Big Tom Cryer "poor me - I owe the IRS" Video
Captain America II
googlegroups.com...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgbYkElqxw
>
> Geeee, why didn't this show up in the "news?"
> Because the "mainstream" media censors what you hear.
It's all a giant conspiracy !
Poor Tommy Cryer - owes the IRS taxes, penalities and interest !
www.evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html
www.quatloos.com internet tax scams
www.fraudsandscams.com
www.quatlosers.com
Nossy
No he doesn't. He didn't borrow any money from them. He took no loan
from them.
They can't even show him what law and regulation HE SPECIFICALLY
has violated!
Heck, they even issue the notices, with CP letters for businesses to
individuals, notices without OMB numbers, machine signatures or no
signatures in boxes that say signature, names without badge numbers,
altered occupations on master files, and above all, when they send out
letters about non-filing they are "nice enough" not even to tell the
recipient that he violated any specific law or regulation. And that's
because they are covering themselves well because in such case they
know darn well the recipient has violated no regulation or law!
cpt banjo
> They can't even show him what law and regulation HE SPECIFICALLY
> has violated!
They've showed him the law that makes him liable for income taxes.
It's not their fault Cryer and his lemmings are too stubborn or
ignorant to realize it.
When will you morons learn that an acquittal on the willful failure to
file charges has absolutely nothing to do with his civil liability for
the taxes?
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> They can't even show him what law and regulation
They can, and they have. The fact that Cryer, as all other deniers do,
won't accept the law as "the law" and deny it exists or applies as it is
written.
No matter what gets shown, by whom, to whomever, when ever, where ever - all
that seems to be necessary to continue the stupidity of the crazed anti-tax
cult is to just deny that section of the law applies to them or their
situation.
It's akin to sticking fingers in your ears when you were in the third grade
on the schoolyard and didn't want to hear something someone was saying.
--
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?
----------------
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Athens, Georgia
Nossy
<paultho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
>> They can't even show him what law and regulation
>
>
>
>
>
>They can, and they have. The fact that Cryer, as all other deniers do,
>won't accept the law as "the law" and deny it exists or applies as it is
>written.
>
>No matter what gets shown, by whom, to whomever, when ever, where ever - all
>that seems to be necessary to continue the stupidity of the crazed anti-tax
>cult is to just deny that section of the law applies to them or their
>situation.
>
>It's akin to sticking fingers in your ears when you were in the third grade
>on the schoolyard and didn't want to hear something someone was saying.
You guys are unbelievable. You know PERFECTLY WELL that if a citizen
specifically asks the IRS to know WHICH regulations and laws he is in
violation of, they will not respond! And to which a citizen is
PERFECTLY entitled. And NONE of their notices pertaining to non-filing
to such people even alleges a SPECIFIC VIOLATION OF A SPECIFIC LAW OR
REGULATION.
And by the way, thanks for ignoring the other facts of the way the IRS
doesn't even follow its own regulations and manual!
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> You guys are unbelievable. You know PERFECTLY
> WELL that if a citizen specifically asks the IRS to
> know WHICH regulations and laws he is in
> violation of, they will not respond!
I am totally unaware that they do this for normal taxpayers. However, they
stopped trying with your childish wannabe tax protestors years ago.
> And to which a citizen is PERFECTLY entitled.
It's all in Title 26. Hey, lookey here,
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=26&sec= it's all on
the internet, FREE for the reading.
Let me hit the high points:
TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1
§ 1. Tax imposed
There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of-
(1) every married individual
(2) every surviving spouse
(b) Heads of households
(c) Unmarried individuals
(d) Married individuals filing separate returns
(e) Estates and trusts
§ 3. Tax tables for individuals
(d) Taxable income
Whenever it is necessary to determine the taxable income of an individual to
whom this section applies, the taxable income shall be determined under
section 63.
§ 63. Taxable income defined
(a) In general
Except as provided in subsection (b), for purposes of this subtitle, the
term "taxable income" means gross income minus the deductions allowed by
this chapter (other than the standard deduction).
§ 61 Gross income defined.
(a) General definition.
