Fiddo
Forum Replies Created
JWR, I can also understand your frustration in these matters. From what I have heard it seems better to deal more “administratively” with the thugs and ask for proof that they even have such jurisdiction. As in your post
Quote:I have also noticed in 27CFR Section 70.161(a), which is the corresponding regulations for 26USC 6331(a) says“(a) Authority to levy?(1) In general. If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the tax within 10 days after notice and demand, the appropriate ATF officer who initiated the assessment may proceed to collect the tax by levy, provided the taxpayer has been furnished the notice described in ?70.162(a) of this part. The appropriate ATF officer may levy upon any property, or rights to property, whether real or personal, tangible or intangible, belonging to the taxpayer.”
It seems that often the irs tries to get people to run to the courts where they have the home “field” advantage since they control most judges. Plus it's more a tactic to make you spend more money than they have to until you either loose everything fighting or the court just ignores you like they do most others.
From what I understand, the irs uses more bluff and such to make a person waste time and resourses trying to “guess” what they have. I myself would send them what knowledge I had about all I knew about my position and theirs. I would put the facts in their face with a certified signed postal receipt telling me they got everything I sent. I would shine the light of day on them and let them know that I know the truth. Of course this is just my opinion since I don't have the “legal” background to give advice.
Just know that you are not alone. As for the CDPH, I think I would not do that myself and if I did have to then it would be at a time and place of my choosing. Again, that's just me. Since it seems that the irs uses CDPH meetings to intimidate and attempt to get people upset to where they make a scene, then the irs can use “whatever they want to make up”..
<_<
Yes, it's what “they” claim and of course they threw out schiff's line of delusional which is kinda like.. huh??
Can a person not use a mental state of mind as a defense against oppression?
🙁
I reside in the state of Oregon, although I could submit a “exempt w-4” and write on it “federal only” all the federal taxes would stop being withheld, but the state would still move forward with the garnishment for state unless I did as I mentioned before. Plus I would also still have the other voluntary things being taken too such as social security and medicare and “oregon state manpower”… which I would prefer not to participate in anymore since SS will pretty much be gone by 2008 according to Greenspan, plus I would have to wait another 29 years before I could collect on an empty coffer anyways.. 🙁
Thanks again Sonic for the suggestions, I don't ever consider anything from this site to be “legal” advice, even when I go to sites like the Cornell law site since they could have typo's.
As with your statement, I did show them the 3402(n) section, and the related court cases. Anyone who was sane would have been able to determine that I was not trying to get away with anything. Only they went and had a company lawyer write very direct questions about 3402(n) and related sections of the “tax advovcate” who of course ignored their questions and replied that it was all a “scam” (in their words). So my employer has informed me that this matter is concluded and that as far as they are concerned they will not address anything further about the issue. Or they would have to take professional management actions. (whatever that is)
Plus unfortunately the state I reside in has this little statute that anyone within the state who recieves “income” from within the state, either with or without an actual liability will pay the required 9% state “income tax”. Then at the end of the year such persons with no liability would then have to file the proper claims with “tax court” providing proof of non-liability and file a claim for full refund.
Unfortunately I see a couple problems with that “statute” since employment taxes are beyond the jurisdiction of tax court, so they cannot be litigated there. 2nd is that “tax court” is only for “tax payers” “or those within the jurisdiction of the tax court” so going into the court, to claim that they have “no jurisdiction” over something they cannot litigate anyways pretty much has you stamped as being liable for the taxes and the amounts owed. Just like as Author #2 (or someone) wrote in another section about using court lawyers, as they are officers of the court that to use them you would have to be in the courts jurisdiction and as such the lawyer would not be able to claim that you were not… (I think that was the jist of what I read)…
Plus if I file an “exempt w-4” with my employer, if it does not have another one dated in the future to restore the withholding, the state files an (albiet illegal) garnishment with the employer to withhold the maximum amount of tax. Because for some odd reason when the reg's say that “employers may” send questionable w-4's to the ir s, these people follow the party line. Even the “tax advocate” response the company lawyer (not much of one if you ask me) got didn't even answer his questions but it did say at the end of the “advice” from them that anything further that the employee submitted could be forwarded to them (ir s) for consideration.
