"TaxRearcher" at losthorizons admits he/she is lost

[Gregg]

One of my favorites posted this little leap of logic

*That is a good one. I bolded some of your text for emphasis. So sly, so tricky they are... They infer 'individual' or 'person' yet use the TERM 'taxpayer.' The IRS would prefer that everyone be a 'taxpayer' - although by having this special definition, it is plainly obvious that there must be those who are NOT 'taxpayers.' Same thing goes for 'employee', 'wages', 'trade or business', 'employer', etc. If those were just the common WORDS, no special definitions would be needed. Neither would a huge part of the code. They could just say, 'anyone who makes any money from any source owes income tax. Every receipt of any valuable thing in any form is taxable income.' That would be a very short (and oppressive) IRC, no?

Umm, well, that is the simple version of what it says Sparky, but it takes tens of thousands of pages to keep up with all the "what it really means" people like your fearless (and convicted felon) leader, so they had to clarify a little...

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

"mutter" at losthorizons responds to TaxReseacher":

I am sorry my friend but what can be done is [sic] such a short period of time?

What would your petition say? Here is the reality of it. This is a contest about how the law is being applied[.] all the judge has to do is claim you are misinterpreting the law.

If you wish to stop a lien or levy then read up on here about how a 23c is required before collection actions. They should have had one done before any CDPH hearing I believe. Be that as it may the law states and courts have ruled a 23c is required before a tax is owed. Petes article argues this very well. So demand it from them[;] make sure the law and regs where [sic] followed, yes YOU are going to have to do some research, or any lien/levy notice is void. That may be your bases [sic] for your tax court petition. ]

(bolding added). [...]

LH "mutter" must be "muttergeo" on YouTube. I see where he's been arguing the same 23c nonsense over on some of the tax boo-hooer's videos over there.

[grixit]

Heh.

The IRS would prefer that everyone be a 'taxpayer' - although by having this special definition, it is plainly obvious that there must be those who are NOT 'taxpayers.'

Yeah, they're called `children', `unemployed', `retired', 'prisoners', `mendicant friars', "welfare recipients', etc.

Sorry folks, it may be beyond your understanding, it may seem uncanny and inexplicable, but--

The Tax is Out There...

[Famspear]

User TaxResearcher is still getting no help (what a surprise) from his fellow dolts at losthorizons. Here's a new post from him:

Since I lost the CDP hearing, I technically have 30 days from that point to appeal to TC. Would it not make sense to do that, in that collection activities (lien / levy) would start automatically? As for this administrative hearing, I have repeatedly asked them to show proof of a proper assessment but they say they don't need to. I understand the truth but dealing with all this procedure and legal process is a different story.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... =6566#6566

(bolding added).

Yes, TaxResearcher, "understanding" what you call "the truth" is pretty useless. Why? Because what you delusionally believe to be "the truth" is actually a useless scam by ex-con Peter Eric Hendrickson called Cracking the Code.

Under the law, the Internal Revenue Service is not required to "prove" to you that the IRS has validly assessed your tax in order for the IRS to be able to legally seize your property and sell it to satisfy the tax liability. Oh, boo-hoo. So sorry.

Yes, "TaxResearcher," dealing with "all this procedure and legal process" is tough when you are as clueless as the PeterEricBlowhardMeister himself. He lost his case. You will lose. Now you are suffering the consequences.