Tax Agency papers- sent to wrong address

[nicetaxcut]

I plan on taking some action against the US tax fraud. The last time I filed a return was in 2004. For 2005 I claimed 99 exemptions to have minimal taxes taken out while I figured out what I was going to do. Well, time has passed and I let it slip. But now I am able to focus on this again.

I plan to study the problems and hurdles to overcome, as well as answers and solutions. My first question is what to do about my Kalifornia/Fed papers being sent to the wrong/old address. I have moved twice since 2004. So those papers are going to a residence I lived at 3 years ago.

Fed:
LTR 2645C
Thanking me for my response on April x, 2007. I know I didn't respond to anything. They haven't resolved the matter because they haven't completed all the research necessary for a complete response.
?

State:
Request For Tax Return

Notice of Proposed Assessment
Lists my supposed taxable income, tax liabilities, exemptions, interest, late filing fees

Thanks in advance for your opinions.

[KarenM]

If you didn't file a change of address with the tax agencies, they use the last address they have on file for you.

Otherwise, how are supposed to know that you moved?

[nicetaxcut]

thanks. My concern is how to go about starting my fight. If I let them know my new address, I feel like I am telling them that I have a valid account with them and that I owe them something.

From what I've read so far, they are sending notices to an entity that is not me anyway - the ALL CAPS entity. So it may benefit me by not answering the notices. ?

[Chinese Panda]

Originally Posted by KarenM

If you didn't file a change of address with the tax agencies, they use the last address they have on file for you.

Otherwise, how are supposed to know that you moved?

The IRS employee is responsible for doing the proper address research as required by "IRM 4.71.11.7 (05-24-2002)(1)(d).
http://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/ch50s11.html

Per that section of the manual they are supposed to...
"D. Contact the postmaster of the most recent address obtained under steps a. — c., above. Step d. must not be taken unless steps a. — c. have first been taken. The following certification statement is required by the postmaster and must be stamped or typed at the bottom of the request: "Change of address is required for official use. We have searched other known sources of information for the address." Form 4759, Address Information Request Postal Tracer, catalog #41974T (current revision 4-2001), can be used to secure information from the Post Office."

Is your name and number listed in the local phone book?

Also, there are regulations for the last known address.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...301.6212-2.htm
Section (b)(2) says...

"The IRS will update taxpayer addresses maintained in IRS records by referring to data accumulated and
maintained in the United States Postal Service (USPS) National Change of Address database that retains change of address information for thirty- six months (NCOA database)."

Did you file a change of address with the post office?

[Shoonra]

(a) Normally, you are expected to update your address on various tax papers, such as your annual return and your W-2 form whenever a change occurs.

(b) More importantly, the fact that the IRS sent papers to an obsolete address is merely a mistake (let's presume it was the IRS's fault), not fraud. You could argue, with some success, that since the IRS letters were sent to the wrong address, you cannot be penalized for failing to answer them (or failing to answer within a deadline). However, to make this, or a related, argument you'd have to set forth your current address and the IRS would immediately send the same letters to your current address.

You might avoid a default or a lateness penalty, but you will still have to straighten things out with the IRS eventually. And you don't have grounds to sue the IRS for not having your current address.

(c) You evidently know about the delivery to the obsolete address because, one way or another, you finally got those letters. I wouldn't mention that. That you somehow got those letters, with little or no delay, put you on notice for what the IRS wants -- and most people would immediately contact the IRS in response (AND make sure the IRS had their new address for any further mailings) -- which means that, even so, you might get a default or lateness penalty for not responding once your mail was actually in your hands.

[Chinese Panda]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

(a) Normally, you are expected to update your address on various tax papers, such as your annual return and your W-2 form whenever a change occurs.

