There's No
Statute Making Anyone Liable to Pay IRS Subtitle A Income Taxes
26
U.S.C., Subtitle A: All citations of the word "liable" or
"liability"
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 914:
Liability. The
word is a broad legal term. Mayfield v. First Nat. Bank of
Chattanooga, Tenn., C.C.Tenn., 137 F.2d 1013, 1019. It has been
referred to as of the most comprehensive significance, including almost
every character of hazard or responsibility, absolute, contingent, or
likely. It has been defined to mean: all character of debts
and obligations, Public Market Co. of Portland v. City of Portland, 171
Or. 522, 130 P.2d 624, 643, 646; amenability or responsibility, Eberhard
v. Aetna Ins. Co., 134 Misc. 386, 235 N.Y.S. 445, 447; an obligation one
is bound in law or justice to perform, State ex re. Diederichs v. Board of
Trustees of Missoula County High School, 91 Mont. 300, 7 P.2d 543, 545; an
obligation which may or may not ripen into a debt; any kind of debt or
liability, either absolute or contingent, express or implied, Public
Market Co. of Portland v. City of Portland, 171 Or. 522, 130 P.2d 624,
643, 646; condition of being actually or potentially subject to an
obligation; condition of being responsible for a possible or actual loss,
penalty, evil, expense, or burden; condition which creates a duty to
perform an act immediately or in the future, Union Oil CO. of California
v. Basalt Rock Co., 30 Cal.App.2d 317, 86 P.2d 139, 141; duty to pay money
or perform some other service, Dehne v. Hillman Inv. Co., C.C.A.Pa., 110
F.2d 456, 458; duty whihc must at least eventually be performed,
Vandergrift v. Riley, Cal.Supp., 16 P.2d 734, 736; estate tax, Lyeth v.
Hoey, C.C.A.N.Y., 112 F.2d 4, 6; every kind of legal obligation,
responsibility, or duty, Mayfield v. First Nat. Bank of Chattanooga,
Tenn., C.C.A.Tenn., 137 F.2d 1013, 1019; fixed liability, Ivester v. STate
ex rel. Gillum, 183 Okl 519, 83 P.2d 193, 196; legal responsibility, Clark
v. Lowden, D.C.Minn., 43 F.Supp. 261, 263; penalty for failure to pay tax
when due, State v. Fischl, 94 Mont. 92, 20 P.2d 1057, 1059; present,
current, future, fixed or contingent debts, Erickson v. Grande Ronde
Lumber Co., 162 Or. 556, 92 P.2d 170, 174; punishment, Holliman v. Cole,
168 Okl. 473, 34 P.2d 597, 599; responsibility for torts, Italiani v.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Corporation, 45 Cal.2d 464, 114 P.2d 370, 372; tax,
Thompson v. Smith, 189 Okl. 217, 114 P.2d 922, 924; that which one is
under obligation to pay, or for which one is liable, Reconstruction
Finance Corporation v. Gossett, Tex., 111 S.W.2d 1066; the state of being
bound or obliged in law or justice to do, pay, or make good something; the
state of one who is bound in law and justice to do something which may be
enforced by action, Fidelity Coal Co. v. Diamond, 310 Ill.APp. 387, 34
N.E.2d 123; Clark v. Lowden, D.C.Minn., 48 F.Supp. 261, 263; unliquidated
claim.
All the claims against a
corporation. Liabilities include accounts and wages and salaries
payable, dividends declared payable, accrued taxes payable, fixed or
long-term liabilities such as mortgage bonds, debentures and bank loans.
See also Current
liabilities; Derivative liability; Employer's liability acts; Enterprise
liability; Legal liability; Liable; Limitation of liability acts;
Malpractice; No fault; Parental liability; Personal liability; Product
liability; Several liability; Strict liability; Vicarious liability.
Absolute liability.
See Strict liability.
Accrued liability. Obligation
which has been incurred but not yet paid; e.g. taxes, rent.
Children. See
Parental liability.
Contingent liability. A
liability not yet fixed but dependent on events to occur in the future (e.g.
a pending law suit).
Fixed liability. One
fixed as to time, amount, etc.; e.g. mortgage.
Joint and several
liability. Responsible together and individually. The
person who has been harmed can sue and recover from both wrongdoers or
from either one of the wrongdoers (if he goes after both of them, he does
not, however receive double compensation). See also Joint and
several liability; Joint tort-feasors.