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income
from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following
items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits,
and similar items;
(2) Gross income derived from business;
(3) Gains derived from dealings in property;
(4) Interest;
(5) Rents;
(6) Royalties;
(7) Dividends;
(8) Alimony and separate maintenance payments;
(9) Annuities;
(10) Income from life insurance and endowment contracts;
(11) Pensions;
(12) Income from discharge of indebtedness;
(13) Distributive share of partnership gross income;
(14) Income in respect of a decedent; and
(15) Income from an interest in an estate or trust.
Paul Maffia
idiocies. But then maybe he is just jealous that Knews4u has such a lock on
the title of Village idiot of MORON TOWN and wants to put in his claim to
the throne.
"Paul Thomas, CPA" <paultho...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:vtqui.7210$2v5....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
Nossy
There you go again. How on Earth would an IRS representative reading a
letter know how to "categorize" the writer?
If all the writer asks is to know WHAT LAW OR REGULATION HE
SPECIFICALLY IS IN VIOLATION OF THAT
LEADS TO A NOTICE OR WARNING, what prevents the IRS representative
from telling said person that he SPECIFICALLY has violated law X or
regulation Y and then to SIGN the darn letter with an original
signature that happily creates liability on the part of the IRS
person??????
Nossy
Your name-calling will not change the facts. If a person writes a
courteous letter to the IRS REQUESTING TO KNOW WHICH LAW OR REGULATION
HE IS IN VIOLATION OF, HE HAS EVERY RIGHT AND EXPECTATION TO OBTAIN
THAT INFORMATION. But he won't get it!!
Paul Maffia
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote in message
news:srrkb39bj9hna2tmn...@4ax.com...
You idiot, mr. Thomas jsut quotrdf the law to you and all you can do is pose
another moron question.
> If all the writer asks is to know WHAT LAW OR REGULATION HE
> SPECIFICALLY IS IN VIOLATION OF THAT
> LEADS TO A NOTICE OR WARNING, what prevents the IRS representative
> from telling said person that he SPECIFICALLY has violated law X or
> regulation Y and then to SIGN the darn letter with an original
> signature that happily creates liability on the part of the IRS
> person??????
You are one of the premier inhabitants of MORON TOWN!
Paul Maffia
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 15:29:36 -0700, "Paul Maffia"
I am not calling you any names. I am describing your mental achievements
accuratly and succiently.
.> If a person writes a
> courteous letter to the IRS REQUESTING TO KNOW WHICH LAW OR REGULATION
> HE IS IN VIOLATION OF, HE HAS EVERY RIGHT AND EXPECTATION TO OBTAIN
> THAT INFORMATION. But he won't get it!!
As Paul pointed out, morons like you ignore the law when it is cited to you
or claim you are not covered by the law or some other idiot reaction.
You are one of the premier inhabitants of MORON TOWN.
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> Your name-calling will not change the facts.
The fact is that you have a perfectly valid law that you wish to ignore.
> If a person writes a courteous letter to the IRS
>REQUESTING TO KNOW WHICH LAW OR
> REGULATION HE IS IN VIOLATION OF,
Why would someone be in violation of the law in the first place?
> HE HAS EVERY RIGHT AND EXPECTATION TO
> OBTAIN THAT INFORMATION. But he won't get it!!
Oh yes - he will "get it"....in the end.....pun intended.....
Besides, courteous letters do NOT INCLUDE ALL CAPS.
--
"Under certain circumstances profanity
provides a relief denied by prayer"
Mark Twain
---------------------------------------------
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> There you go again.
Yup. Put the law right under your nose and you don't even know what it
means.
> How on Earth would an IRS representative reading a
> letter know how to "categorize" the writer?
Basicaly by the number of all capital letter words in the letter.
> If all the writer asks is to know WHAT LAW OR REGULATION
> HE SPECIFICALLY IS IN VIOLATION OF
How would the letter reader know that? Seriously. Do you start out the
letter with "Hi, I'm a tax denier and I haven't filed in years and years,
even though I make $22,000 a year in self-employment income from a moonshine
still next to the pot plants. What law or regulation am I specifically
violating?" Is that how it goes?
Where to start? Where?
