California FTB (franchise theft board)

Ice is right.& How can they take your property&without a court order?& I've never heard of anyone (or thing)&being able to take your property without&court order, so why should FTB be an exception?I don't understand that.& Why does their code say they CAN take your property without a court order and then&turn around and say&the Withholding&Order&has to have a court order?& It doesn't make sense, but I would&stick to the property rights argument and learn more&what responsibility your employer has to you.&

[nralien]

Tora

Is the Privacy Act for government agencies only?& That is, I thought the IRS was not a government agency.

nralien

[Ice]

nralien,


Somewhere in this forum there is a post that explains how any entity that gathers and submits information to government entities is considered an "agency" of the government.


But the Privacy Act can be used in any instance if the above is noted.


Ice


&

[nralien]

Thanks Ice,

nralien

[rushpat]

I finally found the Williamson and O'Dell cases on the familyguardian site. The link here didn't work.

Thanks for the heads-up.

nralien, did you send the Williamson decision to your bank as part of the documents when they were about to hand over $$$ to the FTB?

About 5 years ago IRS sent a levy to my employer&and Thurston Bell wrote my letter .&He cited the O'Dell case.& The letter was very good and my boss (who was a lawyer) had a paralegal check to see if all of the cases cited in that letter were good.& They were.& My boss and his two other partners decided to honor the levy anyway.


I tried to work something out with IRS, but they&wouldn't budge because I was non filer.


I was also a fairly new employee so I didn't&have much influence on the boss' decision.My desk was also&very close to his office, and had I stayed despite his decision, I would have been very unhappy there, being that I had to&look at his lying&face him every morning.&


So it's probably better if you work for a large organization, although large organizations&might tend to view you as just a number, and be less sympathetic to your beliefs.

[Ice]

Tora,


That is a perfect example of "maliciousness".& He understood the law... knew the law... but ignored it in order to violate your rights.& Because he was aware of the law and had no lawful reason to honor the notice of levy... there must have been SOME OTHER REASON that he honored it... and you could have promoted the reason as being one of maliciousness towards your person.


How could he rebut that?& By stating that his fear of the IRS or threats received from the IRS were his reasons for honoring the notice of levy?& And what would that say about the IRS?


Question: Why didn't you pursue an action against your employer?& Was it due to the small size of the company?


&

[nralien]

Ice

Williamson and O'Dell to name&just a&few were in my letter.& The letter listed all of the enclosed copies of:
<UL>
<LI>Affidavit of Default
<LI>Respondent's Private International Administrative Remedy Demand No...
<LI>Offer from the State of California Franchise Tax Board dated...
<LI>Domestic Return Receipt/Date of Delivery dated...
<LI>Your letter dated...[banks written notice to me]
<LI>Your letter enclosure Order to Withhold Personal Income Tax - Tax Year(s) 2XXX</LI>[/list]

It just occured to me what your getting at.& In my letter I wrote "I have been reading cases about financial institutions liability in such cases.& <U>Williamson v. Boulder Dam Credit Union</U>,..." and went on to list a bunch of cases including O'Dell.& I did not actually provide <U>a copy of the decision</U> in that or any other case.& Do you think it would have helped?

I have been following this thread and have been reserved in responding becasue I have been looking for something of real value to add without cluttering the thread.& I have read rushpat's post to "start a new topic to discuss the steps on can take against employers, banks, etc." and wish to participate in such.

I have to admit the only scrap I have to offer is a link to some "letters" and demands to banks.& They may only be good for format but one may offer admittance from the bank that they had no such authority - maybe.
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/banklevy/index.htm

Let me know what you think and what I can do to help.
nralien


&


&

Originally Posted by Ice

Tora,


That is a perfect example of "maliciousness".& He understood the law... knew the law... but ignored it in order to violate your rights.& Because he was aware of the law and had no lawful reason to honor the notice of levy... there must have been SOME OTHER REASON that he honored it... and you could have promoted the reason as being one of maliciousness towards your person.


How could he rebut that?& By stating that his fear of the IRS or threats received from the IRS were his reasons for honoring the notice of levy?& And what would that say about the IRS?


Question: Why didn't you pursue an action against your employer?& Was it due to the small size of the company?

His reasoning was that he&asked their accountant about it and the accountant said no (which&was a lie--why would a lawyer consultant an accountant&about the law??)&. He did not tell me why his "accountant" said no.& I only know that he and his other partners got together and decided.& That's it.& I believe he made his decision based on the fact&that everyone has to pay taxes, so why shouldn't I?& I believe&he&felt that if he did not honor it, I would somehow take advantage of his decision not pay ANY&taxes&because he would come to my rescue.& That's the impression I got.


On top of that,&since I was a new employee, and that I was fairly new to the tax honesty movement, I was still a little ignorant as to what&rights I had and how to assert them, without causing&others&to feel the way he did.&


98% of time&the employer feels&justified for honoring the levy&because THEY pay taxes.& They&won't tell you that, but that is usually the reason.& They look around at&the other employees who also have to pay taxes.&And sometimes they don't even know that&is how they are basing their decision.


I don't know how I would handle it again, but I definitely& be a little tougher on the employer this time.


&


&

[Ice]

Maybe you could still redress with a "nunc pro tunc" type of action?... or would some statute of limitations deny you?... or....


Those more knowledgeable in regards to such matters may chime in with some suggestions.& But, it's your personal choice to pursue the matter or not.& Might be nice if you could recoup your losses and not have to invest too much time and energy to do so... wouldn't it?


Ice