Joint
liability. Liability for which more than one person is
responsible. See also Contribution; Joint liability; Joint
tort-feasors.
Liability
bond. See Bond.
Primary
liability. A liability for which a person is directly
responsible as contrasted with one which is contingent or secondary.
Secondary
liability. A liability in the nature of a contingent claim such
as the liability of a guarantor as contrasted with that of a strict surety
or comaker. A guarantor's liability does not arise until the
principal debtor has failed to pay the creditor.
26
U.S.C. §7601(a):
TITLE
26 > Subtitle
F > CHAPTER
78 > Subchapter
A > Sec. 7601.
Sec.
7601. - Canvass of districts for taxable persons and objects
(a) General rule
The
Secretary shall, to the extent he deems it practicable, cause
officers or employees of the Treasury Department to proceed, from time to
time, through each internal revenue district and inquire after and
concerning all
persons therein who may be liable to pay
any internal revenue tax, and all persons
owning or having the care and management of any objects with respect to
which any tax is imposed.
26
U.S.C. §6331(a):
TITLE
26 > Subtitle
F > CHAPTER
64 > Subchapter
D > PART
II > Sec. 6331.
Sec.
6331. - Levy and distraint
(a) Authority
of Secretary
If
any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay
the same within 10 days after notice and demand, it shall be lawful for
the Secretary to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall be
sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property
and rights to property (except such property as is exempt under section
6334) belonging to such person or on which there is a lien provided in
this chapter for the payment of such tax. Levy may be made upon the
accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official, of
the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or
instrumentality of the United States or the District of Columbia, by
serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 3401(d))
of such officer, employee, or elected official. If the Secretary makes a
finding that the collection of such tax is in jeopardy, notice and demand
for immediate payment of such tax may be made by the Secretary and, upon
failure or refusal to pay such tax, collection thereof by levy shall be
lawful without regard to the 10-day period provided in this section.
United States v. Ward, 833
F.2d 1538 (11th Cir. 1988)
"The government is unable, therefore, to offer case authority for
the universally accepted proposition that a citizen of the United
States, working and residing in the United States, subject to
federal law, earning wages, and responsible for filing an income tax
return, is liable for taxation."
[United States v.
Ward, 833 F.2d 1538 (11th Cir. 1988)]
LIABILITY ACCORDING TO THE COURTS:
"'Tax' is legal imposition, exclusively of statutory origin, and liability
to taxation must be read in statute, or it does not exist." Bente v.
Bugbee, 137 A. 552; 103 N.J. Law. 608 (1927)
"The
taxpayer must be liable for the tax. Tax liability is a condition
precedent to the demand. Merely demanding payment, even repeatedly, does
not cause liability." Bothke v. Terry, 713 F.2d 1405, at 1414
(1983).
"Liability for taxation
must clearly appear from statute imposing tax." Higley
v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 69 F.2d 160 (1934)
STATUTORY LIABILITY
Congress does not hesitate to
use the words "liable" and "liability" when writing
tax laws exercising its constitutional taxing authority.
Approximately 55 different
types of constitutional, lawful and mandatory varieties of tax statutes
can be found within the Internal Revenue Code. Here are but a few examples:
§3403 states that employers
shall be liable for payment of tax withheld from employee wages
§4374 places tax liability on foreign insurance policies;
§4401 establishes tax liability on wagering;
§5005 lays a tax liability for distilled spirits, wines and beer on
distillers or importers;
§5043 establishes wine tax liability on wine cellar proprietors or
importers;
§5703 places cigar and cigarette tax liability on manufacturers or
importers.
Dozens of other "revenue
taxable activities" which the Constitution authorizes Congress to
tax uniformly throughout the United States are clearly enumerated within the IRC and are lawfully taxable.
Scrutiny of Exhibit 13
displaying the Internal Revenue Index to Code entries for
"Liability for tax" reveals that a Code section establishing "liability for income tax" does not exist.
Congress is not authorized to make any taxpayer within the 50 states
liable and has not done so.
Question 1:
Can a federal regulation
create a specific liability, when no specific liability is created by
the corresponding statute?
Answer 1: No. The
U.S. Constitution vests all legislative power in the Congress of the
United States. See Article I, Section 1. The Executive Branch of the federal government has no legislative power
whatsoever. This means that agencies of the Executive Branch, and
also the federal Courts in the Judicial Branch, are prohibited from
making law.