--
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992), Salvor Hardin in "Foundation"
Nossy
a citizen has the right to know what SPECIFIC charges are being laid
against him pursuant to SPECIFIC laws and regulations. We are not
interested in general references. We want to see WHAT SPECIFIC laws
and regs have been violated and stated as such:
Dear Mr. Maffia/Thomas:
We hereby inform you that our legal department has found that your
non-filing of a 1040 for year 2009 is a civil violation of Art.....of
the USC and Reg.......of the IRC, for which you are potentially liable
for penalties A, B, and C..
WHY WON'T THEY DO THAT ANYTIME??!!
Nossy
and regulations:
Paul Maffia
> Excuse me.......In case you didn't know. Under American jurisprudence
> a citizen has the right to know what SPECIFIC charges are being laid
> against him pursuant to SPECIFIC laws and regulations. We are not
> interested in general references. We want to see WHAT SPECIFIC laws
> and regs have been violated and stated as such:
>
> Dear Mr. Maffia/Thomas:
>
> We hereby inform you that our legal department has found that your
> non-filing of a 1040 for year 2009 is a civil violation of Art.....of
> the USC and Reg.......of the IRC, for which you are potentially liable
> for penalties A, B, and C..
>
> WHY WON'T THEY DO THAT ANYTIME??!!
When and if a person is charged with a crime the charges and specifications
which include the references to the laws violated are supplied. Its too bad
you are so ignorant that you don't know this.
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> Excuse me.......In case you didn't know.
Yet another baffoon to "set us straight".
> Under American jurisprudence a citizen has the
> right to know what SPECIFIC charges are being
> laid against him pursuant to SPECIFIC laws
> and regulations.
So you can wait till specific charges get filed - if you want to take it to
a court.
> We are not interested in general references.
You're not interested in much that doesn't fit your idiocies.
> We want to see WHAT SPECIFIC laws
> and regs have been violated and stated as such:
Are you confessing to have broken some laws?
> We hereby inform you that our legal department has
> found that your non-filing of a 1040 for year 2009 is
> a civil violation of Art.....of the USC and Reg.......of
> the IRC, for which you are potentially liable for
> penalties A, B, and C..
If they did, will you shut the fuck up and pay your taxes? Or will you
stick your fingers in your ears, yelling "nanny, nanny, nanny" at the top of
your lungs in hopes that it turns the law into a fiction.
United States Code
TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
SUBTITLE F - PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 61 - INFORMATION AND RETURNS
SUBCHAPTER A - RETURNS AND RECORDS
PART II - TAX RETURNS OR STATEMENTS
SUBPART A - GENERAL REQUIREMENT
Section 6011. General requirement of return, statement, or list
(a) General rule
When required by regulations prescribed by the Secretary any
person made liable for any tax imposed by this title, or with
respect to the collection thereof, shall make a return or statement
according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
Every person required to make a return or statement shall include
therein the information required by such forms or regulations.
Supported with the Regulations
Reg § 1.6011-1. General requirement of return, statement, or list.
(a) General rule. Every person subject to any tax, or required to collect
any tax, under subtitle A of the Code, shall make such returns or statements
as are required by the regulations in this chapter. The return or statement
shall include therein the information required by the applicable regulations
or forms.
(b) Use of prescribed forms. Copies of the prescribed return forms will so
far as possible be furnished taxpayers by district directors. A taxpayer
will not be excused from making a return, however, by the fact that no
return form has been furnished to him. Taxpayers not supplied with the
proper forms should make application therefor to the district director in
ample time to have their returns prepared, verified, and filed on or before
the due date with the internal revenue office where such returns are
required to be filed. Each taxpayer should carefully prepare his return and
set forth fully and clearly the information required to be included therein.
Returns which have not been so prepared will not be accepted as meeting the
requirements of the Code. In the absence of a prescribed form, a statement
made by a taxpayer disclosing his gross income and the deductions therefrom
may be accepted as a tentative return, and, if filed within the prescribed
time, the statement so made will relieve the taxpayer from liability for the
addition to tax imposed for the delinquent filing of the return, provided
that without unnecessary delay such a tentative return is supplemented by a
return made on the proper form.
