Well, let's see:
If it's a CP-515, they're alleging the receipt of "information from payees" and other sources, blah blah, "suggesting" you owe a debt, blah blah.....
Start here:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6061.html
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6065.html
All those little w-2's, etc. are, by definition, "information returns.& Betcha never have gotten one that was "signed" AND "verified." Neither has the IRS.
Respond immediately and "ask" to see the information upon which they are basing their allegations.
Over four years later, and I'm still waiting. The war continues....
Begin NOW to read and study the Internal Revenue Manual.& Here's the link:
http://www.irs.gov/irm/index.html
For example, we here all about "substitute returns" prepared by the Secretary. From the I R Manual:
<H3><FONT size=2>4.12.1.4.3.2 (05-03-1999)
IRC Sec. 6020(b)</FONT> </H3>
- <FONT size=2>
<LI><U>Code Section 6020(b) states</U>, "If any person fails to make any return required by any Internal Revenue Law or regulation made thereunder at the time prescribed therefor, or makes, willfully or otherwise, a false or fraudulent return, the Secretary shall make such return from his own knowledge and from such information as he can obtain through testimony or otherwise."
<LI>IRC SEC. 6020(b)(2) states "Any return so made and subscribed by the Secretary shall be prima facie good and sufficient for all legal purposes."
<LI>This is a Substitute for Return</LI>
</LI>
ME again: Yes, that's what it says.& Keep reading (from the Manual):
<H3><FONT size=2>4.12.1.17 (05-03-1999)
No Return Secured Agreed Closure IRC 6020(a)</FONT> </H3>
- <FONT size=2>
<LI>If the nonfiler does not provide a delinquent return, all adjustments, tax, and penalties will be proposed on an income tax change report (Form 1902–B or Form 4549</FONT><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=3>). <U>If the nonfiler signs this report, it becomes a return filed by the Service under IRC 6020(a). </U></FONT>- </FONT>
<LI>Form 3198, Special Handling Notice, will be attached to the case with notation "IRC 6020(a) Return — Close Disposal Code 08" .
<LI>If a "dummy/SFR" has not been processed follow procedures to establish the entity on Master File. </LI>
</LI>
Me: That's where I am: Got a Form 4549 I'm dealing with. I guess they "forgot" to mention in the code that if you do NOT sign the crap they send you, nothing means anything. Just know going into this that at every step of the way, they MUST try to get you to "volunteer" information. DON'T DO IT!&
See other posts here at SJ about stuff like "critical reading."& I mean really READ the stuff they send. Pay attention to the "details": signed, unsigned, the date (no kidding--received one letter TWO DAYS before the date that was on the letter!).
It's a war. Treat it as such. They are not your friends and they are not trying to help. They ARE trying to coerce you into waiving your rights, volunteering information that the WILL use against you.
The system of taxation IS voluntary. NEVER forget that.
And now, in essence, having accused you of NOT "volunteering," they are proceeding with "distraint." That's okay. Those are the rules. The only problem, for them, is that "by distraint" means "due process." I think these dumbasses can't even spell "due process."
Randy
Oh, might as well add one more thing to show you just how really screwed up all this is. Okay. TWO things:
1) Let's say you would decide to make an "offer in compromise" one of these days.
<H2><FONT size=2>Part 4. Examining Process
</FONT><FONT size=2>Chapter 18. Exam Offer-in Compromise
</FONT><FONT size=2>Section 2. Doubt as to Liability Offers</FONT></H2><FONT face=Tahoma>
<H3><FONT size=2>Note:</FONT></H3>
Because the role of Examination is generally to make determinations of the <U>correct</U> tax liability, acceptance of such offers in compromise by Examination should be uncommon. (See Section 2.5(2) below.) The extent of any determination of "doubt" should be in keeping with Policy Statement P–4–117, Examination Authority to Resolve Issues.
3. A doubt as to liability offer may not be rejected solely because the Service is unable to locate the taxpayer's return or return information.
