STOPPING THE IRS FROM ILLEGALLY SEIZING PROPERTY, ABUSING IT'S AUTHORITY, ILLEGALLY COLLECTING TAXES, AND TERRORIZING CITIZENS. |
">
">
">
">
CERTIFIED MAIL Art #__________________________________ Month ___, 2005 From:____________________ Address:__________________________ _________________, ______________state [Zip Code] To: Mr. ______________________ Internal Revenue Service Ogden, Utah [84201-0049] In Re: Disallowance of Claim: Year_______ 1040 Tax Return Date claim received: _____. ___, 200__ Enclosures: Form 12203 Appeal of Adverse Determination APPEAL STATEMENT of Adverse Determination: UNSUBSTANTIATED DISALLOWED CLAIM Dear________________, Attached please find Form 12203 Appeal demand of your disallowance of my claim as stated in your letter dated_____________, 200__, (LTR 105C). If this Notice of Appeal should not fall within your jurisdiction or job capacity, please route this Appeal Form to the proper supervisory department for the immediate reconsideration for withdrawal of said determination and alternatively to provide a point-by-point denial of my claim with the statutory and regulatory authorities proving the legal basis of the determination of disallowance or the scheduling of a face-to-face appeals conference. This Appeals Conference is required of your agency based upon the administrative procedural statutes, regulations, policy manuals, publications and Form 12203. If the reconsideration of the determination by a supervisor does not produce a retraction, I am notifying you now that I will appear at the appeals conference with my Taxpayer Representative and a tape recording device at the place and time designated. Where I am challenging the adverse determination made by you and perhaps other employees of your agency, (the penalty screening committee), it is your responsibility to do these things pursuant to the law when I have made a timely appeal request showing the risk of irreparable harm if you should fail or neglect your official duties, 26 USC §§7433, 7214 and others were enacted by Congress to enforce my protection against unauthorized, unverified, and otherwise unlawful acts of Internal Revenue Service employees. Respectfully, Sir, Mr. ______________, yours is an executive branch administrative agency Not a lawmaking legislative body. In your letter you state, "You show your taxable income as zero based on frivolous arguments". This statement is not only unresponsive, vague and ambiguous in due consideration of the statutes I relied upon in the statement submitted with the return, it is also clearly mistaken and inconsistent with the legislative intent of the laws enacted by Congress, implementing federal regulations, and Supreme Court rulings. Where your determination does not impeach one statement or authority presented in my claim but attempts to enact a law by secret precedence of a secret source in violation of the separation of powers doctrine limiting the power of lawmaking to the Congress and approved by the Senate and then signed by the President, and, further, where the powers enumerated for the executive branch of government is limited to the implementation of the laws in compliance with the Constitution for the United States of America, and the Constitution and laws of this State, your unsubstantiated, unverified, unauthorized counter-claim is in violation of law absent my knowing and willing waiver and consent which obviously I am not going to give to you as evidenced by the submission of your Form 12203. Therefore, your determination is plain error considering in good conscience the following facts to which I verify as true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief based upon my reading and understanding of the laws, regulations, court decisions and policy and procedure manuals published by and for your agency and which have been admitted as true by way of your silence respecting their presentment. Please consider these affirmative points and their authorities as my lawful claim and frame your response accordingly. 1. My claim is in fact the language of the laws as passed by Congress and as codified in the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, word for word. I did not make up the language of the laws. The House Ways and Means Committee proposed the Bill and the lawmakers in Congress approved by the Senate and signed by the President enacted them, and, finally, the Committee on Taxation wrote them I only cited what the lawmakers wrote, and if this can be determined "frivolous" by you and disallowed by your determination letter only offering no specific premise for a rebuttal or legal explanation, your determination is prima facie evidence that you have no legal basis for your claim and constitutes an attempt to act outside the bounds of the laws or knowingly and willfully in contempt of these laws which you are no more authorized to do than I am. 2. Your letter is silent in want of a statutory or regulatory basis for disallowing my claim. 3. Your letter of determination is silent and in want of Supreme Court decisions or any other relevant and applicable decisions of the federal judiciary branch of the united states of America. 4. Your letter of determination is silent and in want of any factual rebuttal. 5. Your determination letter is vague, ambiguous, confusing, unsupported, and therefore, the disallowance is void as a matter of fundamental law, legislative implementing regulations, published policies and procedures establishing a prima facie case of fraud and conclusive proof of your knowing and willful failure in the performance of your official duties. 