Or here:
United States Code
TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
SUBTITLE F - PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 61 - INFORMATION AND RETURNS
SUBCHAPTER A - RETURNS AND RECORDS
PART II - TAX RETURNS OR STATEMENTS
SUBPART B - INCOME TAX RETURNS
Section 6012. Persons required to make returns of income
(a) General rule
Returns with respect to income taxes under subtitle A shall be
made by the following:
(1)(A) Every individual having for the taxable year gross
income which equals or exceeds the exemption amount,
(i) who is not married
(ii) who is a head of a household
(iii) who is a surviving spouse
(iv) who is entitled to make a joint return
Supported by Regulations:
Reg § 1.6012-1. Individuals required to make returns of income.
(a) Individual citizen or resident.
(1) In general. Except as provided in subparagraph (2) of this paragraph, an
income tax return must be filed by every individual for each taxable year
beginning..........after December 31, 1972, during which he receives $750 or
more of gross income, if such individual is-
(i) A citizen of the United States, whether residing at home or abroad,
(ii) A resident of the United States even though not a citizen thereof, or
(6) Form of return. Form 1040 is prescribed for general use in making the
return required under this paragraph.
Is that just not good enough for you??????????
It's all FREELY available for you to read and access all on your own.
Or will you begin arguing that you aren't a person, individual, citizen or
resident.
What fucking argument will you come up with next?
--
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992), Salvor Hardin in "Foundation"
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Athens, Georgia
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
>I again post the facts of how the IRS does
> not follow its own rules and regulations:
Those aren't "facts" no more than claims that the sun rises and sets in the
same windows every day.
--
Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.
----------
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Nossy
presumably be YES unless proven otherwise. However, one cannot take
someone else's property without a court order, remember?
Therefore, presumably such a statement from the so-called IRS would be
reinforced by a judge's ruling subject to a court appeal. However, the
fact that the IRS will never indicate to someone the basis for that
person's supposed violation tells you something. Now go back to your
vulgarities and name-calling.
Nossy
<paultho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
>>I again post the facts of how the IRS does
>> not follow its own rules and regulations:
>
>
>
>Those aren't "facts" no more than claims that the sun rises and sets in the
>same windows every day.
Of course they are facts, because they happen ALL the time, and you
know it. Come to think of it, you probably issue such idiotic forms
yourself!
Nossy
In that case, Mr. MAFFIA, the IRS has no right to take your property
unless cause can be proven in terms of a specific person's specific
alleged violations. So IF the violation is ALLEGED, it must be backed
up, not by generalities, but by specific references and evidence.
Paul Maffia
funnier.news:fq1nb3dbclbaca78f...@4ax.com...
When you have income and you owe taxes on it and don't pay those taxes, the
IRS through the Justice Department obtain the right to take your property to
satisfy the debt from the courts. And all that is required is that you had
the income how much tax is due on them, plus any penalties assessed and
interest.
The courts know what your obligation is under the law an will grant and
enforce the lien. At that point it is up to you to prove you don't owe the
money or have your assets taken to satisfy the debt.
Since none of you morons can't show the court you don't owe the taxes
penalties and interest you lose, every single time. There has been no
exception in he 94 + years of our current income tax system. Moron like you
always lose. The best you can ever hope for is that IF and ONLY IF you are
charged with a crime, you will beat the rap, but you will still have to pay.
You are a Prime Example of the inhabitants of MORON TOWN.
Paul Maffia
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote in message
news:3j1nb3divc78np7qr...@4ax.com...
> Your vulgaries notwithstanding. The answer by any person would
> presumably be YES unless proven otherwise. However, one cannot take
> someone else's property without a court order, remember?
And the IRS ALWAYS gets a court order when taking the property of morons
whrn they refuse to pay their legl obligation to pay taxes.
> Therefore, presumably such a statement from the so-called IRS would be
> reinforced by a judge's ruling subject to a court appeal. However, the
> fact that the IRS will never indicate to someone the basis for that
> person's supposed violation tells you something. Now go back to your
> vulgarities and name-calling.
And when it reaches that point, all the info is provided every single time
without exception. Contrary to your moronic statement to the contrary.
Nossy
I repeat. When a person receives a notice from the IRS saying that it
has not "received a tax return, blah, blah, blah" why is the recipient
NOT INFORMED at the SAME TIME as to WHICH SPECIFIC LAW AND REGULATION
of the IRC and federal code HE has violated and that he may dispute if
he so wishes?
