NORFED Founder Convicted Of Minting Liberty Dollars

Hmmmm... must be a government employee...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree that he is guilty but I don't think he is deserving of any jail time.

 

The Utah bill passed and sent to the governor was HB0317.

In my opinion, this bill does not espouse the use of a "barter" system. It simply reiterates Public Law (the legal tender status of coin minted by the federal government), and codifies legal tender coin as holding a value on the face as prescribed by Public Law. In my opinion, the removal of the phrase "coins issued and deemed as legal tender by the federal government" from the original draft to simply "coins issued by the federal government" is to curtail any future attempt by the federal government to redefine "legal tender" in any way, thus affecting their new law.

And, the Utah law neither enacts the State minting of any commemoratives or such. It provides for the exchange of legal tender gold and silver coins for face value. If the coin is at any later date (whether as a short or long term capital gain) is sold for over face value, there would be a 5% capital gain tax implemented.

This will allow Utah residents and businesses to hold federal issued gold and silver coins and claim face value for any other tax purposes including county or regional taxes. These coins may no longer be considered a resource or property held, but simple cash held.

I would propose that this law will also allow the State of Utah to redefine its rules on government (both State and federal) assistance programs where resources are a consideration for eligibility. Instead of the need to claim $2800 in property resources for two $50 gold coins, only $100 would be claimed as cash held. This could allow more people to receive government assistance.

One of the key points is that the long title explains that the law in no way intends to compel any person to use gold or silver as legal tender (even if they have it). Thus, I would view this as allowing the market value of the precious metal content to be used in valuing in the case of forfeiture by court order.

In these savage economic times, I do not find it impossible to believe that State lawmakers may actually be looking for codifying legal loopholes to better the economic status of it's citizens as well as itself.

 

Regardless of your other opinions, I believe this one hits it on the nail.

 

Well the verbiage he had on the coins was flawed too so he still would have ran into problems. If he had minted them and not tried to make them look so much like US coins then he would have been alright. The fact that he used the word dollar and the dollar $ sign itself is not acceptable according to the feds. If he would have minted something like 20 Bartero's (my made up word which is similar to Ameros) on them he would have been alright. Even more important than all that is, if he wouldn't have tried to promote the use of them for goods or services rendered he would have been alright according to the federal investigation. Unbelievable and only in America.

 

I'm not arguing whether he's guilty or not (he was found guilty and that makes him guilty), but I don't think he was (in any way) attempting to subvert the US Government; a "domestic terrorist" I think they called him.

He was simply making a political protest against "Taxation Without Representation"...which is exactly what happens when an unelected branch of the US Government (the FED) devalues privately held currency by printing more for "the Public Good".

Seems like a peaceful act of civil disobedience...nothing more...and I applaud him!! :hail:

 

Lovely. This would legalize the scam, er, "tactic" of paying workers in silver coin at 1/25 of face value, then only reporting (and paying taxes on) the face value -- a dream for the "all taxation is evil" crowd. It would also make the gold- and silver-holders of the state eligible for increased benefits (aka "redistribution of wealth") from the rest of the country -- edited
I'm sure we'll be seeing lots of well-reasoned and level-headed debate of this issue.

 

Actually he overstepped the line of civil disobedience when he started promoting the use of his coins for buying goods and services rendered. It would be interesting to see how many businesses made money off of his idea. I don't have a problem with what he made, but what he was promoting is against the law and has nothing to do with me.

 

I sure this will not surprise anyone here the NORFED pg on Ebay.

http://shop.ebay.com/items/norfed%20silver?_dmd=2&_sop=12&rvr_id=219371972596&MT_ID=70&crlp=4628584655_9403&tt_encode=raw&geo_id=1&keyword=norfed+silver&adgroup_id=923984795

 

Here's a video of Bernie on Glenn Beck back before his demise. If he would have stopped making them in 2004 and just came out of retirement every few months and made more without trying to promote the use of them he would still be in business today. As Tony Montana would say, pobrecito!! Oh there's also a video of Ron Paul and his response to the RP dollar.

http://avstop.com/march_2011/bernard_von_nothaus_convicted_of_minting_his_own_currency.htm

 

I like the obverse of these coins and may eventually get some.

 

I really wish I could find the mintage numbers of some of these Norfeds. Mr. Von NotHaus, please come on this forum and let us know so we can make a profit while we support you.

Anyone know, ya got a link? :thumb:

 

LEGAL TENDER - "Legal tender is a medium of payment allowed by law or recognized by a legal system to be valid for meeting a financial obligation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender

" 15 General Description:
16 This bill recognizes gold and silver coins that are issued by the federal government as
17 legal tender in the state and exempts the exchange of the coins from certain types of
18 state tax liability."

Gold and Silver "bullion" minted by and assayed by the Federal Government, thereby insuring that 24ct gold is in fact 24ct gold or .999 fine Silver is in Fact .999 Silver, would be valid forms of "legal tender" for payment to the State with certain tax exclusions.

Bullion, whether it's gold or silver from some "other" maker of such coins would not since there is no "official" assay other than from the word of the manufacturer.

The term Face Value is not mentioned in the bill and as such could be assumed but truthfully, who would offer for payment a $50 gold piece at face value that actually has a market value of $1400 in gold?

As for Capital Gains, I'm reading things such as a non-refundable tax credit which also cannot be carried over to future years. I also think their may be some confusion regarding exactly what constitutes the capital gains. Is it the value over face value? Is it the gain since the coin was purchased? When dealing with accepting bullion as a form of legal tender, the payer certainly could not go into the taxing agency and state that even though gold is only $1200 an ounce, he paid for the pice when it was $1400 an ounce. The same is true of silver so those differences and legal claims need to be addressed for this alternative form of legal tender.