<U>The taxpayer cannot be required to submit a financial statement for a doubt as to liability offer.</U>
Me: See? They want you to believe you HAVE to file a 1040, but they can NOT require a "financial statement" re "offers in compromise"? What the hell is a 1040 if it's NOT a "financial statement"? Bastards.
And this is just how devious these pricks really are:
5.1.10.2.2 (04-01-2003)
<U>Promoting Public Confidence</U>
3. If a telephone call is placed to a third party
only to acquire location information (taxpayer's place of abode and phone number at such place, or place of employment) in connection with the collection of unpaid tax, employees should identify themselves by name only.<FONT face=Tahoma>
Employees should not identify themselves by title or as a Service employee unless the third party expressly requests that information.</FONT> <FONT size=2><FONT size=2>
<U>When an employee attempts to contact a taxpayer by telephone and someone other than the taxpayer answers the phone, the employee should not identify themselves as a Service employee or state the reason for the attempted contact.</U> However, if the employee seeks information about the taxpayer from the person who answered the phone that may help in determining or collecting the liability, follow third party contact procedures and make a reprisal determination.
<H2><FONT size=2>Part 31. Criminal Tax</FONT></H2>
<H2><FONT size=2>Chapter 3. Criminal Tax Policies and Procedures</FONT></H2>
<H2><FONT size=2>Section 3. Voluntary Disclosure</FONT></H2>
<H3><FONT size=2>31.3.3.1 (01-17-1996)
Voluntary Disclosure</FONT> </H3>
2. Elements of Voluntary Disclosure. A taxpayer's communication will be considered a voluntary disclosure when it is:
<DIR>
a.Truthful;
b.Timely;
A disclosure is
timely if it is received before:
i The Service has initiated an inquiry that is likely to lead to the taxpayer, and the taxpayer is reasonably thought to be aware of that investigative activity; or
ii Some event known by the taxpayer occurred, which event is likely to cause an audit into the taxpayer's liabilities;
c.Complete; and,
d.When the taxpayer shows a willingness to cooperate (and does in fact cooperate) with the I.R.S. in determining the correct tax liability. </DIR>
4.
<U>The I.R.S.'s voluntary disclosure practice creates no substantive or procedural rights for taxpayers, but rather is a matter of internal I.R.S. practice, provided solely for guidance to I.R.S. personnel.</U>
<H2><FONT size=2>Part 25. Special Topics</FONT></H2>
<H2><FONT size=2>Chapter 1. Fraud Handbook</FONT></H2>
<H2><FONT size=2>Section 7. Failure to File</FONT></H2>
3.If the <U>possibility</U> of fraud exists,
<DIR>
<U>
a.DO NOT SOLICIT</U> tax returns. If returns are submitted, they should be accepted;
<U>
b.DO NOT VOLUNTEER ADVICE </U>to the taxpayer concerning any course of action he/she should follow;
<U>
c.DO NOT DISCUSS</U> tax liabilities, penalties, fraud, or referral possibilities with the taxpayer.
ME AGAIN: They've been "soliciting" me for over four years. Guess what? They're including penalties for "fraud." But wait. IF "fraud" is suspected, they should never have "solicited," right? Gee, this is so much fun. One more, and I'll quit:
<H3><FONT size=2>25.1.7.4 (01-01-2003)
Development of Fraud </FONT></H3>
<DIR>
2.<U>Verify income from all available sources.</U> Methods of income verification include, but are not limited to: </DIR>
<LI>Securing current financial information including checking public records for assets and a physical observation of the taxpayer’s residence, place of business or both. This information will be used to determine whether the taxpayer is prospering and has the ability to pay the taxes, or not complying due to an inability to pay taxes. </LI>
</DIR>
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING!
Funny, ain't it? They can "verify" my "income," but not the damned "law" that's supposed to make all this "income tax" legal?
These people suck, period.
I'm outta here. Sorry about the not-so-tidy post. This is my personal demon......
Randy</FONT></FONT></FONT></FONT>