I also dislike the stupid idea of having to refile a “exempt w-4” which supposedly I could not anyways do, every friggin year to “reclaim” that I wasn't taxable before and am still not liable now… Thanks for the words of encouragement though.. 😉
Thanks Author #2 and Sonic, Although I read much I sometimes don't retain as much because of shear volume. Thanks ever so much for the clarity. Although I have tried to educate my employer about what and who a withholding agent is, about the voluntary nature of a W-4, (which can be terminated by either employee or employer in writting).(But) Since I am just one “number” in a vast (albiet greedy) corporation who or what I want is irrelevant to them. So they still take my money and of course won't allow anything further to be said about it from me.
Yet to give you an idea, this same corp has a cayman island sub that supposedly allowed them to avoid almost 800 million in “alledged” corporate income taxes. I guess they can “avoid” things but the common person cannot. 🙁
But again, thanks for the clarification.. 😀
ehthom…
I have heard that the local sheriff can stop a levy if there is sufficient cause. If you would be in great financial ruin then they might help. But then again since most are un-informed about the laws they serve except when it comes to criminal acts they might not. Might be worth a try since if you've done your letters w/ receipts then you have good faith to show that in your beliefs that you have no liability. Plus you would want to see the sheriff in person, don't call them or write as it might take too long to get in touch with them before the (albiet illegal) levy starts.
Hopefully in dealing with the IRS that you sent everything certified w/ return receipt using the USPS. Sending them uncerted letters, faxes or emails gets nothing and they (the irs) will claim they got “nothing”. It's a wonder how the “former” irs agent won't respond but it's not unexpected. Those types of people want to pretty much collect half of what the person supposedly owes. They are only looking more to help themselves, not the innocent public. (like vultures circling a dieing animal) Plus they won't involve themselves with someone labeled a “tax protestor” even though most in the movement DO NO SUCH THING!!
I am hoping that you have done your research about “levy” and “notice of levy”, you might want to inform your employer about the latter, since that only applies to people that I am assuming you are not one of. As for the other one, if you haven't been to court, it would be in my opinion be an illegal taking of your funds. Plus take your time with teaching your employer, show them materials that explain your position and theirs. If they get a notice of levy for you then you would be able to show them how it does not apply and why. Plus in my opinion such a thing is “voluntary” for the employer, they can toss it since the document is “incomplete” without paragraph “a” on the back…
I am not a lawyer and don't mean anything here as advice but more as a suggestion about direction and things you might be able to try or look into. Good luck and know that you are not alone. 😉
I got this off a free news site:
Tax protester faces kiddie-porn charges
Philadelphia Daily News ^ | Thu, Jun. 17, 2004 | Jim Smith
Posted on 06/17/2004 11:13:47 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian
Tax protester faces kiddie-porn charges
A Montgomery County man who has publicly dared the Internal Revenue Service to arrest him for not paying federal income taxes was charged yesterday in federal court in Philadelphia with possession of child pornography.
IRS agents seized 10 computers from the Hollywood home of Larken Rose more than a year ago, but have yet to charge the tax protester with any tax crimes.
The child pornography was “inadvertently discovered” by an IRS agent who was examining one of the computer's hard drives, an FBI agent alleged.
FBI agent Beatrice A. DeFazio said the computer images contained explicit sexual situations involving underage girls.
The agent said there is “probable cause” to believe that Rose downloaded the kiddie porn from the Internet because the pictures were stored in the same computer file “where partially nude images of his wife” were also stored.”
Neither Rose nor his wife could be reached last night.
I didn't know Larken had a Hollywood home? Plus it's extremely interesting that they “inadvertently” came across these photo's?? I smell a huge rat!! I doubt larken would have nude photo's of his wife but as far as I know there are no laws against taking those kinds of photo's….
Ah, very true.. I see your point after reviewing it again. In my haste to add content I missed something the first time thru.
Thanks 😀
Well actually, in the Brushaber case the Supreme Court ruled that the 16th only clarified the taxation powers of Congress. That it kept a tax which was an indirect tax (excise) from being moved into the catagory of direct taxes. Since I believe the case dealt with an owner of horse drawn buggy's? (my memory fails me atm)
It is common for the IRS to ignore anything that disagrees with what they “know” or “believe” since they are having tens of millions of Americans sending them “free money” every year without really knowing that they might not have any liability for paying. The reason I say “might not” is that some Americans do engage in taxable activities and privilages, so they would earn “taxable” income. As for the IRS: well they don't clarify things just like the FBI and CIA don't. To allow for deniability plus if they started telling people incorrect info we would have them “d–d” to rights and be able to quash the whole income tax system. At least the part that pertains to Americans living and earning only domestic income within the 50 states of the union.
