http://penaltyprotester.com/

[KaosTheory]

I found this video very interesting and thought you all might as well.

http://penaltyprotester.com/

[mrg]

Originally Posted by KaosTheory

I found this video very interesting and thought you all might as well.

http://penaltyprotester.com/

Someone sent me a copy of the original complaint, and exhibits a couple of months ago, in regards to their own dealings with the IRS scam.

Thanks for the update, as I have been wondering.

I have not looked at the video yet, but just read all the paperwork.

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by KaosTheory

I found this video very interesting and thought you all might as well.

http://penaltyprotester.com/

KT,

This is the same thing that was brought out here by Bob Shulz when Lear was freed from his probation and made a free man from prison. The 1040 has no basis in law, as it is a bootleg form without a valid OMB number. This is a case well worth watching. thanks for the link.

[UGA Lawdog]

That's odd....the 2005 version of the 1040 form has this notation in the upper right corner of the first page:

OMB No. 1545-0074


Why, you can even download one from the IRS' home page, www.irs.gov, in PDF format.

I guess you're just wrong...again.

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by UGA Lawdog

That's odd....the 2005 version of the 1040 form has this notation in the upper right corner of the first page:

OMB No. 1545-0074


Why, you can even download one from the IRS' home page, www.irs.gov, in PDF format.

I guess you're just wrong...again.

OOPS!!! Forgot to put you on my ignore list. I will take care of that in a minute.

That OMB number 1545-0074 is not approved for the collection of information, as the case linked to shows. Nice try. Really doesn't matter though since I am not required to file anyway. LOL!!

The mistake I made earlier has now been corrected. You are now on my ignore list.

[UGA Lawdog]

Poor baby. Just can't stand any actual debate, can you?

And, of course, you can't post any court decisions that agree with your lunatic theory about the 1040 form.

[UGA Lawdog]

On the other hand, I can show several court cases that refute your silly theory.

Contention: Taxpayers are not required to file a federal income tax return, because the instructions and regulations associated with the Form 1040 do not display an OMB control number as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Some argue that taxpayers are not required to file tax returns because of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. sec. 3501, et seq. ("PRA"). The PRA was enacted to limit federal agencies' information requests that burden the public. The "public protection" provision of the PRA provides that no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to maintain or provide information to any agency if the information collection request
involved does not display a current control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] Director. 44 U.S.C. sec. 3512. Advocates of this contention claim that they cannot be penalized for failing
to file Form 1040, because the instructions and regulations associated with the Form 1040 do not display any OMB control number.

The Law: The courts have uniformly rejected this argument on different grounds. Some courts have simply noted that the PRA applies to the forms themselves, not to the instruction booklets, and because the Form
1040 does have a control number, there is no PRA violation.

Other courts have held that Congress created the duty to file returns in section 6012(a) and "Congress did not enact the PRA's public protection provision to allow OMB to abrogate any duty imposed by Congress."
United States v. Neff, 954 F.2d 698, 699 (11th Cir. 1992). Also, the Internal Revenue Service issued Revenue Ruling 2006-21 warning taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument.

Relevant Case Law:
United States v. Wunder, 919 F.2d 34 (6th Cir. 1990): the court rejected Wunder's claim of a PRA violation, affirming his conviction for failing to file a return.

Salberg v. United States, 969 F.2d 379 (7th Cir. 1992): the court affirmed Salberg's conviction for tax evasion and failing to file a return, rejecting his claims under the PRA.

United States v. Holden, 963 F.2d 1114 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 958 (1992): the court affirmed Holden's conviction for failing to file a return and rejected his contention that he should have been acquitted
because tax instruction booklets fail to comply with the PRA.

United States v. Hicks, 947 F.2d 1356, 1359 (9th Cir. 1991): the court affirmed Hicks' conviction for failing to file a return, finding that the requirement to provide information is required by law, not by the IRS.
"This is a legislative command, not an administrative request. The PRA was not meant to provide criminals with an all-purpose escape hatch."

Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1445 (10th Cir. 1990): the court held that the Paperwork Reduction Act was not enacted "to create a
loophole in the taxcode".

It's a shame there's no Olympic event for being dead wrong. You'd be in the running for the gold.

[PANICPASS]

Those are some pretty lousy court cases, Dog.


Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1445 (10th Cir. 1990): the court held that the Paperwork Reduction Act was not enacted "to create a loophole in the taxcode".

The PRA is HUGE hole in the taxcode if IRS cannot comply with it. Without tax forms there is no tax. So why don't they just get rid of the PRA as far as IRS tax forms are concerned? That should settle things once and for all, huh, Dog?

[iamfreeru2]

There is very interesting talk going on at Quatlooser regarding a court case that my have been dismissed with prejudice because of this very issue, hmm? Go here and check it out. I have not read it all myself, but is very interesting.

[charlesa6]

Originally Posted by iamfreeru2

There is very interesting talk going on at Quatlooser regarding a court case that my have been dismissed with prejudice because of this very issue, hmm? Go here and check it out. I have not read it all myself, but is very interesting.

Before you go any further, look at their avatar, what you see, Cats and rats, so that tell you something who they are.
I rest my case.
Lawl!!!