quarter and I would like to invest it myself.  I want to stop being
required to pay it further, but not lose what I have put in.  Thank
you.

The only legal way to avoid paying Social Security taxes is to
repudiate your Social Security number in writing to the federal
government. Regarding exactly how to do this, I cannot tell you.

I'm sorry my answer isn't crisp and decisive, but you asked a question
that potentially creeps over the legal line laid down by the federal
government, and I'm sorry to say that as far as I can tell, there is
no official or sanctioned means for getting out of the Social Security
system. People have done it, but there are no statistics regarding
their number or their ability to do business in this country after
they did it.

Not surprisingly, the Social Security Administration doesn't talk much
about this matter, and its Web site is unhelpful. But an individual
can contest his number and refuse to honor it. In such circumstances,
the SSA will almost certainly keep that person's information on file.
However, I would not recommend this tactic.

If you give up your SS#, for better or for worse, you are going to be
on a government short list for the rest of your life. There are plenty
of anecdotal tales of people being persecuted by the government for
doing this. I have no idea whether they are true. However, through my
reading of several publications and Web site and conversations with
those who know more about Social Security than I do, I can tell you
that:

* The IRS hates this tactic, which it views as nothing more than a way
to get out of paying taxes (which, for most people, is exactly what it
is.)
* The lack of a Social Security number may preclude you from ever
applying for benefits. In other words, if you are paralyzed in a car
accident and suffer sufficient injury that you cannot work again, you
will probably not be eligible for Social Security disability. I have
been able to find no information about whether or not retirement
benefits are available.
* There are also any number of state or local organizations or
businesses that will simply not do business with anyone who does not
have the proper identification.
* The lack of a Social Security number will probably make it more
difficult to obtain credit or find work. Though the Social Security
Act does not require one to have an SSN to work in the U.S., for
practical purposes, many employers will likely find it easier to toss
applications rather than deal with any potential difficulties with the
government.

I found a lot of information at independent Web sites, but the groups
that publish this kind of thing are not known for their success at
social reform. These people may indeed be telling the truth, but it's
apparent they have an axe to grind, and equally apparent that if you
follow their advice and it doesn't work, you're on your own.

All that aside, if you wish to stop paying Social Security taxes, you
can do so - at your own risk. Those Web sites offering instructions on
how to get out of the Social Security system, offered a caveat like
this one at http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl17b.shtml. "Disclaimer:
This report is intended purely as a communication of information in
accordance with the right of free speech. It does not constitute legal
or tax advice. Anyone seeking such advice should consult a competent
professional. READERS ARE SPECIFICALLY ADVISED TO PAY ALL LEGAL TAXES
THEY ARE SUBJECT TO, AND TO OBEY ALL LAWS TO THE LETTER. Neither the
author nor the publisher assumes any responsibility for the
consequences of anyone acting according to the information in this
report."

When you hear things like that from the few people advocating a tussle
with the SSA, think twice before following their advice. But if you're
still game, here are some places you can go if you wish to try to get
out of the Social Security system:

Here's an excerpt from the American Patriot Friends Network Web site
(http://www.apfn.org/apfn/ssn.htm):

"The Social Security Administration May Not Remove The Record of Some SSNs: 
A question was recently posed to the Social Security Administration
regarding rescinding an adult's Social Security number. The Agency's
response indicates that once payments have been made under an assigned
account number, the record of the Social Security number -- and all
information about the person it was assigned to -- will never be
removed from SSA files.
The Social Security Administration policy manual, "RM 00205.095,"
addresses this issue; it states:
"SSA does not change, void or cancel SSNs. In special situations, SSA
will delete the application information from the SSN record." This
specific SSA policy statement is in regard to numbers assigned to
children at birth.
However, the statement appears to be a "blanket" policy. Apparently
this is the SSA policy with regard to all assigned SSNs. Accordingly,
it appears that the SSA does not delete or remove SSNs from their
records under any circumstance. All indications are that once a SSN
has ever been assigned, the record is permanently maintained by the
Administration.
According to the Social Security Regulations, a person must use a SSN
if they apply for public benefits. An applicant for government
benefits who does not have, or does not use, a SSN will be denied."

The same information is available at
http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page6/fp-ssnfaq.htm#Can%20I%20rescind%20my%20social%20security,
and I don't who who is the original author. There are some tips about
how to beat the system, though no evidence that they work.

You can find a sample letter to the SSA at
http://autarchic.tripod.com/files/ss-scam.html. The letter contains a
revocation of power of attorney. However, the letter is inflammatory,
and the writer (anonymous) labeled it for informational purposes only.
It does contain a lot of detail and legal precedents. I don't think
I'd send this letter, but it's fun to read the rant.