Answer:
Nossy
its truth at all. And since federal courts will not ordinarily examine
disputes (referring them to the "objective so-called tax courts"),
where is the alternative in the face of this exclusive power of
coercion (which is usually reserved for cases of a police state)??
"You WILL obey!"
Paul Maffia
also demonstrating the depth of your ignorance.
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote in message
news:9genb31sgtl4vc52m...@4ax.com...
> The use of exclusive power of coercion is not prima facie evidence of
> its truth at all. And since federal courts will not ordinarily examine
> disputes (referring them to the "objective so-called tax courts"),
You moron, the only way you go to tax court is IF AND ONLY IF YOU THE
TAXPAYER CHOOSE TO GO THERE. THE COURTS NEVER REFER A DISPUTE TO TAX COURT.
NOR CAN THE IRS FORCE YOU TO GO TO TAX COURT.
> where is the alternative in the face of this exclusive power of
> coercion (which is usually reserved for cases of a police state)??
It is best to say nothing and let people wonder if you are stupid or not,
than to proclaim your stupidity so there is no doubt and all cabn laugh at
you.
In the US there is no "coerscion". What you stupidly refer to as "coercion"
is the legal and Constitutional power of enforcement, inherent to all
governments of organized scocieties and in the case of the US, granted to
the central Government by the Constitution.
Congratulations, you have achieved the status of Assistant to the VILLAGE
IDIOT OF MORON TOWN!!!
Paul Maffia
> WHEN and IF and a whole lot of other issues in between.
> I repeat. When a person receives a notice from the IRS saying that it
> has not "received a tax return, blah, blah, blah" why is the recipient
> NOT INFORMED at the SAME TIME as to WHICH SPECIFIC LAW AND REGULATION
> of the IRC and federal code HE has violated and that he may dispute if
> he so wishes?
>
> Answer:
Sorry moron, as an adult (stretching credulity to its largest possible
limit) you are presumed to know the obligations imposed on you under the
law. No matter what nation you live in, you are obligated to pay the taxes
imposed by that country. If you don't want to pay, IT IS UP TO YOU TO PROVE
YOU HAVE NO OBLIGATION and if you can't are subject to the penalties
prescribed.
You are a prime representative of the inhabitants of MORON TOWN!!!!
Paul Thomas
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> The answer by any person would
> presumably be YES unless proven otherwise.
What answer? What question?
Or are you just babbling on with fingers in your ears in hopes that the
answer - and the law - will just go away?
Supported with the Regulations
Or here:
Supported by Regulations:
> Therefore, presumably such a statement from the so-called IRS would be
> reinforced by a judge's ruling subject to a court appeal.
What statement? There are plenty of well documented rules and regulations
for appealing any decisions by the IRS, and if you're still not happy and
they take your bank account to settle a presumed tax liability, then you can
sue in district court - with a jury - to get your money back - plus court
costs in many cases.
--
Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.
----------
Paul Thomas
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> Of course they are facts,
Then support your "facts" with verifyable sources.
> because they happen ALL the time,
Not based on my experience.
--
"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary.
For those who do not, none will suffice."
- Joseph Dunniger
Nossy
the case of runaway slaves, right? In any case, I will repeat: IF the
IRS is threatening penalties for non-filing of the 1040, the citizen
is perfectly entitled to know on the basis of which SPECIFIC violation
of law and regulation this is being undertaken.
As a CITIZEN, he ALSO has the perfect right to know WHY the IRS does
not even follow its own INTERNAL regulations and manuals in the
application of its coercion.
For that matter, we could ask where in TITLE 26 there is enforcement
power in relation to "income tax" as opposed to TITLE 27. You will see
that when you go through the list of enforcement authorities under
Title 26.
Nossy
the government unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.
Furthermore, you are saying that they have the right to make CLAIMS
upon a citizen with no evidence. No wonder you use the name MAFFIA.
cpt banjo
> For that matter, we could ask where in TITLE 26 there is enforcement
> power in relation to "income tax" as opposed to TITLE 27. You will
> see that when you go through the list of enforcement authorities under
> Title 26.
Why don't you just read Sections 6301 through 7124 of the Code and the
regulations thereunder?