6. The common law equitable principle of reasonableness commands that your letter of determination to disallow my claim cannot be countenanced in good conscience with due consideration of the legislative intent of the laws, regulations, policies, publications and other legal and relevant authorities I have clearly and precisely presented in my claim. Further, my claim has legal standing for it relies upon my inalienable rights, International Treaty of individual human rights, the guaranteed protections and securities against usurpation of executive branch power and the resultant oppression, trespass, deprivation of privacy and property, involuntary servitude and other irreparable injury contemplated by the framers of the Constitution for the United States of America and as upheld by the Supreme Court of the united states in its decisions these being the supreme laws of this land. In thoughtful and due consideration of the provisions of the Internal Revenue Manual, published as the official policy and practice of your agency, specifically providing that the legislative intent of the law and the upholding of constitutional protections as the paramount consideration and duty of those charged with making decisions affecting the public such as the one at issue; and, the language of the sections enacted into the Internal Revenue Code upon which I based my lawful claim for deductions and refunds, your determination standing presumably for a counter claim fails to pass legal muster. If I have made a mistake in my understanding of the language of these laws, a mistake in my understanding of the protections guaranteed to me by the Constitution, or a mistake with regard to your agency's duty to honor its policy manuals, job descriptions, authority requirements and Mission Statement to clearly, plainly, and specifically address my misunderstandings by explaining to me and providing evidence to support the agency's claims, and particularly any adverse determinations affecting the rights to my property put at risk as a result of such determinations, your silence with respect to the letter of determination of disallowance fatally neglects to notice me of any misunderstandings to facilitate a prompt and peaceful settlement and closure in this matter. Your failure to address the Code Sections and the Supreme Court Decisions, the legal premise of my presentment of claim, is legally considered as a stipulation that my position is correct and reasonableness dictates that you are misapplying the laws or violating the laws with respect to my involuntarily filed Form 1040 return. In accordance with Butcher's Union Etc Co. v. Crescent City Etc Co. [111 U.S. 746, 757 S. Ct. (1883)], the Supreme Court ruled that my labor is my "property" and that my rights to that property cannot be taken away except for punishment for conviction of a crime, the exact standard of protection and security enumerated in the Constitution for the United States of America. "It has been well said that 'the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable." [Butcher's concurring opinion of Justice Fields ]"rights which cannot be bartered away, or given away, or taken away, except in punishment of crime." Citing Coppage v. Kansas, 236 U.S. 1 (1915): "Chief among such contracts is that of personal employment, by which labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property. If this right be struck down or arbitrarily interfered with, there is a substantial impairment of liberty in the long-established constitutional sense."; Adair v. U.S., 208 U.S. 161 (1908), "In our opinion that section, in the particular mentioned, is an invasion of the personal liberty, as well as of the right of property, guaranteed by that Amendment. Such liberty and right embrace the right to make contracts for the purchase of the labor of others, and equally the right to make contracts for the sale of one's own labor." Respectfully, Mr. __________, you should read this entire case. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, in order for money received for labor wages, salaries, compensation for personal services, etc. to constitute income, there must be a gain derived from the labor which produces the money. The procedure to determine whether there is or is not a gain also has its foundation in decisions of the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court holds that not only does one's labor constitute property, but the employment contract also constitutes property: "The principle is fundamental and vital. Included in the right of personal liberty and the right of private property -- partaking of the nature of each -- is the right to make contracts for the acquisition of property. Chief among such contracts is that of personal employment, by which labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property." [Coppage v. Kansas, 236 U.S. 1, 14 (1914)]. Thus, the Supreme Court rightfully and reasonably holds that a contract for labor is a contract for the sale of property: "In our opinion that section, in the particular mentioned, is an invasion of the personal liberty, as well as of the right to property, guaranteed by that Amendment [5th Amendment]. Such liberty and right embraces the right to make contracts for the purchase of the labor of others and equally the right to make contracts for the sale of one's own labor." Adair v. United States, 208 U.S. 161, 172 (1908). And, Mr. __________, the Supreme Court made these rulings even in light of the fact that at that time, 1908, the law provided for a liability and payment of the income tax, where since the enactment of the 1954 Internal Revenue Code the current laws do not. Please think about this and respond to this. Internal Revenue Code Sections 1001, 1011 and 1012, and their regulations, 26 C.F.R. Section 1.1001-1 and 1.1012-1(a) provide the method for determining the gain derived from the sale of property: The gain from the sale or other disposition of property shall be the excess of the amount realized therefrom over the adjusted basis provided in section 1011 for determining gain,.. The amount realized from the sale or other disposition of property shall be the sum of any money received plus the fair market value of the property (other than money) received. 