The buildfreedom site also provides a sample letter to the SSA, this
one written by a man named Anthony Hargis. It is shorter and less
inflammatory than the letter at the above Web site. Below the letter
is a list of organizations that will help you "terminate your SSN."
Based on my reading of the SSA handbook
(http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/ssa-hbk.htm), I don't know if
such "termination" is possible.

You might be thinking that I left out the most obvious strategy -
calling up the SSA and asking them. I have no doubt that if you did
that persistently enough, you could get a straight answer. Had you
asked a less-risky question, I'd have made the call. But I doubt this
is the kind of call that can be handled by an accountant who
calculates your benefits or a customer-service agent who tells you
which forms to fill out. I would be surprised if such calls were not
automatically routed to senior-level executives, and your name would
be on a list before you hung up the phone.

That's too risky for $20! Or for $200, as a matter of fact.

You didn't ask for my advice, but I'll give it anyway. I've known of
several people who considered this course of action. All, after
careful research, a new reading of the Constitution, and discussions
with a few people who actually did deal themselves out of Social
Security, decided not to do it.

I'm in the investment business and have no doubt I could earn returns
better than the SSA will deliver. But I wouldn't do this on a bet. I'd
advise you not to do it, either.

V


Search strategy: 

"social security" cancel taxes benefits rescind

Not sure, but I believe once you hit gross pay of $89K and have paid
in associated social security tax appropriate to that level, THEN you
don't have to pay any more for the year.  As I understand it, everyone
in the U.S. must pay social security tax. You don't get out of it what
you paid in.  You are currently paying CURRENT SS benefactors.  When
you hit the age of elligibility, those folks still working will be
paying YOUR SS.  My niece, at 14 and making minimum wage pays it. My
father, at 61 and making 6 figures pay it. And I, self employed
earning 6 figures pay it quarterly as you do, but you get to stop at
somewhere in the high $80 K range. Next January, you have to start
paying again, though.  If you find a work-around, let me know. I
already know that SS won't be there for me if I need it because I'm
still fairly young... so I'm trying to get to the point where i don't
need it and can rely on my own investments.

That is depressing to hear. The main reason I wanted to be Self
Employed was to get out of the SS system. Now it seems I will be doing
nothing but swiming upstream. Is their any hope? Selah.

:(

contrary to what the resident expert has told you there is a way to
legally get out of the SS system. What you need to understand is that
there are two nations in one. One being the Constitutional Republic
that "State Citizens" have access(i.e. your constitutional rights) and
the other is the legislative democracy based in D.C. whose citizens
only have access to "civil rights", although they may appear similiar
they are vastly different in that state citizens are not subject to
any amendment above the 13th.

From the 14th on as a federal or better yet "United States citizen"
you HAVE TO FOLLOW AND OBEY ALL THEIR REGULATIONS,
statutes,ordinances,codes,administrative law(private policy),etc. etc.

NOw the person is right in saying that once you disconnect yourself
from the feds you CANNOT ever go to them for anything. The only
exception being the use of federal reserve notes

now here I need to elaborate:

Federal Reserve Notes are "fiat money", that means that in terms of
intrinsic value they are no better than monopoly money. Think about it
in the most basic terms, its just paper and ink. If the fed gov
dissapeared tommorrow you wouldn't be able to buy a cup of coffee with
it. This is very important to understand as every court in the land
has accepted and recognized the UCC(Uniform Commercial Code) which
establish the rules for any type of commercial transaction (anything
and I mean anything that involves fed notes is a commercial
transaction.). The UCC basically says that you must honor and fulfill
any commercial contract you enter into. EXCEPT IF THERE WAS NO FULL
DISCLOSURE OF THE TERMS AND OBLIGATIONS in the contract. this applies
to the government as well.

where is all this going you ask? well for a full and detailed
explanation of what has happened to our country it would take a 500
page book,so the short and sweet of it is this: the federal
government(legislative democracy)declared bankruptcy in 1938,at that
point their international creditors stepped and took power of attorney
over the government. Public Law(Constitution) became Public
Policy(private law) laws became statutes(actually Admiralty Maritime
Law but they would not dare reveal this to the public.) In order to
not be dragged into court by one of the few hundred thousand state
citizens who know better and charged with treason(the constitution
guarantees a Republican form of government) they provided a way out,
this can be found in UCC 1-207.7.