Gawd, you are stupid.
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> In other words, the IRS prima facie owns your
> property on behalf of the government unless
> you can provide evidence to the contrary.
They don't "own" your property, and you know that, so stop being stupid.
Property can be seized to settle tax debts, that is common law for centuries
now.
> Furthermore, you are saying that they have the right
> to make CLAIMS upon a citizen with no evidence.
They send you a notice.
You either respond and settle the problem by providing the details to
support your position, or by sending them a check for the tax due.
If you don't respond, at some point, after allowing you time to respond,
appeal, etc, their position is deemed to be correct based on their
"evidence". They then will issue a levy on your assets, and if necessary,
they'll seize them to settle the back taxes, penalties and interest.
You don't even have to go to court. The Browns didn't have to be there to
be found guilty by a jury of their neighbors.
--
Nossy
generic notice is not evidence that you have violated a law or
regulation. A person is ENTITLED to obtain specifics as to which
regulations and laws he is in violation of. SPECIFICS. Get it? S P E C
I F I C S.
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service
Dear Mr, Paul Thomas: (not the idiotic generic "Dear Taxpayer:")
This notice is to inform you that the IRS has concluded that by not
filing a 1040 you are in violation of Law X and Regulation X.
Therefore, penalties of a,b, and c shall be applied unless you comply
or challenge our finding of the aforementioned violation. We are
making this claim upon you (and specifically you) under the
(non-existent) enforcement authority of Title 26, blah, blah,
blah...........
Yours truly,
[Original signature establishing liability for the aforesaid rather
than artificial or no signature]
Paul Maffia
Nossy
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 07:27:50 -0700, cpt banjo <cptb...@aol.com>
wrote:
cpt banjo
> Those are descriptions, they are not the source of ENFORCEMENT
> POWER.
You pathetic cretin, those are federal statutes, passed by Congress
and signed by the President, that give the IRS the power to administer
and enforce the revenue laws.
Paul Maffia
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote in message
news:m6rob3hlfo3bcd9g1...@4ax.com...
> Coercion can also be the same coercion as the results of a ruling in
> the case of runaway slaves, right?
I know it is well beyond your ability to understand, but in those days
people in general saw nothing wrong with slavery, legally or morally. And
since morons like you usually turn to religion that you don't understand
either, I hope you notice that both the Old and New Testament both sanction
slavery. So your comparison is, like so much else you try to pass off as
intelligent comment, total moroni gibberish.
And to try to help you along, the above comment DOES NOT MEAN I ASPPROVE OF
SLAVERY.
> In any case, I will repeat: IF the
> IRS is threatening penalties for non-filing of the 1040,
You moron, the IRS threatens nothing, ther law does and the job of thr IRS
is to ENFORCE THE LAW.
> the citizen
> is perfectly entitled to know on the basis of which SPECIFIC violation
> of law and regulation this is being undertaken.
So read it. I know that is asking a lot of moron like you, bu you should at
least try.
> As a CITIZEN, he ALSO has the perfect right to know WHY the IRS does
> not even follow its own INTERNAL regulations and manuals in the
> application of its coercion.
Your statment is false on its face. The IRS most generally follows its own
internal regulations. And when they don't and cause unwarrented harm to an
indiviual, the courts will and do protect the individual.
> For that matter, we could ask where in TITLE 26 there is enforcement
> power in relation to "income tax" as opposed to TITLE 27. You will see
> that when you go through the list of enforcement authorities under
> Title 26.
Duh, I guess in the excuse for a mind you have, Congress passes laws and the
President signs them with no intention to provide a means for enforcement.
I note you that you made no attempt to acknowledge your ignorant comment
about the Courts forcing you to Tax Court.
You are the Assistant Village Idiot of MORON TOWN!!
Paul Maffia
us today.
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote in message
news:qdrob3p3eh8m8roab...@4ax.com...
> In other words, the IRS prima facie owns your property on behalf of
> the government unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.
No, the IRS does no on anything of yours, you moron. But it is required to
enforce the tax laws passed by Congress and signed by the President. The tax
you owe as prescribed by the law belongs to Uncle Sam and the IRS is
required to collect it.
> Furthermore, you are saying that they have the right to make CLAIMS
> upon a citizen with no evidence.