You'll notice that the IRS and other “parrots” tend to repeat that they have a constitutional amendment that allows them to levy taxes, but the key thing is they don't mention “what” taxes they have the “power” to levy. Plus one amendment (like the 16th) cannot be counter another amendment as that would void the whole constitution. So they just use vague statements and let the viewer think what they want. There are too many sheep in America and the wool is getting very thick as of late. With presidents trying to push America into a “one world government” where those who “still” pay taxes either willingly or by force pay for the misseryies now going on around the world. That Americans fund both the “world monetary fund” and the “national currency stabilization fund” (I am not 100% sure on that second name) which are both used to buy governments in foreign countries that we now have soldiers dieing in.
But I digress..
Sorry to get off topic.. 🙄
Um, okay that was an interesting website. Really scarey if you ask me about some of the claims made. As for the idea that the irs allows schiff to keep promoting his stuff so that they can justify higher interest, penalties and other stuff seems a little far fetched. Since from the way Mr. Swan makes it sound, schiff is promoting an illegal tax scheme. Because he is telling people how to obtain a tax reduction or benefit. Which would have had the irs slap him with a 6700 injuction years ago…
but that's MHO 🙄
If you think that was good, I got a bit off a copy of the Tax Advisors report about how they “encourage” compliance:
Quote:
D E F I N I T I O N O F T H E P R O B L E M
Federal Tax Deposit (FTD) requirements for employment taxes present significant challenges for the IRS as well as taxpayers. Approximately 62 percent of the failure to deposit penalties assessed under this system are later abated.1 Erroneous assessments are a burden on taxpayers and a drain on IRS resources.
A N A LY S I S O F P R O B L E M
IRS Penalty Policy Statement P-1-18 states: ?Penalties are an important tool in collecting the proper amount of tax revenue at the least cost. And in the interest of an effective tax administration, the IRS uses penalties to encourage voluntary compliance.?2 Taxpayers that do not follow the rules for depositing employment taxes are subject to a failure todeposit taxes (FTD) penalty.3
End quote:
Unfortunately I closed the webpage so I don't have the link atm, but it is from the 2003 report of the Tax Advocate to the IRS commissioner. The important line is:
“the IRS uses penalties to encourage voluntary compliance.”
I think I would believe that to be “extortion” not encouragement.. but that just MHO 😮
here's the link the the report, Advocate report to Congress
The quote is from page 207 of 506 pages, at the top of the page. It tells of alot of things which the advocate recommends the irs should do to “improve” things.. :huh:
Interesting, reading these articles I think helps all of us know that much more about what a person (any person) can do to show that we will not go quietly into the night. That we will stand and shout that we know what the laws say and that if the other side is going to make claims against us that they show us those laws and not some wads of paper with useless opinions.
Be strong and know that although you have few responces here that many stand with you in spirit… 😉
From what I have read on the WTP website, Becraft was giving other people the same info without a nondisclosure agreement and having them send it out to various official people. Plus after the first draft of the document was editted/changed and approved by Becraft the first NDA would no longer be valid. As the WTP site mentions in the lengthy article, much of what the agreement covered was already public knowledge which cannot be copywritted or protected. Schultz even agreed to print on the CD's that the researcher was anon so that Becraft (who has been compromised by the IRS) could avoid a 6700 “tax scheme” injuction. So perhaps Becraft was working covertly with IRS/DOJ people in a smear attempt to discredit WTP..
It all seems to be a huge mis-understanding where someone thought that Schultz was passing out protected material which as I said above he was not. Hopefully the matter will be quickly resolved and everything will move forward and this fraud will end…
🙂
This link takes you to a interesting article, hopefully with more people who witnessed the trial coming forward and submitting complaints that things will change. Or maybe even a currupt person will be on the bread line.
Perhaps mostly because the IRS dislikes it when people actually try to put money and assets within a “safe” vehicle because it causes them to have to work harder to tear them down. Yet the ultra rich “like some federal reserve chairmen” seem to have protected “trusts” and political protection that the common “man” could never afford.
🙁