Every system of civilized law must have two characteristics: Remedy
and Recourse. Remedy is a way to get out from under the law. The
Recourse provides that if you have been damaged under the law, you can
recover your loss. The Common Law, the Law of Merchants, and even the
Uniform Commercial Code all have remedy and recourse, but for a long
time we could not find it. If you go to a law library and ask to see
the Uniform Commercial Code they will show you a tremendous shelf
completely filled with the Uniform Commercial Code. When you pick up
one volume and start to read it, it will seem to have been
intentionally written to be confusing. It took us a long time to
discover where the Remedy and Recourse are found in the U.C.C. They
are found right in the first volume, at 1-207 and 1-103.

Remedy

    "The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever
rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights
by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel." (UCC 1-207.7)

It is important to remember when we go into a court, that we are in a
commercial, international jurisdiction. If we go into court and say.
"I DEMAND MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!", the judge will most likely say,
"You mention the Constitution again, and I'll find you in contempt of
court!" Then we don't understand how he can do that. Hasn't he sworn
to uphold the Constitution? The rule here is: you cannot be charged
under one jurisdiction and defend yourself under another jurisdiction.
For example, if the French government came to you and asked where you
filed your French income tax of a certain year, do you go to the
French government and say "I demand my Constitutional Rights?" No. The
proper answer is: "THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO ME. I AM NOT A
FRENCHMAN." You must make your reservation of rights under the
jurisdiction in which you are charged, not under some other
jurisdiction. So in a UCC court, you must claim your Reservation of
Rights under UCC 1-207.

UCC 1-207 goes on to say...

    "When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a
reservation thereof, causes a loss of the right, and bars its
assertion at a later date." (UCC 1-207.9)

You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says:

    "The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an
intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as "without
prejudice". (UCC 1-207.4)

Whenever you sign any legal paper that deals with Federal Reserve
Notes, write under your signature: "Without Prejudice (UCC 1-207.4)."
This reserves your rights. You can show, at UCC 1-207.4, that you have
sufficiently reserved your rights.

It is very important to understand just what this means. For example,
one man who used this in regard to a traffic ticket was asked by the
judge just what he meant by writing "without prejudice UCC 1-207" on
his statement to the court? He had not tried to understand the
concepts involved. He only wanted to use it to get out of the ticket.
He did not know what it meant. When the judge asked him what he meant
by signing in that way, he told the judge he was not prejudice against
anyone... The judge knew that the man had no idea what it meant, and
he lost the case. You must know what it means!

Without Prejudice UCC 1.207

When you use "without prejudice UCC 1-207" in connection with your
signature, you are saying, "I reserve my right not to be compelled to
perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not
enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. I do not accept the
liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or
commercial agreement."

What is the compelled performance of an unrevealed commercial
agreement? When you use Federal Reserve Notes instead of silver
dollars, is it voluntary? No. There is no lawful money or alternative,
so you have to use Federal Reserve Notes; you have to accept the
benefit. The government has given you the benefit to discharge your
debts with limited liability, and you don't have to pay your debts.
How nice they are! But if you did not reserve your rights under
1-207.7, you are compelled to accept the benefit, and are therefore
obliged to obey every statute, ordinance, and regulation of the
government, at all levels of government; federal, state and local.

If you understand this, you will be able to explain it to the judge
when he asks. And he will ask, so be prepared to explain it to the
court. You will also need to understand UCC 1-103, the argument and
recourse. If you want to understand this fully, go to a law library
and photocopy these two sections from the UCC. It is important to get
the Anderson, 3rd edition. Some of the law libraries will only have
the West Publishing version, and it is very difficult to understand.
In Anderson, it is broken down with decimals into ten parts and, most
importantly, it is written in plain English.

Recourse

The Recourse appears in the Uniform Commercial Code at 1-103.6, which says:

    "The Code is complimentary to the Common Law, which remains in
force, except where displaced by the code. A statute should be
construed in harmony with the Common Law, unless there is a clear
legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law." (UCC 1-103.6)

This is the argument we use in court. The Code recognizes the Common
Law. If it did not recognize the Common Law, the government would have
had to admit that the United States is bankrupt, and is completely
owned by its creditors. But, it is not expedient to admit this, so the
Code was written so as not to abolish the Common Law entirely.
Therefore, if you have made a sufficient, timely, and explicit
reservation of your rights at 1-207, you may then insist that the
statutes be construed in harmony with the Common Law.