If an Act of Congress fails
to create a specific liability for any tax imposed by that Act, then
there is no liability for that tax. Executive agencies have no authority to cure any such omission by using
regulations to create a liability. "[A]n administrative
agency may not create a criminal offense or any liability not sanctioned by the
lawmaking authority, especially a liability for a tax or inspection
fee." See 2 Am Jur 2d, page 129 [emphasis added].
Question 2. The federal
regulations create an income tax liability for what specific classes of
people?
Answer 2: The regulations
at 26 CFR 1.1-1 attempt to create a specific liability for all
"citizens of the United States" and all "residents of the United States". However, this regulation corresponds
to IRC section 1, which does not create a specific liability for taxes imposed by subtitle A. Therefore, this regulation is an overly
broad extension of the underlying statutory authority; as such, it
is unconstitutional, null and void ab initio (from the beginning, in
Latin).
Admit that the United States
Supreme Court has held in C.I.R. v. Acker, 361 U.S.
87, 89 (1959), and
in U.S. v. Calamaro, 354 U.S.
351, 358-359 (1957), that a regulation
that purports to create a legal requirement not imposed by Congress in
the underlying statute is invalid.
A
CITIZENS LIABILITY DEPENDS ON A TAXING STATUTE
General
demands for filing tax returns, production of records, examination of
books, imposition and payment of tax, etc., are of no consequence to the
point a taxing statute (1) defines what tax is being imposed, and (2) the
basis of liability. In other words, even if the Internal Revenue Service
was a legitimate agency of the United States Department of the Treasury
and had authority in the several States, the Service would have to be
specific with respect to what tax was at issue and would have to
demonstrate the tax by citing a taxing statute with the necessary elements
to establish that any given person was obligated to pay any given tax.
This
mandate has been clarified by the courts numerous times, with the matter
definitely stated by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in United
States v. Community TV, Inc. 327 F.2d 797, at p. 800 (1964):
Without
question, a taxing statute must describe with some certainty the
transaction, service, or object to be taxed, and in the typical situation
it is construed against the Government, Hassett v. Welch, 303 U.S.
303, 58
S. Ct. 559, 82 L.Ed. 858
In
other words, to the point Service personnel produce the statute which
mandates a certain tax and which specifies, "… the transaction,
service, or object to be taxed..," the burden of proof lies with the
Government, with the consequence being that no obligation or civil or
criminal liability can ensue to the point a taxing statute that meets the
above requirements is in evidence.
This
conclusion is supported by the statute which provides the underlying
requirements for keeping records, making statements, etc., located at 26
USC §6001: Every person liable for any
tax imposed by this title, or for the collection thereof, shall keep such
records, render such statements, make such returns, and comply with such
rules and regulations as the Secretary may from time to time prescribe.
Whenever in the judgement of the Secretary it is necessary, he may require
any person, by notice served upon such person, or by regulations, to make
such returns, render such statements, or keep such records, as the
Secretary deems sufficient to show whether or not such person is liable
for tax under this title. The only records which an employee shall be
required to keep under this section in connection with charged tips shall
be charge receipts, records necessary to comply with section 6053 (C), and
copies of statements furnished by employees under section 6053 (a).
The
control statute for Subtitle F, Chapter 61, Subchapter A, Part I,
concerning records, statements, and special returns, clearly returns the
matter to the "employee" defined at Sec. 3401 (C), and the
"employer" defined at Sec 3401(d). In general, however, (1) the
Secretary must provide direct notice to whomever is required to keep
books, records, etc., as being the "person liable," or (2)
specify the person liable by regulation. In the absence of notice by the
Secretary, based on a taxing statute which makes such a person liable
according to provisions stipulated in Unite States v. Community TV, Inc.,
Hassett v. Welch, and other such cases, or regulations which
specifically set establish general liability, there is no liability.
Sec.
6001 also exempts "employees" from keeping records except where
tips and the like are concerned. This is consistent with constructive
demonstration that "employers" rather than "employees"
are required to file returns, as opposed to paying deducted amounts as
income tax returns, constructively demonstrated in a previous section of
this memorandum and specifically articulated in 26 CFR sec 601.104.
Clarification
via 26 USC sec
6053(a) is as follows: (a) REPORTS BY EMPLOYEES. – Every
employee who, in the course of his employment by an employer, receives in
any calendar month tips which are wages (as defined in section 3121(a) or
section 3401(a)) or which are compensation (as defined in section 3231(e))
shall report all such tips in one or more written statements furnished to
his employer on or before the 10th day following such month.
