Even you don't buy this argument. Suppose you have one of these coins. I offer you a $50 bill and aa $5 bill in exchange because I like shiny metal things. You refuse, even though I am nominally offering you a profit of $5, because you're not an idiot and like me, you value the coin for its gold content rather than its facial value.

'Legal tender' does not mean 'sole determinant of value,' only that you as a creditor can't reject it if it is tendered to satisfy a debt. If you legally owe me $1 million and offer to settle the debt with a giant diamond, I might take your offer but I'm not obliged to. But if you offer me $1 million in $100 bills I have to take it - I can't reject it on the grounds of inconvenience or anything else. But suppose you owe me $50. Can I require you to pay me with one of the $50 gold coins? No, I have to take a $50 bill if that's what you choose to offer.

OF course, you're referring to the case where Robert Kayre wwent ot prison for 15 years for tax evasion involving gold coins.

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/12/23/09...

What actually happened was his workers would go to a warehouse, where they would receive gold coins (or certificates of ownership of same), which they would then immediately 'sell' - at the same location - for envelopes full of cash. Kahre's wife produced payroll sheets based on the cash amounts. However, employees were never issued W-2 or 1099 forms, for either the cash amounts or the gold coin amounts. Notably, any employees who opted to retain coins rather than sell them had the fair market value of the coin deducted from the 'amount owed' in their payroll records. Generally they didn't, so Kahre and his wife would keep recirculating the same gold coins over and over - withdrawing a bunch of cash from the bank, 'paying' an employee with coins and then 'buying' them back immediately with the cash, 'paying' the next employee with the coins they had just 'bought' and so on.

Kahre was doing this not only for his own business (a drywall/construction services company) but for a bunch of other businesses in his local area, for which he raked off $14 million in fees, but didn't see fit to file any tax returns documenting this fact. All told, the total amount of unpaid taxes in the case amounted to about $57 million.

This wasn't bright,it was fraudulent. there was plenty of notice that where the market value of an asset exceeded the face value (as of these coins) that the asset was taxable as property at the market value, going to back to well before the coins in question were issued. Kahre's legal arguments depended heavily on the fact that the matter hadn't been litigated in court before, even though similar matters had and even though there were clear rules promulgated by the IRS. On top of that, the actual mechanics of the payment operation made it screamingly obvious that the payments in gold were nothing more than a sham, using workers' brief physical contact with the gold coins as justification for not filing taxes while operating a parallel system of buying and selling the same coins over and over as an excuse for getting regular old cash from the employer to the workers.

If you actually think schemes of this kind make sense then you are a gullible person and I strongly recommend you avoid investing on the basis of these beliefs.