If the charge is a traffic ticket, you may demand that the court
produce the injured person who has filed a verified complaint. If, for
example, you were charged with failure to buckle your seat belt, you
may ask the court: "Who was injured as a result of your failure to
'buckle up'?" However, if the judge won't listen to you and just moves
ahead with the case, then you will want to read to him the last
sentence of 103.6, which states: (2) Actually, it is better to use a
rubber stamp, because this demonstrates that you had previously
reserved your rights. The simple fact that it takes several days or a
week to order and get a stamp shows that you had reserved your rights
before signing the document. Anderson Uniform Commercial Code Lawyers'
Cooperative Publishing Co. The Code cannot be read to preclude a
Common Law section. Tell the judge, "Your Honor, I can sue you under
the Common Law, for violating my rights under the Uniform Commercial
Code. I have a remedy, under the UCC, to reserve my rights under the
Common Law. I have exercised the remedy, and now you must construe
this statute in harmony with the Common Law. To be in harmony with the
Common Law, you must come forth with the damaged party."

If the judge insists on proceeding with the case, just act confused
and ask this question: "Let me see if I understand, Your Honor, has
this court made a legal determination that sections 1-207 and 1-103 of
the Uniform Commercial Code, which is the system of law you are
operating under, are not valid law before this court?"

Now the judge is in a jam! How can the court throw out one part of the
Code and uphold another? If he answers, "yes", then you say: "I put
this court on notice that I am appealing your legal determination." Of
course, the higher court will uphold the Code on appeal. The judge
knows this, so once again you have boxed him in.

I hope this helps on your path to understanding

Interesting posts since I left. But I'll stand by my initial comments.
I have no idea whether the strategy put forth by the poster would
actually work. I do, however, maintain that attempting to get out of
paying Social Security taxes is a mind-bogglingly foolish thing to do.

Yes, the system punishes the self-employed. I know, I pay self-employment tax.
Yes, the system punishes those who know how to invest their money. I
know, because I have had some success managing my own money.
Yes, the current use of the Social Security number as an
identification tool is not in keeping with the purported use of the
number when it was first introduced. It's too late to change that.
Yes, employers and financial institutions should not discriminate
against people without a valid SSN. But they do.

Despite all that, the risks of trying to separate yourself from the
system are, in my opinion, far worse than the drudgery of the extra
taxes and doubts about whether that money will be there when you
retire.

In many jurisdictions you simply can't get a driver's license without
a Social Security number. That's just a fact of life. Many employers,
probably most, won't bother with you if you don't have a number, as
there are a line of people in the HR office who are willing to fill
out the form, with the SSN. Another fact of life.

Every game has an ante. I could move to another country, but I like
the U.S. the best, despite recent unsettling political trends. In this
game, the ante is turning over a portion of your pay for the privilege
of living in a society with the greatest breadth of opportunity in the
world. You give up some of your freedom for privileges. It stinks, but
it's been the way societies have worked ever since men first gathered
in large cities for protection, commerce, and companionship. Studies
of chimpanzee society have noticed similar sacrifices made by apes
that want to get along in society.

The other game has its own ante. No driver's license. No job. No
credit cards. No brokerage accounts. But you do get to be on a short
list of government troublemakers.

No thanks, I'll play these.

Sometimes you take a stand to make a point. Nothing wrong with that,
if you're prepared to bear the burdens in the wake of your fortitude.
That doesn't mean you should jump in front of a bus just to see if it
stops.

V

I feel the need to correct something that thewatcher-ga posted above.
Although his/her economic description of paper fiat money is accurate;
his/her application of the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) is not. The
UCC only covers the sale of goods. Goods are defined by the UCC as
"tangible, existing products". The sale of real estate, future goods,
or services are not covered under the UCC. Social Security is a
transfer program that moves money from earners to nonearners. It has
nothing to do with tangible goods and it DEFINITELY has nothing to do
with legal contracts.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f4029.pdf

This form will allow you to be exempt from paying SS tax and Medicare
tax.  You will lose anything you have paid into your account, but for
younger people it may be worth not paying into ever and investing your
money yourself.

Read this form carefully because you do have to meet a couple of
requirements.  So, if you are not a member of a church you may have to
join one.

I wouldn't advise using that IRS link posted above except under
unusual circumstances. I looked into this a couple years ago. That
form applies when you are a member of a church that teaches against
public insurance. You can't just join a church and say you don't want
to pay taxes.

My guess is that a number of people have done just that, and until
they get audited, they do not pay taxes. But this form only applies
for religious groups that meet specific criteria, and few do. I can
only imagine what happens when these people get audited -- and I can
almost guarantee that if you're not paying Social Security taxes, your
return moves up near the top of the pile for auditing.

A word of warning: Pay your taxes. Deduct all you can, and pay the
rest. Why risk years of prison to save a few thousand dollars? Unless
your life is such a mess that you'd be better off in jail, the risk is
not worth it.

V