Such statements shall be furnished by the employee under such regulations,
at such other times before such 10th day, an in such form and
manner, as may be prescribed by the Secretary.
Unraveling
Sec. 6001 straightens out the meaning of Sec.
6011, which requires filing
returns, statements, etc., by the person made liable (Sec. 3401(d)), as
distinguished from the person required to make returns (payments) at Sec.
6012 (sec. 3401(c)). Even though a person might be a citizen or resident
of the United States employed by an agency of the United States, and
thereby be required to return a prescribed amount of United States –
source income, he is not the person liable under Sec. 6011 and attending
regulations.
The
"method of assessment" prescribed at 26 USC Sec. 6303 is
therefore dependent on the taxing statute and must rest on authority
specifically conveyed by a taxing statute which prescribes liability where
the Secretary (1) has provided specific notice, including the statute and
type of tax being imposed, or (2) supports assessment by regulatory
application. In the absence of one or the other, an assessment by the
Secretary is of no consequence as it is not legally obligating.
The
requirement for the Secretary to provide notice to whomever is responsible
for collecting tax, keeping records, etc., is clarified at 26 CFR Sec.
301.7512-1, particularly (a)(1)(i), relating to "employee tax imposed
by section 3101 of chapter 21 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act),"
and (a)(1)(iii), relating to "income tax required to be withheld on
wages by section 3402 of chapter 24 (Collection of Income Tax at Source on
Wages)… " The person liable is the employer or the employer’s
agent, and of particular significance, it is this "person" who
is subject to civil and particularly criminal penalties (26 CFR sec
301.7513-1(f); 26 CFR Secs. 301.7207-1 & 301.7214-1, etc.). Officers
and employees of the United States are specifically identified as being
liable at 26 CFR Sec. 301.7214-1.
The
matter of who is required to register, apply for licenses, or otherwise
collect and/or pay taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code is
ultimately and finally put to rest under "Licensing and
Registration", 26 CFR Secs. 301.7001-1, et seq. Each of the
categories so addressed has liability based on some particular taxing
statute that creates liability.
PLEASE
PROVIDE ME A COPY OF THE TAXING STATUTE THAT MAKES A CITIZEN OF THE U.S.
LIABLE FOR THE INCOME TAX!
Enclosed in this
correspondence you will find copies of IRS Notices that threaten to
assess frivolous-filing penalties against me for the year 2000. I
am hard pressed to understand the nature of your communication, as I
have cooperated in good faith with the IRS to the very best of my
knowledge, information, and belief. I have sought to comply with
the rules and regulations of the Secretary and have submitted all forms
known by me to be pertinent in this process.
I have prepared and provided the lawful forms regarding my returns for
the above year. The 8275 Forms allowed me to explain my contentions of
factual nature on the returns, and the 8275 Forms demonstrate how this
position concurs with that of the Secretary of the Treasury. Both
the 8275 Forms were created and promulgated for these specific
purposes by the Secretary.
I must point out that the IRS does not have statutory
authority to penalize me civilly or create criminal charges against me
for the returns that I have submitted. The following points clearly
express the supporting elements of this claim:
1)
the 1st Amendment says that I have the right to
redress a grievance to my government;
2)
the case of United States v. Sullivan
274 U.S. 259 (1927) states that I can, by law, raise
objections and controversies on a return.
It was my
right, as set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court and the administrative
process, to make my contentions of factual nature on my return. The
requirements of the Internal Revenue Manual clearly provide
that the IRS must comply with those determinations of the U.S. Supreme
Court regarding my rights:
[4.2]7.2.9.8 (05-14-1999)
Importance of Court Decisions
-
Decisions
made at various levels of the court system are considered to be
interpretations of tax laws and may be used by either examiners or
taxpayers to support a position.
-
Certain
court cases lend more weight to a position than others. A case
decided by the U.S.
Supreme Court becomes the law of the land
and takes precedence over decisions of lower courts. The Internal
Revenue Service must follow Supreme Court decisions. For
examiners, Supreme Court decisions have the same weight
as the Code.
-
Decisions
made by lower courts, such as Tax Court, District Courts, or Claims
Court, are binding on the Service only for the particular taxpayer
and the years litigated. Adverse decisions of lower courts do not
require the Service to alter its position for other taxpayers.
As
you should be well aware, the courts have also held that you must comply
with your own Regulations;
"Purpose of rules
that federal agencies are required to abide by their own regulations
even where such regulations are more generous than required by law is to
prevent unjust discrimination and denial of adequate notice of
procedures by the agency in violation of due process."