The tax law, legally passed and Constitutional, alon with the fact that ypu
have income, is all the evidence
> No wonder you use the name MAFFIA.>
Gee Moron, I use the name because that was the one I was born with. You
really are stupid!
You are the Assistant Villafge Idiot of MORON TOWN!!!!
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <he...@heavier.com> wrote
> The evidence from the KGB
I see.
> or anyone else in a mere computer-generated
> generic notice is not evidence that you have
> violated a law or regulation.
If you haven't filed a return, all the notice says, generally, is that you
haven't filed and you should. The Code Section for that have been given to
you already. If the IRS receives W-2 or 1099 statements, they believe those
to be evidence of your income. You have the ability to refute that income,
if you care to do so, or you can, as many other tax deniers do, ignore the
notice and lose by default. The same types of rules apply in cases of
something as simple as a speeding ticket. You have the opportunity to
challange the position of the government, but if you don't show up, if
you're not actively and legally seeking to clear yourself, you lose.
> A person is ENTITLED to obtain specifics as to which
> regulations and laws he is in violation of.
And when it gets to that point, those Code Sections age given to you.
> This notice is to inform you that the IRS has concluded that by not
> filing a 1040 you are in violation of Law X and Regulation X.
Given to you here and now:
Supported with the Regulations
Or here:
Supported by Regulations:
Nossy
Enforcement Regulation In
6020 Returns Prepared by the Secretary
27 CFR Parts 53, 70
6201 Assessment Authority 27 CFR
Part 70
6203 Method of Assessment 27 CFR
Part 70
6212 Notice of Deficiency NO
REGULATION
6213 Restrictions applicable to deficiencies;
petition to Tax Court NO
REGULATION
6214 Determinations by Tax Court NO
REGULATION
6215 Assessment of deficiency found by
Tax Court NO
REGULATION
6301 Collection Authority 27 CFR
Parts 70, 24, 25,
250, 270, 275
6303 Notice and Demand for Tax
27 CFR Part 70
6321 Liens for Taxes 27 CFR
Part 70
6331-43 Levy and Distraint
27 CFR Part 70
6601-02 Interest on Underpayments
27 CFR Part 70, 170
6651 Failure to File Tax Return or Pay Tax
27 CFR Part 70, 24, 25, 194
6671 Penalty Assessed, Person Defined 27 CFR
Part 70
6672 Failure to Collect and Pay Over Tax
27 CFR Part 70
6701 Penalties for Understatement of Tax
27 CFR Part 70
6902 Provisions of Special Application to
Transferees NO
REGULATION
7201 Attempt to Evade or Defeat Tax NO
REGULATION
7203 Willful Failure to File Return, Supply
Information or Pay Tax
NO REGULATION
7207 Fraudulent Return
27 CFR Part 70
7212 Interference with Adm. of I.R. laws
27 CFR Part 170, 270, 275,
285, 290
7401 Judicial Proceedings Authorization
27 CFR Part 70
7402 Court's Jurisdiction to Enforce Summ.
NO REGULATION
7403 Judicial Action to Enforce Lien
27 CFR Part 70
7454 Burden of proof in fraud, foundation
manager, and transferee cases NO
REGULATION
7601 Canvass of District for Taxable Person 27 CFR
Part 70
7602 Examination of Books and Witnesses 27 CFR
Part 70, 170, 296
7603 Service of Summons 27 CFR
Part 70
7604 Enforcement of Summons 27 CFR
Part 7
7605 Time and Place for Examination 27 CFR
Part 70
7608 Authority of Internal Revenue
Enforcement Officers 27 CFR
Part 70, 170, 296
cpt banjo
The IRS regulations (which, of course, aren't necessary since the
statutes give the IRS the authority it needs) are found in Part 301 of
26 CFR.
But then you were too incredibly stupid to find them, weren't you?
Here, I'll even cite them for you:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/26cfr301_07.html
Tell us, how does it feel to parade your ignorance for all to see?
Paul Thomas, CPA
"Nossy" <du...@dumber.com> wrote
> Title 26
So glad that you have sealed your fate as to constructive knowledge of the
law.
You've been told.........
No Cheek defense for you.
--