As near as I can tell, the gov't really does sidestep the true question of whether silver and gold are actually money..In a nutshell, the gov't argument was that should he sell gold or silver for the intrinsic value of the metal he should pay taxes, which I agree and I believe Sanders would as well. Only thing was, that Sanders made the specific point of using TRADE confirmations, specifically using the phrase gold and silver MONEY, and therefore who is to say he was selling the intrinsic value of the metals as opposed to trading the representative currency value of them for Federal Reserve Notes, and therefore simply moneychanging??
"In its opinion, the Tennessee Supreme Court specifically held that the sale of gold and silver coins and bullion for their intrinsic value as metals, rather than for their representative values as currency, constitutes a taxable sale of "tangible personal property" under Tennessee law."
As a record of each transaction, [Sanders] gave the agent a "trade confirmation," which stated: (in part)
......Our acceptance of Federal Reserve notes (the green paper you carry in your billfold) in exchange for gold and silver money is a function of our common law 'moneychanging' only......
The other elaborate stuff going on would of course call for a conviction,(the delaying and depriving) if the gov't would first prove that the gold and silver ARE NOT MONEY. Which they can't really, and hence he wouldn't be delaying or depriving them of anything.
So who should determine if each transaction was a trade of money, or a sale of metal? The gov't says one way is taxable, the other isn't, yet doesn't give a clue on how to determine what the transaction was. |