United States v. Newell,
578 F.2d 827, 828 (9th Cir.) (1978)
In support of my submission of the 1040 Forms with Form 8275, the
actions of the IRS to-date have indicated to me that I must now
specifically inform the Examination Division of the following U.S.
Supreme Court decision supporting my right and duty to make my
contentions of factual nature upon the face of those forms:
“If
the form or return provided called for answers that the defendant was
privileged from making he could have raised the objection in the
return, but could not on that account refuse to make a return at
all.” United
States v. Sullivan
274 U.S. 259 at 262
Also, in my effort to
understand the IRS’ determination and threat to penalize me I have
discovered the following statement from the IRS’ own Internal Revenue
Manual at [120.1] 10.9 (08-12-1998):
The
intent of the law [6702] is to stop the flow of returns, amended
returns, or documents which purport to be returns, that contain altered
line items or claim clearly unallowable deductions or credits based on a
frivolous position.
It is unreasonable to
believe that my submission of duly promulgated tax forms in the proper
and specific manner for which they were created qualifies as a frivolous
action. Therefore, to attempt to
press this matter from your position will place the IRS in direct
conflict with the Court, as well as its own governing Manual provisions.
As a result, it appears to have entrapped me with civil penalties
despite the fact that the IRS itself has promulgated the Forms by which
I can make contentions of factual nature.
Furthermore, the IRS
Penalty Handbook [120.1] 1.2.1 [08-20-1998] details 10 points explaining
how penalties are to encourage ‘Voluntary Compliance’.
I have taken
note of them and provide the following contentions regarding your
Office’s apparent violations of these provisions of the IRM.
From what I can see, I have been compliant with the process for 1997
through 1999 but am being threatened with penalties nonetheless:
#1
“Voluntary compliance exists when taxpayers conform to the law without
compulsion or threat.” This is exactly why I filed returns for
2000, but the problem in this case has arisen due to the IRS refusing to
review and acknowledge the forms that I submitted (i.e. Form 8275).
These forms were submitted in order to make complete and acceptable
contentions of factual nature to prove that I had “0” gross income
as defined by law.
#2
“The Service is responsible for providing information to taxpayers,
which includes:
Written
materials that clearly explain the rules.
Forms
that permit the self-computation of tax liability.”
This
statement by the Commissioner in the IRM proves my assertion that the
IRS has acted in bad faith by initially failing to inform me of the
proper forms and documents to make my contentions of factual nature, and
then is apparently choosing to ignore my submissions when I have
provided the forms as the procedure allows. I actually have concluded
that I should be filing a 2555 form so I am asking if that will solve
this problem.
The BIG problem is that I have never met an IRS employee that had
even a remote clue concerning the Code and some did not even know what a
regulation was nor had ever read the regulations. How can such a person
who is ignorant of the law make any adverse determinations against any
Citizen? I think it is the principal of “we have always done it that
way, or we were only following orders”. I think I will summons you to
any examination proceedings concerning this penalty and see just how
much you really know about tax law, and the basis upon which you found
the citations of law I included on my 8275 form are frivolous. I will
also ask you what regulations I should have followed in order to
properly file the 1040 form. I am willing to bet you do not have a clue.
“In
the present context these principles require…timely and adequate
notice detailing reasons…, by presenting arguments and evidence…
FCC v. WJR, 337
U.S. 265, 275-277 (1949)”
“This
court has been zealous to protect these rights from erosion. It has
spoken out…in all types of cases where
administrative...actions were under scrutiny.”
Greene v. McElroy, 360 U.S.
474. 496-497 (1959)
pursuant
to the standards of due process of law as held by the U.S. Supreme
Court, and the burden of proof being upon the Secretary pursuant to 26
USC § 6703(a),
I want to remind you
of the Statues and Regulations I am relying upon for the determination
if I am liable for any tax or subject to any internal revenue tax as
found in the definition of Taxpayer as in code sect 7701 (a)(14).