Additionally, alternative forms of legal tender, which gold and silver buliion appear to be, does not necessarily indicate the "minting" of State Produced coinage or bills backed by coinage. It simply defines Federally produced bullion as an "alternative" form of Legal Tender which may have a fluctuating "dollar" value.

As for Von NotHaus's predicament, his downfall was the overall "stupidity" of the American public with regard to what are valid forms of Legal Tender.

I don't believe for an instant that his coinage looked like a valid US coin (the word dollar or not, $ sign or not since Canada and Australia use Dollar on their currency and the $ sign to indicate dollar value which can be exchanged at any US Bank) and he was adament in trying to get folks to understand that it was not Federally produced money.

He'd set up a network of retailers that would accept the coins at their "bullion value" and folks intending to use this form of tender with retailers "outside" of that network is what caused problems. Vaulting the coins and issuing paper certificates was probably not a real smart thing to do as well.

As a side note, the $ sign did not appear on US Coinage until the introduction of the Presidential Dollars in 2007 which was well after the Liberty Dollars were produced. I suppose if you wanted to really get weird you might suspect that the $ sign was placed on the coin to bolster the governments position but thats getting way out there.

At any rate, no doubt Von NotHaus was setting up an alternative form of trade or tender if you will but I don't believe for an instant that he was intending on "fooling" anybody any more than folks have been "fooled" into thinking the US Federal Reserve note has any "actual" value other than what the US Government says it has since the World Economy and governments seem to disagree. Otherwise each countries Dollar would trade or exchange at equal value.

It's not really about money as much as it is about POWER and the federal government did not like having its power tested. After all, if they can't control your money then what power do they have?

BTW, I know a dealer friend that has a $70 Lincoln Cent for sale. I've offered him two Silver Eagles for the Lincoln. The act is barter but the payment, if accepted, would be legal tender as he'll eventually convert the Silver Eagles into cash.

 

All forms of payment are actually bartering Doug. Its just that some forms of payment are not portable enough for other forms of payment which is the intent of a nations currency.

If I were a wheat farmer that produced wheat which had a market value of $10 per bushel, me offering the 100 bushels of wheat to a car dealership for a $10,000 car would be equitable trade but not very convenient for the car dealer. Instead, I have to sell my wheat first and then offer the cash to the dealer.

However, if the dealer had a simple method for turning my wheat into cashm say through a middleman, then the dealer just might accept my wheat as paymeny (i.e. tender) for the car.

Von NotHaus produced Silver bullion rounds named Liberty Dollars which were sold to the public for the purpose of such bartering based upon the silver bullion value of each piece within a specific network or retailers who agreed to accept the coins for the bullion value.

 

Yes to the "POWER" concept 19Lyds. The want to control drives the majority of human actions/reactions, be it the individual or a society.

 

Yes the power of a ruling Oligarchy, driving the heard for its own gains and succor of power.

 

I'm not taking a political stance on this (to my knowledge), however, this is how I feel about the NORFed / Liberty Services situation...

Bernard von NotHaus sued the US Mint in 2007.
Bernard von NotHaus coauthored The Liberty Dollar SOLUTION to the Federal Reserve in 2003.
From 1998-2009, NORFed / Liberty Services distributed Liberty Dollars through "Regional currency offices" and exchanged bullion and NOTES in exchange for US dollars.
In a 2007 article citing 1999 interview with von NotHaus, The Spokesman Review noted von NotHaus as saying "We're going to be to the Federal Reserve System what Federal Express was to the Postal Service."

Insofar as I can tell, NotHaus acted with the intent to replace US currency. To claim otherwise would imply that the man lacked a fundamental grasp of what he was claiming. The USPS is a private contractor, hence USPS.com, whereas the Federal Reserve and US Mint are government agencies, hence FederalReserve.gov and USMint.gov. von NotHaus claimed that NORFed would bring direct competition to the US Mint while creating a distribution network AND the "von NotHaus reserve" (Couer d'Alene, Idaho facility holding bullion in a secured vault backing his currency).

Regardless of what we may believe as individuals, von NotHaus' actions indicated a clear intent to distribute an alternative currency within the borders of the United States of America. He broke the law. It is what it is.

Now, for my opinion of it... I think he did defraud folks somewhat by using AvOz instead of TrOz when pouring his coins. Here, I say coins instead of bullion, as his intent was evident toward developing coinage and not distributing bullion. A Liberty Dollar never contained the spot equivalent stated on the currency notes. After all, a $20 Liberty Services note could only be redeemed for $20 in Liberty Dollars coin. By its very design, the notes were continually subject to devaluation with inflation.

Also, someone made the point of Liberty Dollars not being mistaken for US coinage. I disagree. I regularly encounter situations at fast food restaurants where the employees will make comments like "we only accept US money" when they encounter very old (FRN, silver/gold certificates, red/blue stamps) or very new (pennies, nickels, Presidential dollars) currency and coinage issues. By that same token, I could see individuals assuming that something designed to look like ASEs would be a "new issue" from the US Mint.

For what it's worth, von NotHaus is fortunate that most (if not all) of the individuals using Liberty Services are libertarian or at least strongly anti-government. If that weren't the case, this federal decision would be the least of his worries. Many individuals are in a situation where they would be justified in claiming that von NotHaus defrauded them... if they chose to view it as such.

 

So.. is it illegal to own these?

I think he should have not used the words liberty, dollar, a dollar sign, or anything close to the look/sounds of U.S. currency... At least then they would have a hard time pegging him as a counterfeiter... but since he did, everyone in the public and the news is saying he is a counterfeiter... and their minds are already made up at that point.