26 U.S.C. Section 1001(a)(b). The adjusted basis for determining the gain or loss from the sale or other disposition of property, whenever acquired, shall be the basis (determined under section 1012), adjusted as provided in section 1016. 26 U.S.C. Section 1011. The basis of property shall be the cost of such property ... 26 U.S.C. Section 1012. The cost of property purchased under contract is its fair market value as evidenced by the contract itself, provided neither the buyer nor seller were acting under compulsion in entering into the contract, and they were both fully aware of all the facts regarding the contract. (Terrence Development Co. v. C.I.R., 345 F.2d 933 (1965); Bankers Trust Co. v. U.S., 518 F.2d 1210 (1975); Bar L Ranch, Inc. v. Phinney, 426 F.2d 995 (1970); Jack Daniel Distillery v. U.S., 379 U.S. 569 (1967); In re Williams' Estate, 256 F.2d 217 (1958)). In other words, if an employer and employee agree that the employee will give one hour of his time in return for a certain amount of money, the cost, or basis under Section 1012 of the employee's labor is the pay agreed upon the same as when an attorney, doctor or other professional in a field of specialty agrees to perform a certain service for an agreed upon amount of compensation, the value of the service to be performed is the amount the patient or client has agreed to pay. In the case of the sale of labor, none of the provisions of Section 1016 are applicable, and the adjusted basis of the labor under Section 1011 is the amount paid. Therefore, when the employer pays the employee the amount agreed upon, or the professional is paid for his services, there is no excess amount realized over the adjusted basis, and there is no gain under Section 1001. When there is no gain, there is no "income" in the constitutional sense, and no gross income under consideration of Code Section 61(a). If one has no gain, one would not have sufficient "gross income" to require the filing of a federal personal income tax return, (even if there were a statutory requirement to file the form), and one would not be a taxpayer as to that tax, nor subject to the provisions of Subtitle A. Likewise, without gain there can be no "taxable income", "tax table income" or "self-employment income", and would not have a tax liability. Again, this person would not be a taxpayer as defined by Congress and enacted into the Code, nor subject to the provisions of Subtitle A. The Internal Revenue Service is duty bound to abide by all United States Supreme Court rulings and decisions as is clearly outlined by the IRM section listed below and must be a determining factor in relation to the Form 1040 tax return. Internal Revenue Manual section 4.10.7.2.9.8 (05-14-1999) "Importance of Court Decisions", which states, 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. [bold underline added] These affirmative defenses are proffered in good faith in response to what appears to be an attempt by your agency to create a law by secret default process in a counterclaim. I have met my burden of proof and so far your agency has admitted that my claim is valid by silence of rebuttal. Your default will not succeed under the circumstances of this demand for retraction based upon the paramount legal authorities. Therefore, I shall not take the risk of being deemed by the court as having waived my rights and protections under the laws and regulations and policies and procedures, and, my securities as guaranteed by the Constitution for the United States of America and the Constitution and laws of the State of Nevada by corresponding with you on this matter until you address this controversy seriously by specific claims with supporting legal authorities and evidence. If I should receive any more correspondence from your agency before I receive a retraction of the determination and a peaceful closure of this case by written advice or a legally valid response to this letter of appeal and demand for hearing, I will consider the subsequent correspondence to be sent in error and will accept it for its value and return it for its value presuming that these points and authorities along with the evidence of your silence constitute an admission and default. Where I am the only party in interest, having legal standing of risk of irreparable harm, a prima facie case exists by this admission for show cause why a Writ of Prohibition should not issue where Congress, the courts and the policies provide that the anti injunction statutes and qualified immunity do not apply in cases such as this where agents and employees purporting to represent the government act outside the bounds of the law and in violation of the Constitution in the performance of their duties. This statement of appeal of the disallowance of my claim and rebuttal of your counterclaim relying upon: your silence where there is a legal duty to speak; the Supreme Court of the United States; the Constitution for the United States of America; the Constitution of the State of Nevada and the laws of this State; and, the Internal Revenue Code in the computation and treatment of exchange of property for allowable deductions under Internal Revenue Code of 1954 §§§1001, 1011 & 1012 as clearly noted on my return legally constitute a claim upon which the judicial branch of government shall grant equitable and lawful relief should your agency fail in its official duties to do so. I demand a prompt and speedy resolution to this matter for justice delayed is justice denied and this matter thus far is severely unjust by its unlawfulness and I demand a response within 15 days or a letter explaining the need and requesting an additional 5 days for the complete response with supporting authorities