I first am relying upon the privacy act statement in the 1040
instruction book where the Secretary of the Treasury cites code
sects. 6001,
6011. and 6012. They clearly say I have to pay taxes I am
liable for according to regulations , that is not statutes but
REGULATIONS and that I have to have Gross Income according to
Regulations. I have relied upon the following REGULATIONS and their
Statutes: All are found in 26 CFR and now I will list them,
1.1-1b, 1.61-1, 1.16-2, 1.861-1, 1.861-8, 1.863-1c,
1.861-2, 1.861-3, 1.861-4. I cannot find any provisions of these
Regulations that describe my situation in any of the examples of taxable
situations or sources of income found in these Regulations. I was
unable to also find any other REGULATIONS describing the earned income
of a U.S. Citizen who lives and works within the U.S. I want to
also remind you that the Regulations are the official interpretations of
the Secretary of the Treasury of the provisions and scope of the
Statutes. These Regulations are binding upon the IRS.
I will not
tolerate arbitrary determinations concerning taxable income (code sect.
63) that are not based upon Regulations because this will be a violation
of the law, the 1040 instructions, failure to follow the
instructions if the Secretary as found in REGULATIONS, and constitute
denial of Due Process.
The Court ruled that
the meaning of income is a profit proceeding from capital as found in
the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909. These cases have been cited in
the last several years and have never been overturned. The Eisner v.
Macomber case being the most prominent case defining income. Remember
that in U.S. v. Ballard the court said income is not defined in the Code
and Eisner ruled that congress is not free to define income because the
word is in the Constitution so the Court defined it to mean a profit.
According to the U.S. Government manual the IRS relies upon the 16th
Amendment for income taxing power. The supreme Court defined income to
be a profit from capital and none of the money I received was a
profit.
26
U.S.C. Sec. 26. - Limitation based on tax liability; definition of tax
liability
TITLE
26 > Subtitle
A > CHAPTER
1 > Subchapter
A > PART
IV > Subpart
A > Sec. 26.
Sec. 26. - Limitation based on tax liability; definition
of tax liability
(a) Limitation based on amount of tax
(1) In general
The aggregate amount of credits allowed by
this subpart (other than sections 23, 24, and 25B) for the taxable year
shall not exceed the excess (if any) of -
(A) the taxpayer's regular
tax liability for the taxable year, over
(B) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable
year (determined without regard to the alternative minimum tax foreign
tax credit).
For purposes of subparagraph (B), the
taxpayer's tentative minimum tax for any taxable year beginning during
1999 shall be treated as being zero.
(2) Special rule for 2000 and 2001
For purposes of any taxable year beginning
during 2000 or 2001, the aggregate amount of credits allowed by this
subpart for the taxable year shall not exceed the sum of -
(A)
the taxpayer's regular tax liability for the
taxable year reduced by the foreign tax credit allowable under section
27(a), and
(B)
the tax imposed by section 55(a) for the
taxable year.
(b) Regular tax liability
For purposes of this part -
(1) In general
The term ''regular
tax liability'' means the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable
year.
(2) Exception for certain taxes
For purposes of paragraph (1), any tax
imposed by any of the following provisions shall not be treated as tax
imposed by this chapter:
(A) section 55 (relating to minimum tax),
(B) section 59A (relating to environmental
tax),
(C) subsection (m)(5)(B), (q), (t), or (v) of
section 72 (relating to additional taxes on certain distributions),
(D) section 143(m) (relating to recapture of
proration of Federal subsidy from use of mortgage bonds and mortgage
credit certificates),
(E) section 530(d)(3) (relating to additional
tax on certain distributions from Coverdell education savings accounts),
(F) section 531 (relating to accumulated
earnings tax),
(G) section 541 (relating to personal holding
company tax),
(H) section 1351(d)(1) (relating to
recoveries of foreign expropriation losses),
(I) section 1374 (relating to tax on certain
built-in gains of S corporations),
(J) section 1375 (relating to tax imposed
when passive investment income of corporation having subchapter C
earnings and profits exceeds 25 percent of gross receipts),
(K) subparagraph (A) of section 7518(g)(6)
(relating to nonqualified withdrawals from capital construction funds
taxed at highest marginal rate),
(L) sections 871(a) and 881 (relating to
certain income of nonresident aliens and foreign corporations),
(M) section 860E(e) (relating to taxes with
respect to certain residual interests),
(N) section 884 (relating to branch profits
tax),
(O) sections 453(l)(3) and 453A(c) (relating
to interest on certain deferred tax liabilities),
(P) section 860K (relating to treatment of
transfers of high-yield interests to disqualified holders), and
(Q) section 220(f)(4) (relating to additional
tax on Archer MSA distributions not used for qualified medical
expenses).
(c) Tentative minimum tax
For purposes of this part, the term ''tentative minimum tax'' means
the amount determined under section 55(b)(1)
|