(b) More importantly, the fact that the IRS sent papers to an obsolete address is merely a mistake (let's presume it was the IRS's fault), not fraud. You could argue, with some success, that since the IRS letters were sent to the wrong address, you cannot be penalized for failing to answer them (or failing to answer within a deadline). However, to make this, or a related, argument you'd have to set forth your current address and the IRS would immediately send the same letters to your current address.

And you don't have grounds to sue the IRS for not having your current address.

Doesn't the following case say basically that as long as the taxpayer doesn't make an attempt to hide , it's the duty of the IRS to make the effort to find the correct address?

Mall v. Kelly, 564 F.Supp 371

[Shoonra]

The Mall v. Kelly case, from 1983, dealt with a different situation -- one in which the taxpayers had moved practically every year, and the IRS had treated them as delinquent even though its mail to a former address had been returned by the post office. The court did say that the IRS can normally rely on the last address given in its own paperwork.

In the case given at the start of this thread, it appears that the mail was forwarded instead of returned to the IRS by the postal service. If the mail had been returned to the IRS by the post office then I would expect that someone in the IRS would then be assigned the task of figuring out the current address.

Whatever the situation, the IRS sending its letters to an address that had been valid only a couple of years ago does not constitute fraud or any other pretext to sue the IRS.

[Chinese Panda]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

The Mall v. Kelly case, from 1983, dealt with a different situation -- one in which the taxpayers had moved practically every year, and the IRS had treated them as delinquent even though its mail to a former address had been returned by the post office.

Good point, I give you this one.

Originally Posted by Shoonra

The court did say that the IRS can normally rely on the last address given in its own paperwork.

In the case given at the start of this thread, it appears that the mail was forwarded instead of returned to the IRS by the postal service. If the mail had been returned to the IRS by the post office then I would expect that someone in the IRS would then be assigned the task of figuring out the current address.

Now that "someone" you speak of, he would be identified on the ACCOUNT HISTORY that you could obtain via the FOIA, correct?

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Whatever the situation, the IRS sending its letters to an address that had been valid only a couple of years ago does not constitute fraud or any other pretext to sue the IRS.

OK, not to sue. But as was done in the Kelly case, if it can be shown that (1) the IRS did have the letter returned and (2) the IRS did not then meet its requirements of reasonably and diligently determining and mailing to taxpayers new address and (3) the letter was required by statute, then the IRS may be enjoined against holding that letter against the taxpayer. Would you agree with that?

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by Chinese Panda

Now that "someone" you speak of, he would be identified on the ACCOUNT HISTORY that you could obtain via the FOIA, correct?

I would suppose the fact that the problem about the mailing address would be assigned to someone should show up in the FOIA, but I tend to doubt that the "someone" would be identified by first and last name.

then the IRS may be enjoined against holding that letter against the taxpayer. Would you agree with that?

As in the Mall case, the IRS would not be allowed to hold the lack of response, etc., against the taxpayer ... assuming that the evidence does not show that (as in the case on this thread) the taxpayer went to some lengths to keep the IRS in the dark about his address ... but I won't use the word "enjoin" because that particular word is not appropriate esp in light of the Anti-Injunction Act.

[Chinese Panda]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

I would suppose the fact that the problem about the mailing address would be assigned to someone should show up in the FOIA, but I tend to doubt that the "someone" would be identified by first and last name.

True, but it would show up on a FOIA request for the agents Oath of Office, where most likely, you would receive an OMB Form 61, correct?

Originally Posted by Shoonra

As in the Mall case, the IRS would not be allowed to hold the lack of response, etc., against the taxpayer ... assuming that the evidence does not show that (as in the case on this thread) the taxpayer went to some lengths to keep the IRS in the dark about his address ... but I won't use the word "enjoin" because that particular word is not appropriate esp in light of the Anti-Injunction Act.

Are you saying that there is evidence in this case (other than the fact that he admits he knows letters are going to the wrong address, but has not himself notified the "agency" of his change of address) that this guy went to some lengths to keep the IRS in the dark about his address? If so, what evidence is that?