and documentation showing the statutory authority and legal basis of your counterclaim or the retraction of the determination enumerated in your letter. These statements are verified true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief without waiving any rights remedies or defenses whether considered by Treaty of the International Individual Human Rights, Constitutional, statutory, regulatory, procedural, or otherwise. Sincerely, _______________________________ _______________________________, natural man, under restricted appearance. ~ IN SUPPORT OF CLAIM ~ INTERNAL REVENUE MANUAL OF PROCEDURES 4.10.7.2.9.8 (05-14-1999) Importance of Court Decisions 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. U.S. Supreme Court Butcher's Union Etc Co. v. Crescent City Etc Co. 111 US 746, 757 S. Ct. (1883) "As in our intercourse with our fellow-men certain principles of morality are assumed to exist, without which society would be impossible, so certain inherent rights lie at the foundation of all action, and upon a recognition of them alone can free institutions be maintained. These inherent rights have never been more happily expressed than in the declaration of independence, that new evangel of liberty to the people: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident'- that is, so plain that their truth is recognized upon their mere statement- 'that all men are endowed'- not by edicts of emperors, or decrees of parliament, or acts of congress, but 'by their Creator with certain inalienable rights'- that is, rights which cannot be bartered away, or given away, or taken away, except in punishment of crime- 'and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and to secure these'- not grant them, but secure them- 'governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the governed.' Among these inalienable rights, as proclaimed in that great document, is the right of men to pursue their happiness, by which is meant the right to pursue any lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity or develop their faculties, so as to give them their highest enjoyment. The common business and callings of life, the ordinary trades and pursuits, which are innocuous in themselves, and have been followed in all communities from time immemorial, must therefore be free in this country to all alike upon the same conditions. The right to pursue them, without let or hinderance, except that which is applied to all persons of the same age, sex, and condition, is a distinguishing privilege of citizens of the United States, and an essential element of that freedom which they claim as their birthright. It has been well said that 'the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing his strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty both of the workman and of those who might be disposed to employ him, as it hinders the one from working at what he thinks proper, so it hinders the others from employing whom they think proper'" Butcher's Union, Etc., Co. v. Crescent City, Etc., Co., 111 US 746, S. Ct. Rptr., pp. 660-661. U.S. Supreme Court ADAIR v. U S, 208 U.S. 161 (1908) 208 U.S. 161 WILLIAM ADAIR, Plff. in Err., v. UNITED STATES. No. 293. Argued October 29, 30, 1907. Decided January 27, 1908. "The first inquiry is whether the part of the 10th section of the act of 1898 upon which the first count of the indictment was based is repugnant to the 5th Amendment of the Constitution, declaring that no person shall be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law. In our opinion that section, in the particular mentioned, is an invasion of the personal liberty, as well as of the right of property, guaranteed by that Amendment. Such liberty and right embrace the right to make contracts for the purchase of the labor of others, and equally the right to make contracts for the sale of one's own labor;" U. S. 5TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS Dry Cleaning Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 5 Cir., 1934, 72 F.2d 167. The standard for determining fair market value under 1001 is well established. It is the price at which property will change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or sell and both having reasonable knowledge of the facts. French Dry Cleaning Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 5 Cir., 1934, 72 F.2d 167. 26 USC Sec. 1001. - Determination of amount of and recognition of gain or loss (a) Computation of gain or loss The gain from the sale or other disposition of property shall be the excess of the amount realized therefrom over the adjusted basis provided in section 1011 for determining gain, and the loss shall be the excess of the adjusted basis provided in such section for determining loss over the amount realized. 26 USC Sec. 1011. - Adjusted basis for determining gain or loss (a) General rule The adjusted basis for determining the gain or loss from the sale or other disposition of property, whenever acquired, shall be the basis (determined under section 1012 or other applicable sections of this subchapter and subchapters C (relating to corporate distributions and adjustments), K (relating to partners and partnerships), and P (relating to capital gains and losses)), adjusted as provided in section 1016. 26 USC Sec. 1012. Basis of property - cost The basis of property shall be the cost of such property, except as otherwise provided in this subchapter and subchapters C (relating to corporate distributions and adjustments), K (relating to partners and partnerships), and P (relating to capital gains and losses). The cost of real property shall not include any amount in respect of real property taxes which are treated under section 164(d) as imposed on the taxpayer. ATTACHED: Your Letter of Determination. |
Possible Response to an Adverse Determination of a CDPH for frivolous return |
